Recognise Irish Sign Language as national language

johnl1975

Anyone out there who would agree that irish sign language should be recognised as a national language same as english and irish under the constitution. Does a deaf person not have the same basic rights as the rest of us. Interested to see what replys i get.

I started sign 2 years ago and and absolutley loved it but it made me furious when i found out that it was recognised under the consitiution which means that a deaf person cannot freely express their opinons and convictions like every other irish citizen. Every deaf person i met is as intelligent as everyone else just because they speak with their hands doesn't mean they should be ignored.

buzzybb

hey,
yeah i agree it should be recognised!! the Deaf Community especially the IDS have been campaigning for this for years. Just hope the government will realise the need for ISL recognition. Iv been studying ISL now for 5 years and im currently studying Deaf Studies in CDS. One problem which needs to be made aware to the public that it is NOT a universal language!!! if i hear that one more time!!

SerialComplaint

There is a limited right in S.28 of the Disability Act which says;

(1) Where a public body communicates with one or more persons, the head of the body shall ensure—

(a) if the communication is an oral one and the person or persons aforesaid has a hearing impairment and so requests, or

(b) if the communication is a written one and the person or persons aforesaid has a visual impairment and so requests,

that, as far as practicable, the contents of the communication are communicated in a form that is accessible to the person concerned.

johnl1975

Thanks for the info, i wasn't aware of the section in the disabilty act but i still think the fight is over Changing Article 8 in the consitution to state Irish as the first language, English as the second and then Irish sign language as the third. As an Individual irish citizen a deaf person should have their language recognised just like Britian recognises BSL as a national language, I'm not aware of any other countries but i'm sure there are others that do the same.
Thanks again for the info

6th

Moved from Event Management.

pickarooney

What would the recognition of ISL as an official language change, concretely?

looksee

Can you say that sign language is a 'language'? You are using signs to represent the English language (in this case), while I agree with the principle I suspect it could lead to abuse or other problems.

For example how would you publish public papers in sign language? I know that in fact you wouldn't have to as obviously deaf people can read, but it shows that it is not a language. Then you would have to include braille as a language so that documents would be available to blind people. Again a laudable aim, but how much would it cost to publish all government documents in braille?

Again, if it were a state language, people would have a right to make a case in court in sign language, regardless of whether they are deaf, just to be difficult. You could not insist on someone having to prove they were deaf, in the same way you do not have to prove you don't understand English to have the right to use Irish, or vice versa.

SerialComplaint

looksee wrote: »

Can you say that sign language is a 'language'? You are using signs to represent the English language

You are showing your ignorance here. Sign Language does not use signs to represent the English language. ISL, like other languages, has its own structure and syntax, and is not a word-for-word direct translation from English.

looksee wrote: »

For example how would you publish public papers in sign language? I know that in fact you wouldn't have to as obviously deaf people can read, but it shows that it is not a language.

Like this; http://www.ombudsman.gov.ie/en/AccessibleServices/Watchourinformationvideo/AbouttheOmbudsmanwithSignLanguageInterpretation/

I don't believe that anyone wants a situation where every Govt document is converted into ISL.

looksee wrote: »

Then you would have to include braille as a language so that documents would be available to blind people. Again a laudable aim, but how much would it cost to publish all government documents in braille?

It is not a 'laudable aim' to suggest that every document should be published in Braille. This would be a huge waste of money. There is already a legal requirement on public bodies to make information available in accessible formats on request. It works pretty well, with a tiny number of requests for Braille formats. These can usually be turned around in a week or two.

looksee

SerialComplaint wrote: »

You are showing your ignorance here. Sign Language does not use signs to represent the English language. ISL, like other languages, has its own structure and syntax, and is not a word-for-word direct translation from English.

Well please excuse my ignorance, but if a French speaking deaf person were watching the news for the deaf on RTE, would they be able to completely understand it?

Like this; http://www.ombudsman.gov.ie/en/AccessibleServices/Watchourinformationvideo/AbouttheOmbudsmanwithSignLanguageInterpretation/

Unfortunately the image does not appear in the link, so I am no wiser.

I don't believe that anyone wants a situation where every Govt document is converted into ISL.

It is not a 'laudable aim' to suggest that every document should be published in Braille. This would be a huge waste of money. There is already a legal requirement on public bodies to make information available in accessible formats on request. It works pretty well, with a tiny number of requests for Braille formats. These can usually be turned around in a week or two.

You are missing the point; if it were an official language it would not be a matter of 'accessible formats' on request, voting cards and similar documents would have to be provided automatically in all the official languages.

