Politically Correct International Signs

          To be PC or not to be PC

          There is a movement among some Interpreters and some Deaf people to use indigenous signs for foreign countries and their cities. By indigenous I mean, for example, the Japanese Sign Language sign for "Japan", rather than the ASL sign. This development has been sparked by an increasing interaction between American and foreign Deaf people and Interpreter from varying countries. Through activities such as international Deaf sports, Deaf Way, Deaf tourists (who can communicate more easily with foreign Deaf than Hearing people in a similar situation), Deaf missionary work, and Deaf people working in such settings as the Peace Corps, and international interpreter organizations.

          Should interpreters begin to use these signs in their work too?

Two articles from Silent News are very helpful in examining this issue. The articles are "A sign of African-American pride" by Emmanuel Azodeh, March 1994, and "In England, deaf community fights to keep their offensive signs" by Rajeev Syal, month? 1994. Azodeh discusses the various signs that have been used for "Africa" over the years. Since Africa is a continent, not a country, there is no indigenous sign for it, but it is interesting to see the emotions that a sign can evoke, just as labels of ethnic groups evoke emotions: consider "Negro", "Colored People", "People of Color", "Afro-American", "Black", and "African American". To encapsulate the parts of his article that is pertinent to this discussion, Azodeh says that about five years ago the sign for Africa, which begins with a [5] hand shape, palm orientation away from signer, tracing a half circle to the dominant side while closing to an [O] and dropping slightly, replaced the sign where an [A] circles the face. The original sign for Africa was derived from Swahili and began at the forehead and circled the face. This represented the African continent and a profile of the "African Mother": that is, Africa as the cradle of civilization. Deaf people in Africa will point to their face to represent specific countries. It is an easy way to communicate where the signer is from.  The explanation of the original Africa sign shows how the origin of a sign can be tied to a very tender and loving concept with significant metanotative impact.  Later the sign was changed, shifted to begin from the jaw rather than the forehead, but the circular movement resembled BEAUTIFUL as in the expression "Black is beautiful." The article also examines the two variations of the sign. One sign ends on the side of the face, another sign ends on the nose. Disagreement still exists if there is a negative connotation in the sign that ends on the nose. Some people say ending on the nose shows pride in the distinctive facial feature of people from Africa while others feel it to be derogatory. The sign first mentioned that starts with a [5] surfaced in the 1970s. In 1990 Azodeh traveled to Nigeria and shared this sign with the Deaf people there. They preferred the sign at the face because this allowed the viewer to maintain eye contact with the signer. Breaking eye contact implies looking down on something. Other signs are illustrated and rejected. Sign etymologies are always controversial, especially since this is a relatively new study, but the point this article strives to make is that the article shows how signs, like words, can have a very high emotive impact, and this should be taken into consideration when interpreters select s sign while interpreting. The article is worth reading in its entirety and makes many points not mentioned for the purpose of this article. James Womack (quoted in http://m1.aol.com/alysser/teachaslvocab.htm) says of the sign that is a [C] that traces the shape of the continent and closes to a [O^], "The new sign [for Africa] is American and a certain Jack Burns came up with it during a theatrical rehearsal in Los Angeles back in the mid-1970's."  Jack Burns is a hearing white male interpreter.

         The other article by Syal, reprinted from the (London) Sunday Times, discusses how hearing people in England are trying to prevent Deaf people from using some signs that the hearing people find offensive. The signs have come to the attention of hearing people by being broadcast on television as part of the BBC's “See Here” program. For example, the sign for Gay is a limp wrist, and the sign for Jewish resembles a hooked nose. Austin Reeves, chairman of the Sign Language Committee at the British Deaf Association, said that the television producers "are in a dangerously powerful position to dictate language." Hearing people should not make decisions for Deaf people about their language! This article is also well worth reading in its entirety.

