In other signing news, I was at an EdSign34 lecture on Symmetry in Sign Language. It was quite interesting in terms of picking apart common structures in signs — signs that are left/right reflections of each other, signs that rotate around each other, that are translated along a plane and so on. Some styles of symmetry are much more common than others and it seems that the less-common ones are generally harder to perform. Over time they tend to change so that they’re easier to produce, like words that get their hard edges ground down. (“Fo’c’sle” comes to mind, or “Wednesday”.) The symmetry aspect was also an appeal because who can really say no to a bit of group theory?

In a few weeks a friend of mine is doing her own presentation there so I’ll be hecklingshowing my support.

It is a romance: a study of the relationship between a “hot-shot” speech therapist moving to a deaf school in New Brunswick, and a deaf woman who works at the school.

It fails to impress on nearly every point that it makes an effort — as a romance, as a statement about deafness and as entertainment. The characters are either uninteresting or hateful. I could find no redeeming features in the leading man. I could see no reason why the leading lady would want to have anything to do with him.

Some points in particular really rubbed me the wrong way. The treatment of ASL, both as a language and as an important part of the characters’ identity, was downright shoddy. Many of the shots were framed so that the signer’s hands were offscreen msot of the time. There were no subtitles for the signed speech. Instead, the leading man provided a tedious running commentary whenever someone signed to him. As if we didn’t hate him enough, we now have to listen to his voice for all the other characters too!

For some reason the two main characters fall for each other. The reason for their affection remains a complete mystery to me. I would guess that she is the ultimate difficult student for him, while he is a suitable target for the anger she feels as an outsider. How all this translates into romance is a complete mystery to me. Their relationship seems to be based entirely on mutual antagonism. But unlike stories like The Shop Around The Corner it seems utterly unlikely that the animosity is just a front. They really do hate each other.

It seems the film was adapted from a play. I only hope the play wasn’t nearly as bad as this.

First of all, we have moved venue, and I think the move is permanent. We used to be in the Elephant House, which I think is the cafe where Joanne Rowling wrote the first Harry Potter book. I hope I’m remembering that right. Anyway, it wasn’t a great place for what we wanted. Now we’re in the Boardroom in the Central Library, which is literally next door to the Elephant House but we’ve got the room to ourselves and no interruptions.

We also have a change in our web presence. The organiser, Dee — well, she’d gone radio silent for a couple of months while she moved jobs, but now she’s back and we’ve got a little website set up. The Facebook group had been silent this whole time too. Now Dee’s made me an admin on the Facebook group and I intend to keep everyone up to date about meetings and stuff. The local Cafe Sci group have been very good recently about sending out “event” invites whenever they meet, which is a great thing for monthly groups to do. Otherwise it’s so easy to forget about these things.

So last night was our first night in the new place. We had a few new faces, including at least one person who saw a poster that had been pinned up at the library entrance. How’s that for the power of advertising? I think last night’s session went quite well. We don’t seem to have much of a stride yet. It’s really difficult because I’m sure we’d all like to just turn up and have a chat, but no-one knows each other very well so it’s difficult to “just chat”. And then, if there is something you want to say you can’t be certain you’ll have the language skills to say it.

I hope if we maintain the group that we have at the moment we’ll build those relationships we need so that we can all have free and easy conversations without recourse to, as Sarah suggested, topic cards and “circle time”. (You can tell she’s a teacher, right?)

I still haven’t thought what’s going on the website yet. I mean, we’ve got the “come to our meeting” spiel, and some links to other BSL-related pages, but nothing that approaches content. Just information. If you see my distinction. Although we’re working on making the group more official (read: getting funding) so there will be a constitution and stuff too.

Now if only I did more practice, because nowadays we don’t do much apart from these monthly sessions. But we’ve got a PVR, so we can start watching SignZone. Or just check Facebook again…

There’s something unnatural about the signing that’s hard to get past though. Maybe it’s the lack of facial expression, which is very unusual. Thoughts? I haven’t been able to find any more information about the video other than the advertising company behind it.

There are several obstacles to taking BSL 3. Cost (£2000 per year for two years) and location (college/university) are important, as well as the fact that I don’t really feel capable of it. I think a lot of people lost motivation over the year. Mostly I’ve improved but there has been a significant degree of backsliding too.

What now? We have neither the time nor the money to devote to the next level, so it seems this is where we have to stop. We need some time to practise regularly to keep the skills fresh. Facebook has a Sign Edinburgh group, for monthly practice sessions, which seems to be dormant at the moment. I’ve been trying to get a reaction from the current members without luck.

I hope we’ll be able to maintain contact with a few of the people from class as well. If all else fails we can just form our own drinking signing group. Tuesdays from now on will be a little duller without it all.

With slightly more immediate effect, we can start watching signed television again, on BBC iPlayer. This is great news for — watching real television shows (rather than the talking-heads stuff we used in class) is much more interesting.

Getting nice new potatoes is probably quite important too. The only ones I could get in Somerfield were a bit tired.

I had a deep philosophical conversation with Martin earlier and came to the conclusion that the green Eee was the way to go. (Thanks for the encouragement Calum; you’re still invited for Nigella-food some time!) So I ordered it, and hope to get it within a week. (Finding somewhere that stocked it was harder than I expected.)

Meanwhile, I have to think up, practise, and then record, a ~3 minute presentation for my next BSL assessment. I hate these things where you have talk about your hobby or whatever because I never know what to say. I had this paralysis in school with French essays and it hasn’t really got any easier. Must get thinking…

Our excuse is that we no longer have time to practise, so it just doesn’t happen. There are always things we’d rather be doing. When we lived with our parents it was a nice way to have a private conversation. That’s redundant when you’re the only two people in the house.

