Communication Accommodation Theory
Communication Accommodation Theory is known as the examination of speakers modifying their communication to increase or reduce the differences in speakers and their communicators (Street & Giles, 1982). Communication Accommodation Theory is examined through two different forms of communication: convergence and divergence (Griffin, 2009). When comparing communicators of different first languages you can see a very distinct difference. The reason I used the word ‘see’ and not ‘hear’ is because I am comparing the differences in those who speak English to those who communicate through American Sign Language. In the present paper, Communication Accommodation Theory is applied to Deaf/Hearing communication barriers. Is Communication Accommodation Theory assisting in the disappearance of Deaf Culture?
In the 2008 International Encyclopedia for Communication, Howard Giles and Susan Baker explain how Communication Accommodation Theory works. Due to integrity and fairness, people do not speak the same way to every person they encounter. The article places Communication Accommodation Theory into the socio-psychological category stating that due to social interaction with different individuals the results of the theory could vary. Giles has contrasted two strategic forms of communication that diverse people use when they interact (Griffin, 2009). Convergence is defined as a strategy of adapting your communication behavior in such a way as to become more similar to another person. This is shown when a person adapts the way they communicate to approximate the way of their conversational partner (Griffin, 2009). Divergence is defined as a communication strategy of accentuating the differences between yourself and another person. This strategy is shown when a person insists on a particular dialect or language even if it makes the conversational partner feel uncomfortable.
When applied to the use of American Sign Language, we are starting to see more of the Convergence strategy. This is how pidgin communication comes about. A pidgin is a form of communication that develops when different groups of speakers do not have a common language to communicate with. Pidgins are NOT languages; they are only forms of communication. Signed Exact English (SEE) and Pidgin Signed English (PSE) are two forms of pidgins. Signed Exact English is exactly what it says. In American Sign Language the use of ‘the’, ‘is’, ‘am’, ‘was’, ‘were’, ‘will’, ‘are’, and so on are not used. Since we use these words in English, SEE uses them as well. SEE also uses exact English word order. Pidgin Signed English is the combination of English and American Sign Language. Linguists believe that PSE is used to bridge the gap between those who are native in American Sign Language and those who are native in English. Pidgin Signed English is an example of Giles’ Convergence theory.
Ceil Lucas recorded many studies that compared the differences in adaptation when Deaf individuals were placed with Hearing individuals. These studies placed Native American Sign Language users who knew English with Deaf interviewers, hearing interviewers, and watched them alone. With the Deaf interviewer, each participant in the study signed American Sign Language. With the hearing interviewer, the participants began signing in American Sign Language, but when they realized that the interviewer was Hearing they immediately switched to Signed Exact English or Pidgin Signed Language (Lucas, 1989). Another survey that Lucas conducted was an examination of Deaf College students’ attitudes toward American Sign Language and English. In this survey Deaf students were asked their views on American Sign Language, Pidgin Signed Language, and Signed Exact English. The individuals stated that if they saw someone using true American Sign Language grammar then they often related them to coming from a Deaf family. They also wanted to clear up the misconception of American Sign Language being a ‘broken down’ form of English. American Sign Language is a true language because it is rule governed (Scott, 1980). It follows all of the rules of a language; it is productive, shows relationships, introduces new symbols, is used for unrestricted number of domains, can be broken down, has one or more meanings for symbols, refers to past, present, and future, changes across time, interchangeable, can monitor use, is learned from other people, there are over variants of same language, and you can use the language to discuss the language (Valli, Lucas, & Mulrooney, 2005).
If American Sign Language is considered to be a true language then how is Communication Accommodation Theory assisting in the disappearance of Deaf Culture? It’s all in the history. Most people associate Alexander Graham Bell as the man who invented the telephone, but he was also very involved in Deaf education in his time. This was education that banned the use of American Sign Language and enforced the use of oral communication on Deaf students. It wasn’t until the National Alliance for the Deaf rose to proclaim American Sign Language as the ‘natural language of the Deaf’ (Lane, Hoffmeister, & Bahan, 1996). American Signed Language took off from there but as the United States started to adapt, so did the American Sign Language. In the Deaf World and Deaf Community, you will see American Sign Language being used. In the Hearing Community and even most schools, you will always see a form of Signed Exact English or Pidgin Signed English. This is because education is now focusing on having the deaf student (if they are born from hearing parents) learn English before they learn their natural language. Most Deaf schools do not teach American Sign Language which means the students have to look upon Deaf role models to learn American Sign Language. With this becoming an ongoing issue in schools, it is affecting the growth of Deaf Culture. Deaf children are Deaf Culture’s future.
If there weren’t any truth in Communication Accommodation Theory then this paper would have had no support. American Sign Language users who interact with those whose native language is English adapt their way of communicating to better the conversation for the non-ASL signer. Unfortunately for Deaf individuals, signing is leaning more towards the pidgin form of communication rather than the language of their culture. The theory of Communication Accommodation is assisting in the disappearance of Deaf Culture as we know it.
REFERENCES
Giles & Weimann (1987). Street & Giles (1982).
Communication Accommodation Theory. Retrieved from:
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/communication_accomodation.htm
Griffin, Em (2009). A First Look At Communication. The
McGraw Hill Company, Inc. Communication Accomodation
Theory, Chapter 30.
Lane, H., Hoffmeister, R., & Bahan, B., (1996). A Journey
Into the Deaf World. Dawn Sign Press. San Diego,
California.
Liddell, Scott (1980). American Sign Language Syntax.
Mouton Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands. Great
Britain.
Lucas, Ceil, (1989). The Sociolinguistics of the Deaf
Community. Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, California.
Chapter 1, 2, 9.
Valli, C., Lucas, C., Mulrooney, K., (2005). Linguistics of
American Sign Language: An Introduction 4th Edition.
Gallaudet University Press.
Communication Accommodation Theory. Retrieved from:
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/communication_accomodation.htm
Griffin, Em (2009). A First Look At Communication. The
McGraw Hill Company, Inc. Communication Accomodation
Theory, Chapter 30.
Lane, H., Hoffmeister, R., & Bahan, B., (1996). A Journey
Into the Deaf World. Dawn Sign Press. San Diego,
California.
Liddell, Scott (1980). American Sign Language Syntax.
Mouton Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands. Great
Britain.
Lucas, Ceil, (1989). The Sociolinguistics of the Deaf
Community. Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, California.
Chapter 1, 2, 9.
Valli, C., Lucas, C., Mulrooney, K., (2005). Linguistics of
American Sign Language: An Introduction 4th Edition.
Gallaudet University Press.