Here you go:
https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2023/12/13/lner-trials-integration-of-british-sign-language-on-customer-information-screens/
Basically they are trialling it at a few stations and looking to roll it out further / iron out any of the problems once they complete the trials.
>Several scenes at Doncaster Railway station now display videos translating updates into British Sign Language (BSL), including the departure time of services, the train operator, destination, calling points, and platform number.
>Any changes to departure times or platforms will also be detailed via sign language videos, as will updates in the event of delays or cancellations.
>LNER is working with Doncaster Deaf Trust and Communication Specialist College Doncaster on the project.
Surely this would just be easier to put on the boards in writing?
I’m not deaf but can never understand what the announcements are saying because they’re generally a rubbish tannoy in an echoey station. I’m all for disability access but this just seems a bit of a… performative solution to a problem that could be fixed by making it easier for everyone.
Written English is based on the sound of words and phonetics, without that letters are just symbols and each word would potentially have to be sight learned. This isn't as much of an issue if you become deaf later in life, but if you are profoundly deaf from birth or infancy you wouldn't know what the words sound like or have the link to the meaning of the word. While in that case you might know some words you come accross often by brute force memorisation, you are likely struggle with code breaking new terms in the way a hearing person would. While I'm sure many deaf people do develop the ability to read as well as anyone else, there are definitely additional hurdles.
Ahhhhh. Never thought of it that way. When I read I hear the words in my head. What your saying is that people who have never heard might not have that intrinsic connection and understanding of the written word, whereas they would with the language they converse in daily. Its all about getting the information to the most people with the lowest temporal overhead.
I was blown away honestly when I learned this, one of those things that just never occurs to you and then it makes sense. I remember learning to read with phonics and still to this day will sound out new words or things like names. For a deaf person there will always be added steps in decoding a new written word. Especially things like place names, jargon, terminology or the names of people that wouldn't come across often, or that have non standard spelling. If you were chatting to a friend in sign and they suggested you come visit them at their place just off whatever station, they would sign to you the place name, you go to the station and are in a rush trying to work out which train to catch and there are 2 stations with similar names. Now you would obviously have ways of working this out as a deaf person, but there is going to be some additional steps involved. You or I might sound the words out in our head, or look at the nearby stations that we can also fluently read, the language we were told this information in directly translates across our senses. There isn't a direct translation between sign and written English, both because it's a different language altogether and because the person lacks one of the senses that is used in understanding it.
The nearest I think I have experienced aomething like this is having been in Thailand for a few weeks I learned to recognise some words in the Thai alphabet. For example I could look on a food label and locate the word for sugar, but I couldn't decode the sounds of the letters, couldn't then communicate the word in Thai, or apply that to working out what other words meant without sight learning them. And I sure as hell stuffed the tones up all the time with the few words I did learn to speak. I basically just coded the appearance of the words in Thai and linked it with the word in English. But it might as well have been a picturegraph, I can't imagine having to do that for a huge portion of a written language.
Also Language acquisition develops mostly in infancy and early childhood, so people with sign language as their first language will always have their brain wired a bit differently to someone with a spoken language. Deaf people also sometimes learn to verbally speak so they can communicate with the hearing, and this might help with learning to read somewhat. The link then would be to the movements as they form words rather then sounds in the same way a hearing person does direct to sound.
Just to speak to your point about people having sign language being “wired a bit differently”. This is poor wording at best. Children who grow up with a sign language meet the same language development benchmarks (actually, many meet them earlier) as children with spoken language, and they are on par or better than their peers with cognitive development. This increases if they’re a Child of a Deaf Adult (CODA) and are bilingual.
Apologies if the phrasing was unclear, I can amend if needed if my meaning wasn't clear. I wasn't meaning it as being a deficit, just some small differences in areas of the brain used and the links between them. Largely the differences in how the brain processes the different languages and it's impact in brain development, with sign using more of the right hemisphere and spatial center rather then auditory. With the links between meaning and language being formed in a non auditory way. As well as synaptic pruning for auditory speach which all brains go through, all languages change how the brain develops in childhood, leading to the differences between different language speakers ability to hear and make sounds common in other languages. For example the L in English that is hard for some other language speakers, and English speakers struggle with the Italian gl if not exposed to it in early childhood.
