Tove Skutnabb Kangas Bilingual Education and Sign Language As The Mother Tongue of Deaf Children

Bilingual education and Sign
language as the mother tongue

of Deaf children
TOVE SKUTNABB-KANGAS
University of Roskilde, Denmark, and
bo Akademi University, Vasa, Finland
www.Tove-Skutnabb-Kangas.org
SkutnabbKangas@gmail.com
1
List of contents 1
1. The future of languages?
2. Why have languages become extinct or seriously
endangered? Old ideologies of homogenisation as a
road to unity and prevention of disintegration?
3. Agentless neo-imperialistic control as a
context for Linguistic Human Rights
2
List of contents 2
4. Who/what can have language-related rights? Terms
used when rights are granted: own language,
minority language, mother tongue
5. Definitions of mother tongue - can one have a
mother tongue that one does not know?
6. Compensation for loss of the mother tongue?
7. Concluding remarks
3
List of contents 1
4
Over half of the worlds
languages are Indigenous
Of the worlds almost 7,000

spoken languages (the
Ethnologue, 15th edition) at
least some 4,500 are
Indigenous (Oviedo & Maffi
2000; Terralingua,
www.terralingua.org)
5
6
Endangered languages 1
Over 50% of the worlds almost

7000 languages are endangered
7
96% of the world's 6000 languages

are spoken by 4% of the world's
population.
90% of the world's languages are not

represented on the Internet.
One language disappears on average

every two weeks.
80% of the African languages have no

orthography (UNESCO).
8

9
If 90-95% of the worlds languages disappear
before 2100, most Indigenous languages will go
There may be only 300 to 600 oral languages left in
2100 as unthreatened languages, transmitted by the
parent generation to children. These would probably
include most of those languages that today have more
than one million speakers, and a few others. Almost all
languages to disappear would be Indigenous, and most
of todays Indigenous languages would disappear, with
the exception of very few that are strong numerically
(e.g., Quechua, Aymara, Bodo, Mapuche) and/or have
ofcial status (e.g., M!ori, some Saami languages).
10
What about Sign languages?
How many Sign languages are

there?
What is their future?

11
The future of Sign languages? 1
How many Sign languages are there
NOBODY KNOWS!!!!!
The World Federation of the Deafs Fact Sheet on Sign

language(s) does not mention any figures:
http://www.wfdeaf.org/documents.html - it only says

