ramen is now slimmer than michelle obama

[juji]

Shitty gif, make it 9 patch and try again, loser of dog and wife

okay elz, go back under your rock now

i, too, have the right to bare arms!! bare arms with lots of skin from being so fat before. :(

have the right to eat glue sticks

[abercrombie]

Shitty gif, make it 9 patch and try again, loser of dog and wife

DEAF CHILDREN'S STRATEGIES FOR LEARNING ENGLISH
HOW DO THEY DO IT?
Ruth Swanwick
The University of Leeds
This paper was originally prepared for presentation at "Bilingualism and the Education of Deaf Children : Advances in Practice", a Conference held at the University of Leeds June 29th 1996. The full Conference Proceedings (ISBN 0900960868) are available from Pam Knight or Ruth Swanwick, School of Education, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT. email P.A.Knight@education.leeds.ac.uk

The work in progress described in this paper explores some of the practical and theoretical challenges of the teaching and learning of English as a second language within a bilingual approach. By way of introduction some key practical challenges regarding the teaching of English have been identified, which are evident from working with teachers and children in schools and which will undoubtedly be familiar to many deaf and hearing professionals working in this area.
How can we provide the right kind of exposure to English?

We know that the right kind of exposure to language is essential for successful language learning. Learners need experience of the language they are trying to learn as a complete language, being used for real purposes in meaningful contexts. Hearing children learning English as a second language gain this exposure through the experiences of speaking and listening in that language and this is then consolidated through the written form. In the context of deaf education this exposure is obviously problematic because of the barriers experienced by the learners in accessing the full spoken form. One of our challenges therefore is to develop English teaching strategies and methods which respond to this need for meaningful and accessible exposure to English.
How much formal teaching of English grammar should we do?

We also know that exposure alone is not enough to enable the learners to achieve high levels of competence in their second language and that language also needs to be explained. Learners need to be taught formally how language works, how different language structures carry different meanings and how language fits together. Deaf children learning English as a second language are likely to rely even more heavily on this more structured formal teaching and so we have to consider how much formal teaching of English we actually do and what types of approaches we will use.
How can we keep the languages of BSL and English separate in our teaching?

In the wider field of second language learning the importance of keeping the two languages separate is stressed as it is argued that this will avoid confusion for the learner. This is another significant issue for the context of deaf education because of the unique form of language mixing we engage in where we use signs selected from British Sign Language (BSL) as a support for the spoken form. There are various systems of coding spoken English which can be collectively referred to as Manually Coded English (MCE). It is likely that in our teaching of deaf children we both shift languages (stop signing and start speaking) and mix languages (use MCE). We need to examine the implications of this and consider whether or not it can realistically be avoided.
How can we enable the children to become more successful language learners?

It is clear from these three practical challenges identified that deaf children are in a very unique language learning situation. They are not only working with two languages but with two very different language modes (a visual/spatial and a linear/spoken/written mode). There are practical difficulties surrounding the issues of exposure to English as a complete language and concerning language separation. Given these challenges we have to develop our knowledge and skills so that we can enable them to become successful and independent second language learners.

This work in progress is driven by these very practical questions but there is also a more

theoretical line of enquiry underpinning this work which focuses on the children themselves as language learners. I suspect that it is only by finding out more about their experiences and strategies as English language learners that we will be able to tackle the above questions more confidently. We need to explore the relationship between deaf children's knowledge and use of BSL as a preferred language and their learning of English as a second or foreign language.

We often talk about the transfer of skills from a first to second language but we have not examined this theory in relation to BSL and English in any great depth. The goal of this research is to increase our understanding of the processes involved in learning English as a second language for the deaf child.
AN OVERVIEW OF THE LANGUAGE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

With these goals in mind a pilot study was set up to provide an overview of the bilingual language learning environment, looking particularly at language exposure and language use from the learner's point of view. The information gained through structured observation and interview provided some useful initial insights into the key areas outlined below:-
The languages and language modes used in the teaching situation

The range of languages and language modes used in the two bilingual settings observed included BSL, natural spoken English, Manually Coded English and written English, although written English was rarely seen to be used for communicative purposes. Constant shifting between and mixing of languages took place depending on the demands of the task and the adults involved.
The difficulties of managing language separation

All the adults were very clear about why they were using different languages for different purposes but this clarity was not always reflected in practice. The most complex learning situations, in terms of adult language use, were where the subject matter and target skills were English and where deaf and hearing adults were working together.

The hearing adults found it particularly difficult to separate the languages and frequently switched between or mixed BSL and English. This seemed to reflect the conflict between their various roles as they tried to balance the general management of the teaching situation with their overview of the demands of the whole curriculum and of the learning needs of each individual. The deaf adults' use of BSL was more consistently focused on establishing meaning and developing the children's conceptual understanding and they were able to respond more intuitively to the children's communication needs at their level.