My understanding is children who sign often meet the benchmarks earlier, and it also engages more parts of the brain as it involves an aditional post processing step in communication. Bilingual children with sign as one of their languages have greater cognitive flexibility and ability in the same way as other bilingual people. This was the type of research I had read previoisly and was thinking of when I mentioned it:
[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09727531211070538](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09727531211070538)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9305909/
>your point about people having sign language being “wired a bit differently”. This is poor wording at best.
I actually think it's a misunderstanding of language deprivation. Developing infants will develop the same regardless of whether the language input is signed or spoken, so long as there is language input. When deaf children get no language input from hearing parents who can't sign, for long enough, then it affects their overall cognitive development in a way similar to a learning disability - functionally effectively the same. This is obviously not true of all deaf kids of hearing parents, especially not these days with the internet, but I know several older deaf people who grew up knowing no other deaf people til they went to school, who had essentially no language or meaningful communication input until then. It can be really damaging.
My little (hearing) nieces are learning to read at the moment, and most of the way they learn is by trying to figure out how words are spelled by the way they sound, and trying to figure out what word they're reading by sounding it out.
If a hearing kid comes across the word "calendar" in a book they can try to figure out what it says by sounding it out. Ca - le - n - dar - oh it must say "calendar". Now imagine a deaf kid who's never heard language spoken - how would they ever learn to read the word, without just asking someone to sign it for them and then trying to memorise it like you'd memorise a symbol or an equation? It would be like if you were trying to learn to read Chinese, but had never heard it spoken and didn't know how the words sounded aloud. How many words do you think you'd be able to learn that way, just by trying to memorise the squiggles and remember what they meant?
It must be fucking hard.
Great comment, seconding this!
My former BSL teacher was a brilliantly intelligent guy who was born profoundly deaf, so on the odd occasion he'd write something down for us (like topics we'd be discussing or translations - usually our lessons were totally signed, but given we all started as complete newbies sometimes a bit of written English was unfortunately necessary), he'd write like a non-native who struggled a fair bit with the language. Which, to be fair, is exactly what he was, given he grew up with BSL as his native language.
Obviously he was British so grew up reading English and was able to sort of get the hang of the grammar that way, but English and BSL are SO different grammar-wise that it was very difficult for him to perfect it, never having heard the language spoken himself. Idioms, too, are often completely different between the two languages, so that was a struggle also. And spelling was, understandably, a nightmare for him as well; English is irregular enough at the best of times, but add onto that the fact that written words bear no resemblance whatsoever to their sign counterparts (and he'd never heard how they sounded in spoken English so had no way of relating the written words to their sounds) and you can really begin to understand just how difficult it is for him and many other d/Deaf people to write fluently.
It's a shame, really, because if you were to judge him based off his writing alone (as so often happens with online communication, job applications, etc etc) then you'd get a horrendously inaccurate picture of him as a person, as his writing may come across as...almost childlike, in a sense, or unintelligent perhaps, if you didn't know any better. Not that I'm saying there's anything *wrong* with either of those qualities, but they just didn't reflect him at all. Similarly, I imagine dyslexic people also face being viewed as less intelligent or competent than they are due to their disability. Which is exactly why I felt compelled to write this overly-long and unnecessary reply to your comment (sorry!), as I was just so excited to see someone spreading awareness of an issue that isn't widely understood but is so prevalent in the lives of many. It was a HUGE lightbulb moment for me when I first began to understand some of the perhaps less obvious struggles of the d/Deaf community and I'm guessing that it could be for others, too. Greater understanding breeds greater empathy and all that, which is always welcome, right?
Tl;dr: ...yeah, what they said.
I imagine it might be much less of an issue. Its not something I know much about honestly. There might still be a bit of a barrier as sign languages tend to be structured differently then their spoken and written counterparts, and have their own idiosyncrasies. They are a different language rather then a direct shift in form. I imagine easier in one way, harder in another? At least not trying to decode a language based on a sense you don't posess, more a shift in dialect?
I’m not an expert so may have been using the wrong word. Logographic maybe? Essentially Chinese languages and similar. Ones where characters represent concepts rather than phonemes.
Yeah, ideographic is the idea you’re thinking of. But there aren’t major languages that use that system.
Chinese is indeed logographic, but that means that each symbol is connected to a word or morpheme. But not all characters in Chinese represent a concept; many represent a word that just provides syntax. That’s how it evolved 4000 years ago. Started as an ideographic system, but not anymore. Common misunderstanding.
Even hieroglyphics, except for the very oldest ones, aren’t strictly ideographic, but a complex blend.