(downloaded 18 June 2007):
There are currently about 4,000 recorded spoken/

written languages in the world if more countries
recognise sign languages as well, this number would go
up dramatically.
12
Sadly, there are several errors in this sentence.
Firstly, the number of recorded spoken/written
languages (provided the WFD means spoken
languages, regardless of whether they are written
or not, and all are not) is almost 7,000 (see above),
not 4,000 (and there are 114 Sign languages
included).
Secondly, each country that has so far recognised
sign languages, has recognised one and one
only. Since there are somewhat over 200 states in
the world, the number of the worlds languages
would not go up by more than around 100 more.
13
In fact, there may be as many Sign
languages as spoken languages in the
world. Every society has deaf people,
and they have developed sign languages
everywhere, with many dialects.
When Deaf organisations become
stronger, maybe we learn how many
Sign languages there are unless most
of them are extinct at that point.
14
What is happening to Sign
languages?
Many of them are disappearing,
and we can predict that there will
be even fewer Sign languages
left than spoken languages
around the year 2100.
Why?
15
There are two main reasons and both are,
paradoxically, connected to more rights to
Deaf people
1. States grant rights to only ONE Sign
language, if at all. The other Sign
languages may disappear.
2. If cochlear implants are used
subtractively, instead of in addition to
Sign languages, Sign languages may
disappear.
16
Sign languages recognized in the
Constitution, according to the World
Federation of the Deaf, are
Brazil, Czech Republic, Ecuador,
Finland, New Zealand, Portugal, South
Africa and Uganda
(Fact Sheet on Sign language(s): http://
www.wfdeaf.org/documents.html,
downloaded 18 June 2007).
17
There is, (ibid.) some recognition in terms of
legislation and/or policy in the following
additional countries: Australia, Belarus,
Belgium, Canada, China, Colombia,
Cyprus, Denmark, France, some German
states (Lnder), Greece, Iceland, Iran,
Latvia, Lithuania, Mozambique, Romania,
Russian Federation, Slovak Republic,
Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland,
Thailand, USA, Uruguay and Zimbabwe.
18
The Sign language is, in addition,
officially recognised by the
government in the United
Kingdom, Cuba and Mauritius.
19
There is thus some kind of
recognition of Sign
languages in alltogether 38
states, i.e. fewer than 20%
of the worlds states.
20
Japan is not on the list.
Is this correct?
If so, what are you doing about it?
Languages that are completely
invisible are not going to make it.
Is your school a first positive sign
towards formal recognition of Sign
languages in Japan? Or are there others
too?
21
The second reason for Sign languages
disappearing is cochlear implants. Users of
cochlear implants should obviously in most
cases be granted the same right to learn and
use Sign languages as non-users of implants.
Cochlear implants are probably good if they
are additive (used in addition to Sign
languages) but can be disastrous if they are
subtractive, used instead of Sign languages.
22
Cochlear implants cannot replace
Sign languages if we want Deaf
people to have LHRs.
Unfortunately there is a lot of
wrong information around which
tries to convince people that implant
users do not need Sign languages.
But implants do not change Deaf
children into hearing children.
23
List of contents 1
24
The old false claim: linguistic assimilation
furthers integration of a state through a
common language. LHRs prevent it.
!
Many of the fears that prevent states from
guaranteeing LHRs originate from the old false
claim that granting LHRs and thus maintaining
linguistic diversity will prevent the integration of
a state through a common language.
!
A special type of language policy goal, namely
linguistic assimilation of minorities, is said to
further this integration.
25
"the indivisible integrity of the
state with its territory and nation"
The Turkish Constitutions have
since the 1920s, Mustafa Kemal's
(Atatrk's) times stressed "the
indivisible integrity of the state
with its territory and nation".
26
Old ideologies of homogenisation as a road to
unity and prevention of disintegration 1
Language is one of the essential
characteristics of a nation. Those who
belong to the Turkish nation ought, above all
and absolutely, to speak Turkish. [] Those
people who speak another language could,
in a difficult situation, collaborate and take
action against us with other people who
speak other languages (Mustafa Kemal,
Atatrk, 1931).
27
Old ideologies of homogenisation as a road to
unity and prevention of disintegration 2
The USA president Theodore Roosevelt expressed
in 1919, three days before his death, sentiments
similar to Atatrks, in a letter to the next
president.
28
"In the rst place, we should insist
that if the immigrant who comes here
in good faith becomes an American
and assimilates himself to us, he
shall be treated on an exact equality
with everyone else, for it is an
outrage to discriminate against any
such man because of creed, or
birthplace, or origin. But this is
predicated upon the person's
becoming in every facet an
American, and nothing but an
American...There can be no divided
allegiance here. Any man who says
he is an American, but something
else also, isn't an American at all.
We have room for but one ag, the
American ag... We have room for
but one language here, and that is
the English language... and we have
room for but one sole loyalty and that
is a loyalty to the American people."
(Theodore Roosevelt, 1919)
Theodore
Roosevelt
29
Old ideologies die hard...
Turkey still sees any ofcial use of Kurdish as

a threat to this unity - it is legally forbidden to
use Kurdish as a teaching language or to teach
it as a subject in schools.
The attempts in the USA to make English the

only ofcial language and to ban the use of
other languages from schools as much as
possible speak to the same (unfounded) fears.
30
Nice phrases - and assimilation
There are thousands of examples of similar quotes
from the 1860s onwards all over the world.
The question is: why do these attitudes still linger on,
under all the nice phrases about linguistic and
cultural diversity?
Can one see them in the relative lack of funds and
rights for educational programmes using Indigenous
and minority childrens (including Deaf childrens)
mother tongues as the main teaching languages??
Even in the best of situations?
31
A global phenomenon:
Subtractive assimilation still mostly required
from Indigenous peoples for full human rights
In India the term backward tribes is still in official
use - they are backward until they are subtractively
assimilated. The phenomenon is global: assimilation
through linguistic genocide is in many cases still
required from Indigenous peoples and minorities for
full linguistic and other human rights.
See Skutnabb-Kangas 2000. See also http://
www.samiskhs.no/eng/ToveSkutnabbKangas.htm for some
literature.
32
33
Deaf education? 1
Is this true for Deaf people too? Of

