Equality Issues

Deaf communities globally often identify the status of their signed languages as one of the defining indicators of their social standings. Thus, social justice measures, including aims for societal equality, must be intertwined with the status of signed languages. It is pertinent to understand the differing societal attitudes toward signed languages and the manner in which such attitudes come to bear on the status of those languages.

For Deaf communities worldwide, their indigenous signed languages and cultures are the mainstay of those communities. It would be a huge mistake to treat a signed language as an entity that can be replaced or substituted by a spoken language. Signed languages are often the source of innate experiences for Deaf people, allowing many Deaf people to develop a sense of belonging. While Deaf people can acquire spoken languages through artificial or rehabilitative means, these languages are not the native or first languages of Deaf people. Notably, the distinction between the terms “native language” and “first language” has originated from the field of language acquisition. Native language users are those individuals whose parents’ language is sign language, while those who are first language users are born to parents who do not sign. In the latter case, sign language is acquired when the individual arrives at the school for the Deaf. This distinction will become more apparent as this research progresses. Accordingly, Deaf people cannot attain the same level of proficiency in them as they would in a signed language. A recurring theme of several investigations of Deaf communities has been that Deaf respondents preferred to recount their experiences or responses in sign languages because they felt that they could articulate them much better in that way, rather than through spoken or written languages. It is widely recognized that 90% or more of deaf children are born to hearing parents. Furthermore, it is quite common that these parents do not have sign language skills, thus reducing the level of exposure that their children may have to sign language as the natural method of acquiring language. It has also been reported that parents are often advised against using sign language with their children. In light of this, signed languages may be the only natural means for most Deaf people to express their views articulately. For example, a Dutch governmental committee on the recognition of Dutch Sign Language stated that signed languages were the only languages that could be naturally acquired by Deaf people, and that deaf children should be provided with sufficient exposure to this language.

[Page 403]In historical terms, the fate of signed languages has not been a happy one, and they have been subject to eradication, degradation, or dismissal. The Congress of Milan, in 1880, is widely regarded as a landmark event in Deaf heritage as it approved a series of resolutions that removed signed languages from classrooms in the schools for the Deaf. This congress was by no means an isolated incident, and formed one part of a long process of degrading the status of signed languages.

...