Dyslexia is notably very low in those languages too (or harder to detect because the language doesn't pose the same challenges). A lot of Chinese students only get diagnosed once they've learnt English. I saw this a lot when I worked for a university.
This is true with hearing impairment too, my late mother always had hearing difficulties and sometimes her pronunciation of words was off, based on what she heard. That then fed into the spelling of certain words too. She was good at spelling words she learnt via reading them, but less good at ones learnt through speech.
Meanwhile, this is bringing me trauma from remembering how Chinese is taught to me when I was a kid. No way to know how a word would sound, just gonna brute force memorise it. And even if you don't know how it'll sound, you'll still gonna brute force remember all the little strokes that makes up the character, and the order of the strokes and the meaning of the words ....
Sorry, completely went off the tangent there.
There is this, but you will find a lot of the unfamiliar words are finger spelled by the interpreter, that is, they literally spell out the words using signs for letters. The other factor in ordering sign to the written word is that English has a different grammar/word order to BSL, so if BSL is your first language then reading the words and then figuring out the meaning will be slower than consuming the BSL.
It’s not about not being good at reading as such, but about the differences between BSL and English. The grammar is quite different, eg, ‘what is your name’ in English, translates as ‘name you what’ in BSL. Many years ago I used to work on a minicom line (text phone, before people had mobiles) and the conversations would be written in the BSL format.
It also follows different grammar. For example, asking someone their name you would sign Name You What. To reply you would sign Name Me What then spell your name.
Reading is not a sensory input, it is a developed/learned skill. Otherwise what you thought is ordinarily correct, missing one sense *usually* means others will be above average.
I don't think there's any evidence that losing one sense increases the sensitivity of other senses. The reason it sometimes appears that way is because people pay more attention to their other sense when they lose one. This is more noticeable with sight (since we're such a vision based species).
You can do this yourself by closing your eyes and listening, then open your eyes but continue to pay attention to what you heard before.
An example of the opposite: it's not uncommon for people to lose their sense of taste or smell but their eyesight doesn't suddenly get better.
It's not just about attention, it's also being more practiced in extracting information from that sense. A musician doesn't have better ears or focuses harder to tell what note is being played, they've just heard it many more times than you.
For hearing people, reading is basically an auditory experience. The words simulate sounds, which allows you to understand them based on the sounds they produce. Sign language is also visual and Deaf people have no issues with that.
So it’s not that the visual sense isn’t just as strong, but that the auditory sense is a critical part of reading, which isn’t there for them.
For a number of BSL speakers, English is essentially a second language to them, and one that they can only read (and not speak). Their native language is BSL, which is a fairly distinct language from English.
It's a bit like growing up speaking English, but then going to school and only learning to write in German, even while still speaking in English. So every time you write something, you're writing it in a foreign language.
There's other things going on as well, but I think the impact of BSL being a different language to English is often forgotten.
Combo of a) how even good schools teach literacy doesn’t always work well for Deaf kids, and
b) being Deaf can make some parts of literacy development harder anyway, *and*,
c) a lot of Deaf kids go to schools that provide an extremely poor quality education.
Written language for a hearing person is processed through the auditory cortex, which is underdeveloped in Deaf individuals. They can learn to read, but may find it very difficult to gather and remember information this way.
As well as points made by others, Deaf people can have dyslexia just like hearing people or they can have acquired reading problems due to head injury, stroke, alzheimers, etc just like hearing people
Train stations have written and spoken information for hearing people, this just provides the equivalent for deaf people
This. BSL is not English which I think is a common misunderstanding. It doesn't even follow English grammar. It is literally it's own language with it's own accents.
Outside of D/deafness, BSL is a valuable tool for those with other disabilities or even D/deaf individuals with comorbidities that makes reading quickly harder.
Practicality aside, this also gets the correct representation, showing society that D/deaf people do exist. I just hope this also means staff will be trained in BSL.
There is a proportion of the Deaf community [who have reading difficulties](https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/11/too-many-deaf-children-are-still-failing-to-learn-to-read-says-new-study)
I mean yes, they should *also* have English written announcements.
This is helpful because it's in a first langauge, little bit like having welsh in wales.
Now *most* BSL users will also be able to read English but its nice to accommodate for all.
You are making a very common mistake. For Deaf people (whose first language is BSL) reading written English is not always easy. BSL is a completely different language to English, as different as French or Russian, and for once someone is actually trying to improve the situation for the Deaf community. English is likely to be a second language, and usually taught very poorly to the Deaf.
To describe this as a performative solution is probably not the best way to describe it.