course.
All education based on orality only,

education that forbids the use of
Sign languages, all education of the
Deaf which does not use a Sign
language as the main teaching
language, is subtractively
assimilationist.
34
Deaf education? 2
Even education where the use of Sign
language is allowed informally, and
even if Sign language is taught as a
subject but is not the main teaching
language, is subtractively
assimilationist.
It tries to replace the Deaf childrens

mother tongue, a Sign language, with a
spoken language, and make Deaf
children as much like hearing children
35
Deaf education? 3
Cochlear implants can do this too, if

they are used instead of teaching
through Sign language. If cochlear
implants are used in an additive way,
in addition to teaching the children
good Sign language skills, using Sign
language as the main teaching
language, then they can be useful for
many children.
36
Deaf education? 4
Subtractive assimilationist
teaching of Deaf children is
linguistic genocide, and
does not respect childrens
linguistic human rights.
37
List of contents 1
3. Agentless neo-imperialistic control as
a context for Linguistic Human Rights
38
The role of human rights? 1
If we want Deaf children to be able to develop their
capacities fully, what role can human rights play?
For most Indigenous peoples and Deaf people,
political, economic and social rights are extremely
important. They are weak or lacking today. Their
achievement often seems to be the first priority.
It might seem for some that linguistic human rights
and other cultural rights come only AFTER basic
material needs have been satisfied at least to some
extent. The two types of right are often, erroneously,
seen as exclusive.
39
The role of human rights? 2
In fact, LHRs are a necessary prerequisite for both
demanding and enjoying all the other rights.
Understanding and analysing the connections
between language, culture, ethnicity, identity, land
and water, philosophy of life, presupposes language -
ones own language, as well as other languages.
Without analysis and understanding, planning
strategies and action may be futile or take a direction
leading to assimilation.
The vogue denying the connections and belittling the
role HRs and especially LHRs is destructive.
40
Hearing people helping the Deaf
There has been and is still
massive paternalism towards
the Deaf they are often seen
as helpless victims, and in
need of help from hearing
people (rather than justice and
human rights).
41
Not helpless victims but actors
I see the Deaf as active agents in their own lives, in
the sense of the British sociologist Anthony
Giddens: Actors are knowledgeable and
competent agents who reflexively monitor their
action.
In other words, speakers of languages that are
subject to linguistic imperialism are not helpless
victims, but are in a more complex relationship
with the forces propelling a dominant language
forward, at the cost of a dominated language
(Phillipson, in press).
42
Glorification, stigmatisation, rationalisation 1
But actors can also act in ways, which may be
harmful to them. Some of the help that Deaf
people got earlier from hearing people can be
identified as part of patriarchal control: the hearing
people claimed that they knew best what was good
for the Deaf.
At the same time as this help was given, it also
hierarchised the hearing and the Deaf. In order to
help somebody, you first have to create the ones
you are helping as helpless (see Gronemeyer 1992),
meaning weaker and less OK than you yourself.
43
Speakers of the dominated languages can become
complicit in the weakening of their own languages
when they accept/receive this help. This has
happened and may still happen through three
processes: glorification, stigmatization and
rationalization. Through the processes of
glorification, the dominant language (what it is,
has and does for you) is made to seem modern
and useful. Through stigmatising the dominated
language, it is made to seem backward and useless.
44
Rationalising the relationship between them makes
leaving the dominated language behind and learning the
dominant language at the cost of it, subtractively, seem
both good, and the only possibility (either/or). And
those who help you in this analysis, are then made to
seem as if they are doing something good for the
dominated group (see Skutnabb-Kangas 2000).
This was how Deaf people were and often still are
made to believe that orality was best for them and that
learning and using Sign language was not useful and
could even be harmful, and that in any case Sign
languages were not real languages and not fit for being
used as teaching languages in schools.
45
Linguistic imperialism as part of modern
agentless neoimperialistic control? 3
This modern agentless neoimperialist control
creates subjectivities FOR Indigenous peoples
and minorities that divide them, so that those
who support the revival of old traditions and
philosophies of life, the reversal of language
shift, and revitalisation of languages and cultures
are constructed as anti-modern, backword, while
those who are constructed as modern are the
ones despising the linguistic maintenance of the
group and seeing mother-tongue-based multilingual
education as romantic but unrealistic.
46
There might be similar
processes going on in relation to
the Deaf, both vis--vis
cochlear implants and education
through the medium of Sign
languages.
47
In fact, of course, what the modern world needs is
exactly those philosophies of life and traditions
and cultures and knowledges that Indigenouas
peoples may still have, philosophies of life
which (without romanticising them as
representing noble ecological savages) have
many of the keys to sustainable, holistic life.
48
The context of Linguistic Human Rights
This agentless neoimperialistic control is the context
within which I look at (the lack of) linguistic human
rights, especially in education. I claim that demands
for LHRs must be based on historical and present-day
analysis of why languages need regenesis in the first
place and what kind of structures, ideologies and
practices keep them down. The analysis must also look
into the future (what are the alternative scenarios) and
plan arguments and strategies accordingly.
"
I also claim that if more and proper rights are granted
NOW, it saves the state from later court cases and large
compensations. Thus it is also in the interest of states to
grant proper Human Rights NOW.
49
List of contents 2
4. Who/what can have language-related rights?
Terms used when rights are granted: own
language, minority language, mother tongue
50
Who or what can have rights?
Individuals, collectivities, or languages 1
Languages themselves may have rights to be
used, developed and maintained.
Alternatively, individuals or collectivities of
people (individuals, groups, peoples,
organizations, or states) may have rights to use,
develop and maintain languages or duties to enable
the use, development or maintenance of them.
51
Who or what can have rights?
Beneficiaries?
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
grants rights to the individual child.
Council of Europes Framework Convention on the
Protection of National Minorities grants rights to
(national) minorities, i.e. groups/collectivities.
Council of Europes European Charter on Regional
or Minority Languages grants rights to languages,
not speakers of the languages concerned.
52
Terms for beneficiaries?
But if we want to look at to what extent the
existing fairly few binding rights
can be and are being applied to Sign languages
and their users, we need to examine what the
terms used in various HRs instruments are when
individuals or collectivities or languages are
being granted rights? Are they defined, and if
so, how?
53
Which language? Terms used when rights are granted:
own language, minority language, mother tongue 1
What are the terms used in various HRs instruments
when individuals or collectivities or languages are
being granted rights? Are they defined? How? Some
examples:
UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR), Article 27 http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_cescr.htm
In those states in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities
exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied
the right, in community with other members of their group, to
enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own
religion, or to use their own language (emphasis added).
54
55
UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging
to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic
Minorities, 1992, Art. 4.3.:

www2.ohchr.org/english/law/minorities.htm

States should take appropriate measures so that,
wherever possible, persons belonging to minorities
have adequate opportunities to learn their mother
tongue or to have instruction in their mother tongue
(emphases added).
56
57
The Framework Convention on the Protection of National
Minorities, 1998 http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/
Treaties/Html/157.htm, Art. 10.2:
In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national
minorities traditionally or in substantial numbers, if there is
sufficient demand, the parties shall endeavour to ensure, as
far as possible and within the framework of their education
systems, that persons belonging to those minorities have
adequate opportunities for being taught in the minority
language or for receiving instruction in this language
(emphases added).
58
59
The most often used terms are
their own language
their own indigenous
language
their mother tongue
the minority language
60
These terms are not defined
legally in the human rights
instruments (except when
immigrant languages or
dialects are excluded from
minority languages).
We need to define them.
61
List of contents 2
5. Definitions of mother tongue - can one have
a mother tongue that one does not know?
62
Definitions of mother tongue
Criterion Definition
ORIGIN
The language learned first
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
a. The language one identifies with
b. The language one is identified as
a native speaker of by others
Competence The language one knows best
Function The language one uses most
63
Mother tongue of linguistic
majorities
For linguistic majorities (e.g. speakers
of Japanese in Japan) all the
definitions usually converge. They
have learned Japanese first, they
identify with Japanese, are identified
by others as native speakers of
Japanese, know Japanese best and use
Japanese most.
64
A combination of all can be used
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
65
minorities 1
If linguistic minorities live and work where
the majority language dominates, the
majority language mostly becomes their
most used language in most formal
domains and often also informally.
Therefore it is not fair to use a mother
tongue definition by function - they have
not chosen freely to use the majority
language most.
66
What does fair mean here?
The expression not fair here means that
the definition does not respect linguistic
human rights, and here especially the right to
choose freely what ones mother tongue is.
The red in the next Table thus shows that we
exclude the mother tongue definition by
function using it would not show respect
for the LHRs of linguistic minorities.
67
67
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
68
minorities 2
If linguistic minorities get their education in
submersion programmes (through the
medium of the majority language), the
majority language often becomes the
language they know best in most more
formal domains.
Therefore it is not fair to use a mother
tongue definition by competence either.
69
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
70
Often a combination of mother tongue
definitions by origin and by internal
identification is a good mother tongue
definition for linguistic minorities.
71
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
72
But there are exceptions where not
even this (origin plus internal
identification) is a good, fair and
respectful definition of a mother
tongue. One important exception is
forcibly assimilated Indigenous or
minority children
73
If the forcible assimilation has
happened already for the parent or
grandparent generation, it is not fair
to use a mother tongue definition by
origin either, because the parents have
not spoken (or have not been able to
speak) the mother tongue (e.g. Ainu,
Saami or Maliseet) to the children.
74
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
75
In this case a mother tongue
definition by internal identification
can be the only possible fair
definition.
76
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
77
Another important exception is the
Deaf. 90-95% of Deaf children are
born to hearing parents. If the
children were to get a good education,
they would learn Sign language early
on, and get most of their education
through a Sign language.
In this case, children and parents do
not have the same mother tongue.
78
For most Deaf children the most fair
mother tongue definition is:
The language that they identify with
(often, at least later on, also in
combination with an external
identification: the language that they
are being identified as native speakers
of by others).
79
For Deaf children, a Sign language is
the only language that they can
express themselves fully in. They
cannot do this in any spoken
language, except in writing. Therefore
we can, for them, also add a modified
definition by competence: The
mother tongue is the language that
they identify with and that they can