SerialComplaint

looksee wrote: »

Well please excuse my ignorance, but if a French speaking deaf person were watching the news for the deaf on RTE, would they be able to completely understand it?
.

No - international sign languages are generally different and unique, just like spoken/written languages. There will be some similarities, but they are generally different.

looksee wrote: »

Unfortunately the image does not appear in the link, so I am no wiser.

It's a video with ISL interpretation.

looksee wrote: »

You are missing the point; if it were an official language it would not be a matter of 'accessible formats' on request, voting cards and similar documents would have to be provided automatically in all the official languages.

I don't believe that anyone is proposing that voting cards and other fundamentally paper documents would be produced in ISL. That is nonsensical.

But you'd better refer the question to those who are pushing this proposal.

looksee

I don't know enough about it to argue the detail, I am simply saying that it may not be possible or desirable to accept sign language as an official language, it could lead to too many legal difficulties.

Of course documents such as voting cards would have to be in braille, otherwise they would be excluding an official language. I take it the suggestion is not that ISL should be an official language and not braille?

I completely agree that communication should be made as inclusive as possible.

I still contend that if, as you say, each ISL is different depending on the country, then it is based on the spoken language of that country? ISL and braille are communication aids, not languages.

Andre80Johnson

ISL is a language. It should be recognized for Deaf people throughout Ireland. I am Deaf and I think it's a joke. We have been promised by Government officials over the years that something would be done. In fact, noting has been done to support ISL. You would say, but that cost money etc but if you look, The government has been spending money putting Polish words on Buses, Buildings etc and it is annoying that they would accommodate Polish people before Deaf people. It is a hard fight and hopefully someday we will have a official language for the Deaf people of Ireland.

SerialComplaint

looksee wrote: »

I don't know enough about it to argue the detail, I am simply saying that it may not be possible or desirable to accept sign language as an official language, it could lead to too many legal difficulties.

Of course documents such as voting cards would have to be in braille, otherwise they would be excluding an official language. I take it the suggestion is not that ISL should be an official language and not braille?

I completely agree that communication should be made as inclusive as possible.

I still contend that if, as you say, each ISL is different depending on the country, then it is based on the spoken language of that country? ISL and braille are communication aids, not languages.

In fairness, if you don't know enough about it, why are you arguing? You are factually wrong when say that ISL is a communication aid, not a language. It is a language. The hint is in the name.

Steodonn

SerialComplaint wrote: »

No - international sign languages are generally different and unique, just like spoken/written languages. There will be some similarities, but they are generally different.


It's a video with ISL interpretation.


I don't believe that anyone is proposing that voting cards and other fundamentally paper documents would be produced in ISL. That is nonsensical.

But you'd better refer the question to those who are pushing this proposal.

Isent that the point of an official language. And as far as I know all official documentation has to be published in the official languages of the state so the proposal would mean that voting cards and the like are produced in ISL

SerialComplaint

Steodonn wrote: »

Isent that the point of an official language. And as far as I know all official documentation has to be published in the official languages of the state so the proposal would mean that voting cards and the like are produced in ISL

That's not my understanding of the proposal. My understanding is that there would be an entitlement to communicate in ISL for oral communications, e.g. doctors appointments, job interviews, jury service etc.

Andre80Johnson

SerialComplaint wrote: »

That's not my understanding of the proposal. My understanding is that there would be an entitlement to communicate in ISL for oral communications, e.g. doctors appointments, job interviews, jury service etc.

What you said in the above is the need for ISL as an official language.

Get In There

The failure by the Irish Goverment to give Irish Sign Language official recongition is a source of incredible frustration for all in the Deaf community. Although I would normally be able to express myself well, I am not able to do so on this topic because basically I get way stressed out at the idea of having to argue for a basic right that I, as an Irish citizen, am entitled to.

You're not going to get many Deaf people posting in this thread and articulating their thoughts very well because as many of them have poor literacy skills, as explained by this quote:

"Moreover, because Deaf children commonly find it difficult to communicate with hearing people they are often late in developing literacy skills, a problem that is often compounded by the inappropriate or inadequate educational support at school." -An extract from http://www.senatormarkdaly.com/site/index.php/news/speech/25-speeches/163-lecture-on-citizenship-and-language-irish-sign-language-week

Also this may be worth a watch, http://www.rte.ie/tv/handson/video.html
(Irish Sign Language recongition broadcast on March 8th, 2009)

Both of these would explain why Irish Sign Language should be recongised much better and much more clearer than I ever would.

Camilo

Please excuse my ignorance in the matter but i am genuinely curious to know what difference, if any, having it as a "national language" would make