Sense-Making Home Page Meetings, Conferences, Workshops 1996 Sense-Making Workshop Workshop Abstracts

THE INFLUENCE OF DEAF CULTURE ON THE
SENSE-MAKING OF DEAF AMERICANS

by

Albert Linderman
Apple Valley, Minnesota, USA
linde017@gold.tc.umn.edu

 

COPYRIGHT AND CITATION INFORMATION:
© Linderman, Albert, 1996. Cite as: Linderman, Albert (1996). The influence of deaf culture on the sense-making of Deaf Americans. Paper presented at the International Communication Association annual meeting, Chicago, Illinois, May 23. Available at: http://communication.sbs.ohio-state.edu/sense-making/meet/m96linderman.html

ESSENCE OF THE PROJECT:
Deaf people in America compose a complex, multi-faceted society. The majority hearing society historically has had significant control over key components of\ Deaf society. These components include; the language taught to Deaf children, philosophy and approach to the education of Deaf children, and employment opportunities, both in the hiring and advancement stages. These societal constraints, combined with the individuality of the person, has resulted in a society which has some elements of homogeneity and some elements of heterogeneity. With this research I am seeking to identify common "Deaf" sense-making actions or verbings. I expect these verbings to be grounded in certain fundamental assumptions and dispositions Deaf people have towards life. I made the following assumptions in this research:
a. Each Deaf person has by virtue of the primary use of the eyes for language a view of the world that differs qualitatively from people who use their ears in deciphering language.
b. Deaf people are "normal;" in that they develop physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually in ways common for any person, given a similar set of circumstances. Deafness is best considered as a difference, not a deficit. It is a difference, however, which, because of the lack of the sense of hearing, does bring about significant communication challenges in life not faced by most hearing people.

REASONS I TOOK THIS ROAD:
....relates to my background in anthropological studies and the need I perceive to more adequately probe Deaf individuals to find the essence of this apparent "dark matter" called "Deaf Culture." As is the case in astronomical circles where dark matter has been postulated due to observed natural effects, yet unelucidated, Deaf culture has been accepted in many circles as reality, though its essence remains obscured.

THE BEST OF WHAT I HAVE ACHIEVED IS:
I spent dozens of hours each with three Deaf individuals. With each per son I recorded 7 hours of interview (a process which covered several months). In the interviews I probed the individuals concerning decisions made in life. These decisions involve areas such as choice made when life circumstances changed, two or more options were presented, or the path of life led to certain barriers. These probings included; how each sees the decisions now, how each saw the decision at the time, and how each perceives other Deaf people, hearing people and family members would evaluate the decisions. I also interviewed, using the sense-making interview, another 9 individuals an average of 30 minutes each. Based on the interviews in conjunction with reading in the field of ethnic studies I conclude that the nature of Deaf culture parallels that of other societies known as oppressed peoples. This parallel is demonstrated in the disclosures of Deaf people in this research. There are also commonalities among those who are Deaf and use Sign Language. These are:

1. The natural move towards an American Sign Language system of signing rather than an English language based Sign system.
2. Similar communication challenges and experiences.
3. Viewing the world in terms of the Deaf/Hearing dichotomy.
4. Actions common to "oppressed peoples".
5. A "Primordial attachment" to being Deaf.

WHAT HAS BEEN PARTICULARLY HELPFUL:
... has been the ontological and epistemological assumptions as well as the theory of the subject proposed by Sense- Making. As one who has been delving into the complementary fields of anthropology and personology, and their corresponding roots in philosophy, I have been refreshed by the articulation given by Dervin and others to some of my thoughts. As an example, when writing about participatory communication in South America, Dervin and Huesca stated: "All explanations are assumed to be potentially useful fictions leading to the question, what do different explanations/fictions allow in terms of actions and possibilities? . . . this approach . . . acknowledges that both the knowing and the standards of testing the knowing are made and contested in communication. Further, in assuming both ontological as well as epistemological incompleteness, this approach provides not only epistemological justification for a view of participation as made in communication but an ontological mandate as well. An epistemological mandate merely requires tolerance of difference; an ontological mandate suggests interdependency" (Dervin and Huesca 1995 "The Participatory Communication For Development Narrative: An Examination Of Meta-Theoretic Assumptions And Their Impacts." Chapter to appear in Jacobson, Thomas L. and Servaes, Jan. THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO PARTICIPATORY COMMUNICATION. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, International Association for Mass Communication book series, in preparation.

I affirm the need for interdependency among the various segments and factions of humanity. The assertions concerning interdependency suggested in the paragraph above inform and motivate my work.

WHAT I HAVE STRUGGLED WITH:
. . . the difficulty of finding a good way to avoid the use of "Why" questions. Sense-Making suggests using interview questions such as, "What led you to choose that?" This general, fuzzy term "led" is not easily translatable into American Sign Language. I have found the need to be more specific in the asking of these types of questions. The specifics I chose have been to ask about motivations, reasons, and causes. The word concept "cause" is similar to "led" but gives a sense of reacting to a situation as opposed to a more generic word which could allow the respondent to speak in proactive as well as reactive terms. Also I have been unable to avoid the feeling that, as a hearing person, I am affecting the responses more than I would like.

WHAT WOULD HELP ME NOW:
. . . more experience in using Sense-Making philosophy and methodology and indications for further development of my research.
. . . an understanding of the role of the individual's volition in sense-making.
. . . a means of unpacking the primordial attachment Deaf people have with others who are Deaf.

PROJECT ABSTRACT:
Deaf people in America compose a complex, multi-faceted society. The majority hearing society historically has had significant control over key components of this society. These components include; the language taught to Deaf children, educational philosophy and approach, and employment opportunities. However, these societal constraints, combined with the individuality of the person, have resulted in a society which has some elements of homogeneity and some elements of heterogeneity. This paper attends to identifying through the use of Sense-Making interviews the conditions in which Deaf people have cohesive "Deaf" ways of information seeking and engaging the world.


  Return to top  Page last updated 7/1/99