03-18-2006, 07:27 PM
Groot GoudaMar 17 2006, 08:52 AM Wouldn't it be easier to simply make it "any person not being able to communicate through speech" and leave the details? [/quote]
Yeah, the phrase "deaf, hard of hearing and/or mute" is quite cumbersome and not all-inclusive; but the problem is that in my opinion "any person not being able to communicate through speech" is too broad.
For example, it could in theory also include mentally challenged people, who however are also not able to master sign language, but which would then seem offensive to some, at least, and the proposal would be smashed by the politcal correctness mallet.
What about a term like "any person not being able to communicate through speech, but sign (henceforth referred to as signers)"?
Yeah, the phrase "deaf, hard of hearing and/or mute" is quite cumbersome and not all-inclusive; but the problem is that in my opinion "any person not being able to communicate through speech" is too broad.
For example, it could in theory also include mentally challenged people, who however are also not able to master sign language, but which would then seem offensive to some, at least, and the proposal would be smashed by the politcal correctness mallet.
What about a term like "any person not being able to communicate through speech, but sign (henceforth referred to as signers)"?