Why not read about it first? Many people interested in the continued survival of deaf culture are very worried about cochlear implants.
Mark 2008/11/23 Gerard Meijssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hoi, > I wonder how effective a cochlear thingie is. I doubt that deaf people > equipped in this way have the same auditory experience as we have. So a > cochlear can be understood as a crutch. They help you to move on but it is > still painful. > Thanks, > GerardM > > 2008/11/23 Marcus Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Gregory Maxwell hett schreven: >> > Only that due care is required if we don't want to end up being a tool >> > for isolationism and this is true for all cases where we create >> > distinct Wikipedia communities and is not at all limited to speakers >> > of sign language. >> If people like to be isolated, why shouldn't we allow them? It's not >> Wikimedia's goal to create "one world", but to provide factual knowledge >> to all people. Even isolated people. >> Why do we have a Breton Wikipedia? Cause Bretons want to isolate from >> French. Why do they want to isolate? Cause they are "bad people" who >> "hate French"? No, cause French dominance destroys Breton. But people >> want to stay what they are, who they are. They want to stay Breton. They >> want to keep their identity. Modern society makes it necessary to have a >> language that enables you to cope with modern society, well, that's >> nothing else than "to cope with life". If your language doesn't enable >> you to cope with life there are two ways: 1) create the means that >> enable you to cope with life in your language. 2) give up your language >> and the identity intertwined with it and assimilate and integrate into >> another culture. >> Languages like English, French, German, Chinese went path 1). Other >> language, like most of the indigenous languages of the Americas and of >> Australia went path 2). >> >> Every decision whether to grant a Wikipedia or not, is effectively a >> calculus, whether the language (and identity connected with it) is >> _worth_ the effort of being adapted to a life in modern society and >> whether it is feasible to adapt it to a life in modern society. By the >> way, when I refer to "adapting" a language, I do not mean lexical or >> semantical changes or additions (a "constructed standard"). but I speak >> of resources too. Resources like books, encyclopedias, media etc. >> Obviously there a few chances that a language with only five speakers >> wil ever be able to cope with all aspects of life. The speakers >> obviously have be fluent in another language too and their first >> language will disappear as dispensable. That's the fate of every >> language in a perfectly bilingual situation. Morse code doesn't deserve >> a Wikipedia cause nobody _needs_ it to cope with life and so nobody is >> interested in making it enable you to cope with life (and actually, of >> course, it is a script and not a language). Breton _is_ worth being >> adapted (in my opinion, "worth" of course is always a matter of opinion) >> and it is feasible too. 200-300,000 people speak it. That's the same >> order of magnitude as for Icelandic and Icelandic is a full-fledged >> language able to cope with all aspects of life. >> >> If we do the same calculus for Sater Frisian, with around 1,000 speakers >> it is questionable, whether it is feasible to adapt the language. It's >> _worth_ to be adapted (again, in my opinion), but 1,000 people is a tiny >> community. Iceland has several kinds of industries and it's not too hard >> to find a good job, where you can work without having to know a foreign >> language on a near-native level. But in a community of 1,000 it's quite >> hard to find a job like that. That means almost everyone has to know a >> foreign language (German in this case) to cope with his job. And as I >> said above, perfectly bilingual situations are highly instable. >> >> Another example: American English. It's perfectly feasible to adapt >> American English to cope with life (it's doing that all the time). There >> are millions of speakers. A Wikipedia of its own would be perfectly >> feasible. But it wouldn't be worth it, cause the difference to other >> varieties of English is very small. "Worth" again, is my opinion. There >> are people, who disagree and believe American English should have a >> Wikipedia on its own. That's showcased by a recent proposal to create an >> American English Wikipedia on Meta. It was made by an Englishman. He >> obviously fears, the American dominance will supplant British English >> and endanger the British identity. >> >> In the end every Wikipedia was created out of isolationism. >> >> For sign languages we should apply the same calculus. Of course the >> special nature of sign languages should be kept in mind while doing >> this. Sign languages do not form close communities. They cannot be >> supplanted by spoken languages. This for example means that "jobs" (as >> mentioned at the example Sater Frisian) does not matter. Deaf people >> cannot work in most "hearer" jobs. And they don't live in close >> territories like Bretons, Icelanders or Sater Frisians. >> Is it feasible? At least the bigger sign languages have enough speakers >> to adapt to all aspects of life. To create encyclopedias, to create >> media etc. >> Is it worth it? Those "anti cochlear" people show that there is a strong >> identity at least among some deaf people. The "anti cochlear" people >> fear, that their unique culture will have to face extinction if deafness >> can be healed. Others would sacrifice this culture for the higher sake >> of being released from their non-self-chosen isolation. >> >> _In my opinion isolationism is a normal motive for every proposed >> Wikipedia._ >> >> Marcus Buck >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-l mailing list >> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
