03-15-2006, 04:49 PM
A fine idea. The "International Sign Language" proposal was a good effort. Unfortunately, the author didn't seem to understand the nature of sign languages very well. He appeared not to understand the technical points that were raised. Some thoughts to consider....
The other proposal intended to "harmonize" existing sign languages -- probably an impossible task. The effort should, of course, look for commonalities among sign languages in use and take advantage of them. But it shouldn't be an effort to try to force-fit them into a common can.
The focus of the effort should be on developing a standard alphabet for finger-spelling and a core vocabulary of signs representing commonly-used words.
The effort should be undertaken by A UN agency. The agency would conduct research on existing signing practices, then develop and publish the standard sign language. Nations may then add signs to their curricula as they teach signing to their people, but the standard core language must remain under the control of the UN agency or commonality will be lost.
The other proposal intended to "harmonize" existing sign languages -- probably an impossible task. The effort should, of course, look for commonalities among sign languages in use and take advantage of them. But it shouldn't be an effort to try to force-fit them into a common can.
The focus of the effort should be on developing a standard alphabet for finger-spelling and a core vocabulary of signs representing commonly-used words.
The effort should be undertaken by A UN agency. The agency would conduct research on existing signing practices, then develop and publish the standard sign language. Nations may then add signs to their curricula as they teach signing to their people, but the standard core language must remain under the control of the UN agency or commonality will be lost.