Rules were established regarding language separation but were invariably broken, usually by the hearing teacher, for good reasons such as continuity or comprehension. This again highlighted the differing pressures experienced by the deaf and hearing adults in this complex teaching situation.

Despite the amount of language switching and mixing which took place no explicit markers were provided for the children in that no explanations of the adult's goals in terms of their language use and indications of the frequent shifting were given. This did not appear to effect the children's general comprehension although it did have implications for their own language use which will be discussed in the next section.

The children's language use and repertoire of skills

As a hearing researcher I was able to make certain observations about how the children managed the language learning environment described but I did not set out to analyse their language skills in any further detail.

All the children demonstrated an awareness of the difference between BSL and English and were able to spontaneously switch languages themselves. Whether they were doing this consciously or not needs further exploration. The children also appeared to be very adept in accommodating and responding to the different adults' language use by adapting or shifting accordingly.

In terms of the children's productive skills they all demonstrated very different strategies for dealing with the spoken form of English ranging from the use of lip patterns without voice with some English word order to attempts at more natural spoken English. There was no evidence of the children having to use written English as means of on-line communication and this raises issues about how text might be more usefully exploited in this situation.

The most demanding learning scenarios for the children seemed to be the English sessions usually with deaf and hearing adults working together. This area has potential for providing us with further insight into the children's management of the two languages and their strategies for moving between them.

The teachers' goals and perceptions

Three teachers of the deaf (two hearing and one deaf) were asked about the decisions they made about their language use. All the teachers were clearly working to a specific language model and clear goals in that they were aiming to give priority to the children's conceptual development in BSL and follow this up by providing structured and supported exposure to the target English. All the teachers were also aware of the breakdown of their own rules regarding language separation and of the essential need to switch and mix languages to ensure understanding, deal with a mixed group, or to maintain the children's interest and motivation.

Two other significant factors placed conflicting demands on the hearing teachers' consistent use of language. They had different goals for different individuals and aimed to adjust their language use to meet these individual language needs and preferences. They also felt constantly under pressure to provide as much exposure as possible to spoken English unlike the deaf teacher who felt more confident working solely in BSL using written English as the model and means of exposure and this resulted in far less unmarked language switching and mixing.

This initial study illustrated how complex the demands of the teaching and learning situation are for both the bilingual deaf child and the adults involved. What also emerged was the amount of juggling of the two languages the deaf children are able to do and the broad repertoire of skills they demonstrate in both BSL and English in the face of the inevitable language mixing and switching. This study also identified the English teaching and learning situation as the richest source of examples of the children's skills in manipulating both languages and so as the focus for the second part of the research.
IDENTIFYING LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES

The aim of the second part of the study was to look more closely at the individual children's bilingual skills and to begin to identify the types of strategies of language use and language learning they demonstrated when faced with a task which demanded some knowledge of English or a response in written or spoken English. The strategies identified so far have been grouped into three areas:
1. Production Strategies

Production strategies are the devices used by children to respond to the immediate demands of a task which draw mainly on their communication skills. These are largely strategies for getting through the task which focus on the outcome and rely on mechanical rather than meaningful responses to the activity. It is unlikely that these strategies contribute to the longer term acquisition of English and although an impression of coping with the task is given there is actually little evidence of learning or genuine comprehension taking place.

Examples

In reading 'aloud' the learner finger-spells all the function words and articles and verbs with no transferable equivalent (was/were). The learner relies on teacher prompts and the pictures to provide an adequate response to the text but does not demonstrate any real understanding of what is being read.

In a shared writing activity the learner uses trial and error and whatever cues are available to contribute a correct English structure by either repeating something already written on the board, repeating part of the adult question or one of the choices offered by the adult.
2. Process strategies

Process strategies demonstrate a more meaningful approach to the completion of a task and are more likely to lead to longer term benefits in terms of the acquisition of the second language and an increase in the repertoire of language skills. These strategies demonstrate some measure of independence in the child's handling of the language task and their ability to use the cues and resources available to him or her.

These strategies are essentially restricted to a particular language task or learning context but they could be exploited and expanded by the adults thus enabling the children to transfer them to other language learning situations.
Examples

In response to text the learner uses signs in context and sometimes provides BSL equivalents. She is able to confidently move between responding to the text in this way and discuss the meaning of the text in BSL.

The learner uses her knowledge about the context of the text to make some guesses about unfamiliar words.