The only way to have time, and not fall into the “no time” trap, is to make time. One simple thing that we can do is improve our fingerspelling. We were practically ordered to do it at yesterday’s lesson. (I hasten to add, not just the two of us, but the whole class.)

Last night we spent 15 minutes fingerspelling animals. This morning, 5 minutes fingerspelling breakfast words. We need to keep this up. It also gives us an “easy in”. If we’re already sitting in front of each other signing and spelling to each other, there should be a natural progression to conversational signing too.

Describing people and animals

We followed on from the previous week, doing more description of animals first, then of people after the break. It’s still really hard to picture what is distinctive about people. Same with animals — there’s always something that’s really stereotypical or indicative but it’s hard to come up with. Last week I was trying to describe a wolf but completely forgot about the “howling at the moon” behaviour, so nobody knew what I was talking about.

This week I managed to convey a goat pretty well, but it’s easier because not many animals butt heads and have long beards. That’s really goatish. I then elected to describe Johnny Rotten, which I thought would be pretty straight-forward. The first guess was Sid Vicious! Meh.

Still pretty difficult to describe without using topic words: to say “23” instead of “age 23” or “blonde” instead of “hair blonde”. It’s the same mindset that has people prefixing every sentence by pointing to themselves. In other words, English grammar.

Holiday

We spent the majority of the lesson covering arrangements for holidays — stuff you need to have, stuff you need to do, that kind of thing. Most of it airport-based, I suppose because it has the most scope for distinctive vocabulary. People use trains to get to work, but departure lounges and x-ray scanners are not day-to-day things.

Let me see, there was “waiting” and “queue” and “lounge” and “complain” and “argument”. You can tell we’ve all been to airports before, right? And “late” but also “early”, “sunglasses” and “midge repellent” and the names of a bunch of different countries.

The sign for Hawaii is good, because it’s like a little grass-skirted hula dance. For the record, Scotland is a stylised bagpipe sign, a sort of one-armed chicken flap. This is apparently called metonymy — referring to one thing by describing something that is related to it. English has this when we talk about “the crown” to mean the monarchy. This happens loads in sign language and is one of the things I really enjoy about it. Some of the examples I’ve seen have been very enlightening and evocative (though naturally I can’t think of any right now).

Homework

For next week we’ve to come up with a two-minute story describing “setting off on holiday”. Everything to the point where the plane takes off, except the decision-making process which is boring. So: packing, readying the house (cancelling milk, etc.), getting money/insurance, leaving for the airport. That should be more than enough for two minutes of presentation.

It seems odd that people think of the alphabet we use in this country as ‘the English alphabet’ when it so poorly suited to the English language. So many sounds we make in English are not catered for — we must use combinations like ‘sh’ or ‘th’ or ‘ch’ to make up for the shortfall Over the centuries we’ve even lost letters that used to do some of these jobs. Even if we consider the stand-ins as single letters rather than pairs, there are so many odd exceptions and disparities between spoken and written English. Would you guess ‘onion’ is actually pronounced more like ‘union’ looks, which itself is actually pronounced more like ‘yoonyin’? (But then, you’ll probably disagree completely because your accent is so different from mine.)

There is an interesting article about the effect of this arbitrary mapping of sound to symbol. The awkwardness of the English language in this regard is contrasted with reading in Germany and Austria, with terrifying results:

Some children in countries with transparent alphabets do have reading problems, but these have to do with fluency and comprehension. Yet even this is relative. Normal readers from Salzburg were compared to normal readers from London on tests of reading accuracy and speed. Seven year-olds from Salzburg read as fast as the 9 year olds from London, making half the number of errors. The Austrian 7 year-olds had one year of reading instruction, the English 9 year-olds, four or five.

There seems to be a long history of attempted spelling reform for the English language, with limited success. The American dictionary compilers have obviously had the most success, though all they’ve really done is entrench differences in pronunciation. There is a big difference between ‘mum’ and ‘mom’, after all.

I started along this track after reading complaints from BSL users about using the English alphabet. BSL reduced to written words removes all the subtlety and all the power from the language. But then, it does that to most spoken English as well. I wonder if the American fellow mentioned above, who invented his own alphabet to suit his own way of speaking, felt the same?

It wasn’t all earnest work though. We all bunked off early to go to the pub (including our tutors). Knowing how to sign in a noisy pub is incredibly useful. Seriously, if I don’t ever use it again, being able to communicate with people in a noisy environment is a big plus. (I find it quite frustrating that other people don’t know BSL. In fact, I’m sure people must think I just wave my hands around a lot when I’m speaking. But that’s their loss, frankly.) I found out that this blog has two (only two?) lurkers. So, hello Emma and Emily.

I had good discussions about the passion some people have for language; this specifically as relates to translation and finding the “right” way to translate some word, phrase or mood. I had other discussions about language, and why some of our classmates apparently just don’t get the fact that BSL ain’t English. I know, it would seem that after all this time it would be well-nigh impossible not to have twigged. But it seems true.

That’s maybe unfair. I’m sure the people I’m thinking of know, when asked that particular question, what the right answer is. But they never seem to use that information. These students listen to the instructions, nod assent, then ignore everything they’ve just been told to do. So what is it? Do they just not understand after all, or is there some deeper failure — like not actually seeing that English grammar is not universal? I’m at a loss to explain it.

I’m sure I had a great time anyway, because I had deep-fried burger supper on the way home and felt like a poorly-stuffed teddy bear for all the next day. Also, that dead badger in my mouth has got to go.