express themselves fully in.
80
ORIGIN
IDENTIFI-
CATION
a. Internal (own)
b. External (by
others)
Competence The language one can express
oneself best in
81
But if the child is unfortunate?
But what if a Deaf child (or an Indigenous
child) is NOT one of those fortunate ones
where parents have used the mother
tongue by identification from the very
beginning, and where the child has had
most of her education through this
mother tongue. What if the child does not
know the mother tongue by internal
identification?
82
82
My claim is:
It is possible to identify with a language
that one does not know.
It is possible to have a mother tongue that
one does not have (any or full)
competence in.
83
It is possible to identify with a language that
one does not know.
It is possible to have a mother tongue that one
does not have (any or full) competence in.
If this were to be accepted in international law
(and it has not yet been tried in court), those
few rights that exist to mother tongue medium
education and to learning the mother tongue as
a subject, would also apply to Indigenous
children in various revitalisation programmes,
and to Deaf children.
84
Conclusion for regenesis
When forcible assimilation has led to a language
being seriously endangered (dying, moribund,
in need of revival) or neglected (endangered, in
need of revitalisation), the strategy could (should?)
be to use ONLY a mother tongue definition by
internal identification, when demanding full
Linguistic Human Rights for individuals and
collectivities, regardless of whether the individuals
are receptive or productive users or non-users.
The same might apply to Deaf children.
At the same time, claims for compensation for
mother tongue loss should be raised in courts.
85
85
List of contents 2
86
Some examples of court cases
87
Compensation for an education lost
because of language? 1
The Federal Court of Australia has found that the
Queensland government discriminated against a 12-year
old boy by not providing him with a sign language
interpreter at school. The boy who, according to Deaf
Children Australia, has the academic skills of a six-year
old was awarded $ 64,000 in compensation for future
economic losses as a result of his inadequate education.
The implications of this finding could prove to be a
landmark decision for Deaf education in Australia as it
establishes firmly deaf childrens right to an AUSLAN
[Australian Sign Language] interpreter in school. Source:
SIGN Matters, June 2005, quoted from Branson & Miller,
in press.
88
Compensation for loss of mother
tongue? 1
Some residential school victims may eventually recover
damage awards for their language loss.
(Cloud v. Canada (Attorney General) [2005] 1 C.N.L.R.
8). The court case still continues - it started in 1992.
Quoted in Leitch, David (2005). Canadas Native
Languages: Wrongs from the Past, Rights for the Future.
Paper given at the conference First Nations, First
Thoughts, University of Edinburgh, Centre of Canadian
Studies, 5-6 May 2005. Available at www.cst.edu.ac.uk/
2005conference/archiveA-M.html
89
Compensation for loss of mother
tongue? 2
(Cloud v. Canada (Attorney General)
65 O.R. (3d) 492
[2003] O.J. No. 2698
Court File No. 1267
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Divisional Court
Gravely, Valin and Cullity JJ.
June 23, 2003. http://www.turtleisland.org/news/
cloud2.htm
90
Canadian $1.9-billion court settlement 2006 on
residential schools recognizes: all students
suffered through loss of culture and language
Residential schools were originally an extension of the missionary work
of European religious settlers who sought to convert aboriginals to
Christianity. The federal government became involved in joint ventures
with the churches in 1874 and took over the schools completely in 1969.
The last residential school closed in 1996.
While specic lawsuits dealing with sexual and physical abuse continue,
the $1.9-billion settlement recognizes that all students suffered through
loss of culture and language and by being forcibly removed from their
homes to live at the schools. The $1.9-billion settlement was ofcially
approved by the courts last month.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.
20070102.NATIVESCHOOLS02/TPStory/?query=aboriginal
91
List of contents 2
92
Concluding remarks: summing up
If more and proper rights are granted NOW, it saves
the state from later court cases and big
compensations. Proper rights include really extensive
revitalisation programmes, even reversal, for those
Indigenous peoples who have lost their mother
tongue. It should be accepted that where the parents
or grandparents have been forcibly assimilated and
have therefore not been able to speak the Indigenous
language, for instance Saami, to their children, Saami
is still the children's mother tongue if they identify
with it, even if they don't know the language.
Therefore, people can demand that they have the
right to mother tongue medium education in Saami.