The learner is able to use a given written English model of a simple story to start off her own written story.
3. Language learning strategies

These are broader strategies which are transferable to other learning contexts because they rely on an understanding of general language rules and principles rather than on a knowledge of specific English words and phrases. These strategies demonstrate an ability to consciously reflect on language and to try out previously learned language structures or rules in different contexts resulting in the continued development of the learner's model of the second language.

Examples

The learner makes conscious choices about how to tackle a particular language task and adopts a systematic organised way of working

The learner discusses her own strategies for remembering spellings with the teacher

The learner labels the two languages, talks about meaning of written English and compares two English sentences in BSL

The learner attempts to apply a recently learnt English rule in her own writing.

It is important to acknowledge that it is not just luck or individual inspiration which results in the demonstration of these varying skills. The nature of the task and the roles of the adults also have a very significant influence on the children's learning behaviour. If we look at the three tasks and at the types of demands made by the adults we can see how these variables might affect the children's opportunities to develop the range of strategies described.
Matching English text captions to pictures

This had a two fold demand depending on the learner. For the more able reader it involved skimming and scanning for key content words and for the gist of each caption. For the less able reader it entailed reading 'aloud' in MCE with the teacher first and then going back and extracting the key points to complete the text matching activity. Ironically the process of breaking down the task for the less able reader actually complicated the task leading to many of the examples of coping or productive strategies given.
Collaborative writing.

This task required the children to contribute to a shared writing activity scribed by the hearing teacher who requested that the children express their ideas in MCE or spoken English. This demanded that children knew some correct English structures and were also able to express them in a form of spoken English. This task stretched the children mainly in terms of their production strategies although more discussion about what was acceptable as correct English could have developed the children's language learning strategies.
Comparison of two written English texts

This task required the children to take part in a discussion in BSL which involved comparing two English texts. A particular English grammar rule was highlighted and then a model text given demonstrating how to use the rule. The children were then required to use the model text to construct their own English version.

This task provided the most opportunities for the application and development of the higher order language learning skills. This was partly because of the way in which the children's learning was structured but also because BSL was used consistently as the language of instruction and for the discussion of English thus giving all the learners an equal opportunity to participate in the discovery of the workings of their second language. This task did not place demands on the learner's productive use of English but focused on their skills in comparison and discussion of language thus providing the children with some transferable knowledge about how language works as well as some transferable practical skills.

Certain types of adult behaviour were identified which promoted the learner's use and development of the higher level strategies.
Examples

The adult confidently uses BSL for full explanation and discussion of English where the written English is used as the model. This responds to the need to expose the learners to a good English model but avoids the problems of language switching and mixing.

The adult focuses on the processes involved in the task not just on the outcome and encourages discussion and explanation. This does not place heavy demands on the children's productive strategies but requires them to think more analytically about language.

The adult careful strutures the activity for the learners ensuring that there is no risk of failing and allowing them to gradually become more confident and independent in their use of English using the written models provided.

Certain types of adult behaviour inhibited the development of the higher level strategies and tended to result in the learner's use of more productive or coping strategies.
Examples

The adult engages in frequent unmarked language switching and mixing making the learner unsure about the language use required of them in response to the task and inhibiting discussion in BSL.

The adult attempts to explain correct English rules using restricted or incorrect spoken English themselves thus providing the learner with incorrect examples on which to base their developing model of English

The adult focuses on the written or spoken outcome of the activity rather than on the process providing fewer opportunities for the learner to gain information about language structure and meaning.

The adult makes complex demands on the learners and gives them conflicting messages about the value of their BSL contributions in an English activity. This discourages them from exploring language in a meaningful way and results in more attempts to produce the correct English word or phrase without the learners really understanding the significance of their choices.

From this pilot work it is possible to draw out some directions for the next stage of the research although a clearer and more in depth picture is needed than the initial observations presented in this paper.
The children as language learners

The children are obviously aware of the two language systems and are all able move between them adeptly according to adult language use and the demands of the task. We need to build on this to help children become more consciously aware so that they can then monitor their own language use and develop skills to compare and analyse the two languages more readily.

For the most part the children operate successfully and flexibly within a language learning environment where the goals of language use and the reasons for language switching and mixing are not always clear. It is likely that more explicit markers and explanations of adult language would also enhance their language awareness and their ability to separate the two languages. This heightened language awareness and the consequent development of metalinguistic skills should in turn enable the learners to construct a more coherent model of the workings of the English language.