         Since signs for nations, nationalities and ethnic groups are a volatile issue, what is an interpreter to do? Let us consider the benefits and drawbacks and end with how to ameliorate the drawbacks if the Deaf consumers are supportive of indigenous signs. The benefits of using such signs are: (1) it shows the unity of Deaf Americans with international Deaf people and encourages the former to help other countries in their struggle for Deaf Rights and Liberation; (2) it broadens the perspective of Deaf people by showing the pervasiveness of Deaf cultures with its consequent increase in Deaf pride; (3) it respects the right of a foreign country to self-determination in regard to its own identity; (4) some ASL signs are seen as insulting or derogatory (IRELAND, POLAND, and CHINA) and using indigenous sign avoids that problem, and (5) it decreases the amount of fingerspelling needed when discussing countries that have no ASL sign. The drawbacks are: (1) some D/deaf people prefer the ASL signs and an interpreter who uses the indigenous signs may appear as if s/he is legislating sign language; (2) the new signs may be confusing and hard to get used to (especially for those countries that already have an ASL sign); (3) Hearing people don't use indigenous names, such as "jung gwa" for "China" and "Deutschland" for "Germany". Should interpreters be forcing Deaf people to do something hearing people don’t do? (4) some indigenous signs are identical or extremely similar (signs that resemble one another) - such as BELIZE and BRAZIL, IRAQ and ENGLAND. To ameliorate the drawbacks interpreters can: (1) use ASL signs or fingerspelling if the consumers object to the indigenous ones; (2) use ASL signs if consumers are too confused or be sure to sign negotiate and watch carefully for backchannel feedback; (3) Follow Deaf people’s preferences (4) if a country has more than one indigenous sign, pick the one that is not homologous to ASL, and if there are none, rely on context.

          Some interpreters continue using offensive signs. Some do so out of ignorance. That some interpreters are ignorant of the offense some signs cause is not so bad, but they try to rationalize the use of the offensive signs, This action causes one to wonder if their ego is more important than possibly offending their consumers. For example interpreters working in Seattle, Washington where Boeing is located and also employs a large number of Deaf people. The standard sign for Boeing is AIRPLANE while mouthing Boeing. For a joke some Deaf people sign BORING with the AIRPLANE or ILY hand shape.  An interpreter used the joke sign during a formal presentation at a company that is a subcontractor of Boeing. After being advised it is inappropriate to use that sing in a formal setting the interpreter just laughed it off. Saying "It's such a cute sign.” Later the interpreter tried to sign Boeing properly but it could be seen the interpreter stumble and struggled to change to the correct sign due to the strength to which the joke sign was ingrained in her lexicon. The struggle illustrates the issue with limiting oneself to only one sign for a concept. Repetition of use causes a sign to be the default sign choice. This struggle with sign choice can draw the attention of the Deaf people away from the topic to sign choice. Imagine if a Deaf person were signing BOING at such a gathering and the interpreter voiced "the Boring Company" because some hearing people mock the company in that manner!

         Another example is the use of the sign N*GGER (N twisting at the side of the nostril). Some white interpreters justify using it by saying, "Well growing up I saw lots of (White) Deaf people sign that.”

          Another example that people should be made aware of:  While we're on the subject, is the sign for Louisiana that looks like EXCRETE. During an event that happened in Louisiana, the platform interpreter signed this for "Louisiana". He / She was later corrected by some Louisianans. I don't know her / his reaction but I bring it up as a caution. This sign is widespread so it is not so amazing that this should happen.

          After discussing using offensive signs many interpreters may decide to always use politically correct signs. The danger in signing what a given interpreter thinks is PC he / she may choose a sign that offends someone. Using the indigenous signs for countries seems as though it is a safe, non-offensive, thing to do. Some Deaf Chinese people have strong negative response to the sign for CHINA that traces the outline of the Mao jacket across the top of the chest and down the side of the chest. Some do not like this sign because of family members experiences grown up in China under communism. The sign is connected in their opinion to a very oppressive regime.

         When interpreting signs for other countries interpreters need to be aware of; signs that are generally accepted as offensive, signs that may be offensive so some people, Deaf people have varied experiences, which affect the meaning and offensiveness of signs.  When choosing a sign to use for another country it is helpful to know the person / people being interpreted for. It is also helpful to ask the Deaf consumers if they have a preferred sign for a given country especially if the interpreter is aware that a country will be discussed during the interpreted event. If there are several consumers that want different signs for a country, let them decide, and if they can't then the interpreter can fingerspell in order to respect all people present. It is easy to become complacent and use the sign that is familiar and in most cases using the sign “that I’ve always used” will not cause a problem. To become more culturally sensitive and respectful of the diversity of the Deaf community interpreters can challenge themselves to carefully choose signs for other countries that make the interpreted event successful and non-offensive to the consumers.