93
Concluding remarks
There is still a gap between nice phrases and
the realities which are not so nice. Low-
intensity warfare still prevails against
Indigenous peoples. It is succeeding, more or
less, all over the world, as also shown by the
fate of the UN Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples.
But there is also new awareness, resistance,
and even emerging action, legal and
educational, that is succeeding.
94
Indigenous peoples and minorities (including the
Deaf) themselves must be key actors
The Deaf should insist that Sign languages (with the
possible exception of ASL, American Sign Language)
are endangered and should be included in all endangered
languages programmes. But this is obviously not
enough. The Deaf must, just like Indigenous peoples,
themselves be key actors. Despite a lot of knowledge and
negotiation skills, the Deaf did not, for instance, manage
to get nearly as much into the UN Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities as would be required
for proper education (http://www.un.org/disabilities/
convention/conventionfull.shtml).
95
Indigenous examples of civil society action
In Orissa, India, a project has started where
Indigenous children from 10 groups of
peoples will be instructed through the medium
of their mother tongues in 200 schools.
(Contacts: professor Ajit Mohanty, dr.
Mahendra Kumar Mishra)
In Nepal, a project has started where all
Indigenous children (around 100 groups) will
be instructed through their own languages
(Contacts: dr. Lava Deo Awasthi, professor
David Hough).
There are many other examples in all parts of
the world, including all Americas.
96
Will you start?
I would like to see lists of all educational
projects for/by both Indigenous peoples and
the Deaf on the web, with descriptions of
the set-up, strategies used to get started,
results, and contact people. This would be a
start. The Japanese project would be in a
good position to start such a website for
Deaf education and Deaf Linguistic Human
Rights. Will you start?
97

Tove Skutnabb Kangas Bilingual Education and Sign Language As The Mother Tongue of Deaf Children

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tove Skutnabb Kangas Bilingual Education and Sign Language As The Mother Tongue of Deaf Children

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bilingual education and Sign

language as the mother tongue

Of the worlds almost 7,000

Over 50% of the worlds almost

96% of the world's 6000 languages

90% of the world's languages are not

One language disappears on average

80% of the African languages have no

What about Sign languages?

How many Sign languages are

What is their future?

How many Sign languages are there

The World Federation of the Deafs Fact Sheet on Sign

http://www.wfdeaf.org/documents.html - it only says

There are currently about 4,000 recorded spoken/

Turkey still sees any ofcial use of Kurdish as

The attempts in the USA to make English the

Is this true for Deaf people too? Of

All education based on orality only,

It tries to replace the Deaf childrens

Cochlear implants can do this too, if

You might also like