It is clear that the children have various strategies for coping with the demands of the bilingual situation and we are only just beginning to appreciate the range of language learning resources that they are able to deploy. More information about their developing strategies would give us greater insight into the processes involved in learning English as a second language for a deaf child so that we might extend and build on these identified strengths.
Implications for the teaching of English

Teachers are striving to provide adequate exposure to the spoken form of English for the learners alongside more formal English teaching. This often results in a confusion between BSL and English and a less than perfect exposure to English coupled with a less than perfect explanation of the structure of English. The meaningful exposure to spoken English that we can provide in the classroom is unlikely to be sufficient to enable the children to develop the English skills to the high levels required for success and achievement in the mainstream hearing society. We therefore need to explore how the written form might be more successfully exploited as the model of English combined with a more extensive and confident use of BSL to discuss and explain languages.

As well as placing more emphasis on the structured and explicit teaching of the grammar of English we could now usefully look to research findings which identify what a successful language learner does and build these skills into our English teaching programmes. It is unlikely that we will ever be able to teach them all the English there is to learn but by exploring some of these issues we could empower them to become better language learners themselves.
Further research

If we are to continue to develop this area there is a need for more information about the children's perceptions of the languages they are working with and their understanding of differences between them. We must also collect more evidence of the strategies they are deploying to learn and use English. The next stage of this research will address these issues by looking at the responses of a group of bilingual deaf children to some controlled translation, comparative analysis and formal grammar activities. It is anticipated that these tasks will provide us with more insight into the learner's strategies for moving between written English and BSL and their ability to compare and discuss the differences between the two languages. In practical terms this should enable us harness the knowledge about language that that already have and use it more constructively to extend their skills as more successful learners of English as a second language.

eslezzzark

[Genital Doli]

m0nde, ramen, abercormbiae. the psoting pack. the m0nde crew. kman i love these guys lmao . always classic zingers, long ass posts, picturs of themselves and htinking that i care what they look like

[abercrombie]

pic for refence

[timmy]

ramen when you have a baby like what happens right uhh lets see how i can sum this up ALL YOUR HARD WORK IS GONE YOU BECOME FAT AGAIN

[timmy]

pregnancy for the win

[maks]

ramen licks butts

http://deafness.about.com/od/localan...exicandeaf.htm

Lenguaje de signos mexicano
La identidad como lenguaje del
sistema de signos mexicano

Karla Faurot, Dianne Dellinger, Andy Eatough, Steve Parkhurst

The Identity of Mexican Sign as a Language



Karla Faurot, Dianne Dellinger, Andy Eatough, Steve Parkhurst
Descripción:

Esta disertación enfoca la pregunta: ¿Es el lenguaje de signos mexicano (lsm) (código mfs del Ethnologue/ISO) distinto en sí, con una identidad lingüística y sociolingüística propia? Hemos examinado el lenguaje de signos mexicano desde estos tres ángulos diferentes: ¿Es el lenguaje de signos mexicano diferente de otros lenguajes de signos, particularmente del lenguaje de signos americano (American Sign Language, asl)? ¿Es el lsm diferente de la lengua nacional que se habla en la sociedad que rodea a la comunidad de sordos? ¿Hay dialectos regionales del lsm que son significativamente diferentes uno del otro?

la pregrunta

[juji]

lmao the m0nde crew took a revenge to make overdone dissing to me

I think m0nde needs to create a new private group the m0nde crew:
-m0nde
-ramen
-aber

god, i love elezzzark

good job owning me, bRO

loser of wife and dog

:(

are you trying to look like a jersey shore character

loser of wife and dog

[juji]

Ramen laughed over m0nde's life is like she a is traitor of the m0nde crew, do you agree?

Ramen laughed over m0nde's life is like she a is traitor of the m0nde crew, do you agree?

[Genital Doli]

the m0nde crew. thinnk u can handl e the latest crew to hit the ytmnsfw scene? we talk on skype, every day. and yes we do have our fair share of lulz. we talk about or lievs and get married to randdom internet ppl and invite m0nde to our wedings. m0nde? creepy? oh far from it

Ramen laughed over m0nde's life is like she a is traitor of the m0nde crew, do you agree?

yeah and i hit on his ex wife all the time, too...

[juji]

the m0nde crew. thinnk u can handl e the latest crew to hit the ytmnsfw scene? we talk on skype, every day. and yes we do have our fair share of lulz. we talk about or lievs and get married to randdom internet ppl and invite m0nde to our wedings. m0nde? creepy? oh far from it

m0nde: retard called me loser of dog and wife!
aber: i will make him to pay!
ramen: GRRR!!!! (eats hamburger and licks butts)

m0nde is a good natured individual we shiould all be so lucky to have him at our weddings why even marks98 if he believed in love would invite m0ne to his wedding I do belive

[juji]

yeah and i hit on his ex wife all the time, too...

You're contradicting yourself, you just laughed over m0nde's life, not to Allison's life

canoron, get on skype

elezzzark, you too

[juji]

i am, but i don't see you online