Teacher Discussion Forums

JuanTwoThree wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnylM1hI2jc

I did. What should I do next?

Do you think it might be a fake?

Is her behaviour in the first part "language"?

Have you ever been treated as stupid rather than just somebody who can't speak or understand the speaker's language?

Do you think it might be a fake?

I thought so at first, but when I saw that other videos were being presented of autistic people, I had second thoughts. Autism causes people to engage in repititive and other unsocial behaviors. Nevertheless, the mind can function efficiently, better than normal people, when involving mechanical or thinking skills, such as math, piano playing etc, without having an ability to communicate (as we know it). I think high-functioning language (like she supposedly did) is possible in some forms of autism, like Asperger's Syndrome, but I would think that language would be somehow impaired if they were demonstrating obvious repetitive movements like she was; but I suppose there isn't any reason they couldn't both occur. I disagree with the message that her repetitive behavior conveys the same complexity as her "understandable" communication (if that truly is her communicating). Many theories, even linguistic theories, rely on this hope, which is the motivating factor behind teaching animals how to talk like humans — like Koko the gorilla and Knisi(?) the parrot — and relegating near human-like qualities to whales and dolphins, who are described as speaking a language far more intelligent to our own, if we stupid people could only just understand, dang it. I think everyone has the potential to communicate, but physiological barriers keep certain individuals from being able to express themselves. This is one of the reasons I'm against pulling the plug on people who are described as vegetables. They may seem worthless to certain people visibly, but inside, thought processes are no doubt still buzzing around,
hindered, in prison, waiting for a medical breakthrough to release them.
I do kind of think that this video is set up though, because normally, people just don't go off spouting linguistic theory after theory like that unless they are, well, linguists. If you can show me that this person has extensively studied linguistic issues, I could believe this video; otherwise, I'm a skeptic. It's like when I hear some politician claim that his or her four-year-old daughter was offended when some opposing politician talked about some highly complex issue. I'm not buying it. I think the politician was offended and used the child to "powerfully" convey or represent his or her own thoughts, dishonestly implying that if a child gets it, then it must be true. Such tactics fool many unthinking people, I suppose.

Have you ever been treated as stupid rather than just somebody who can't speak or understand the speaker's language?

I think everyone has the potential to express a language, and be educated in that language, but again, physiological factors can prevent some from expression, or even from learning. Other people simply don't have the desire to learn, or express. But it is my understanding that every human being has inside of them, discounting physiological or psychological barriers, the ability to communicate effectively in any spoken, written, or signed language. If one doesn't have the desire to learn, or is physiologically impaired somehow, their level of communication and even thought processes will be compromised, even if their potential isn't. This issue is getting into psychology, neurology, biology, and even ethics, which subjects sometimes gets linguists in hot water.

Maybe she's for real

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=silentmiaow

I know it's a very very trite comparison but when you swear at your computer, are you communicating?

One (unproven) theory about the cause of autism is that they are born extremely male, with a stong emphasis on the left brain. They are expert at logic and deficient in emotions, which might be considered emotional intelligence. Since most intelligent people are usually reasonably adept at both, one who lacks emotional intelligence to the extreme, albeit superior logically, might be deemed unintelligent.