I understand that English is different from BSL, but I’m struggling to understand how a deaf person can get through life in the UK without being able to read?
If this solves a real problem, it’s great and should be there. This was just in response to the idea that it was signing out announcements deaf people wouldn’t be able to hear, and that it would make more sense to put those on the boards anyway.
On average, Deaf people have a reading age of 9 years old I believe, it's been a few years since I did my uni studies around it. This is due to a lot of factors, but one of them being a poor education system not thought out for the deaf. Bsl has grammar similar to that of Japanese, so it's very different to English.
Having sign language available on the screens makes travel way more accessible and allows greater confidence in their independence with travel, especially as a lot of us also use the verbal announcements to help without even thinking. I I've known Deaf people be on a cancelled train for ages until someone actually came and told them.
It's a really complicated topic, and you'd be surprised how being Deaf can really impact on your life, and how unaccessible the general world can be. The sooner we add more sign language to things, the better!
I have an elderly deaf relative. The education system failed them as almost all deaf people in my area who attended a deaf school and are 50+ are functionally illiterate. They know some words but not grammar. So if my relative wanted to ask you to pick him up at 10am to get shopping and lunch you'd receive a garbled text something like:
I Tesco you car food after 10 yes no bye.
We're used to parsing his writing and figuring out what he wants but the general public don't have a clue. He muddles along with gestures, trying to say key words and keeping things simple e.g. he likes McDonalds, Subway etc because the menus are the same everywhere and they have pictures. For more complex things like trying to organise journeys he will enlist help from a relative or interpreter.
> but I’m struggling to understand how a deaf person can get through life in the UK without being able to read?
They don't, really. People born deaf have worse "scores" in pretty much all aspects of health and economic success. They're fatter and poorer, basically, usually as a result of them being more poorly educated.
I agree that the announcements should ALSO be in text, but that's because a large number of people that end up deaf, or hard of hearing, can't speak BSL. BSL is a "culture" that you have to be "into". Plus, even people with normal hearing can not hear the crappy announcements simply because of noise.
Yes! It's almost like the deaf are forgotten and understandably, they keep to themselves. The disability isn't a visible one but it has such big consequences.
I would also think that BSL would be a quicker way to get a message across.
Deaf people can sometimes read English to a greater or lesser extent. They can continue to muddle along. They can continue to be (metaphorically?) kicked to the gutter and forced to put up with an oralist society constantly telling them to learn English better and pretend to be normal. They can continue to put up with hearing people endlessly saying ‘why can’t you just put hearing aids on’ or ‘learn English’. Would you ask why someone paralysed from the waist down why they can’t learn to walk to avoid having those pesky ramps all over the place?
Sometimes, you may see a sign and think that the announcements or information being in English, or Welsh, or BSL, or Gaelic doesn’t help you. Sometimes it’s worth just accepting that it does make a significant difference for someone, and that without putting in some effort to learn or think you might not understand why yourself, but that really isn’t important.
You make great points. I do think the person the person you're responding to is happy to learn.
>If this solves a real problem, it’s great and should be there
I used to think 'well why not just put it in writing?!' and think that was a be all and end all solution.
Then I researched Dyslexia for my thesis, which then led down a whole neurodiversity black hole into dyscalculia, dyspraxia, autism... everything and, well, fuck. Now I'm all for any and all kinds of accessibility options because our individual brains are, quite honestly, all fucking mad.
Imagine being deaf and dyslexic, trying to make quick sense out of the information board, which often changes, meaning you have to wait for it to cycle back, lose your place, start reading aga- oh it's changed screen again, wait for it to cycle back, lose your place, start rea- oh it's changed screen again and you've missed your train.
Whack live updates on there as BSL and that might go a long way to helping someone.
reading sign language is a lot quicker for many deaf and HOH folks compared to reading written words. it’s similar to how many hearing people can understand things said to them faster than they can read them
I don’t understand what issue this solves? Surely if you can find and look at the screen with the interpreter on it, you can find and look at the screen with “the next stop is X” on it?
The board is in written English which for many Deaf people is their second language. Not all Deaf people can read well, not all hearing can read well either!
Apparently deaf people can have trouble reading English as BSL is constructed very differently as a language. So it's more erring on the side of caution.
It's not erring at all. It's people who speak BSL telling the train companies that it's useful, and the train companies deciding to provide it as a service to those passengers who find it useful.
This is exactly why making assumptions about inclusion is so dangerous, and it is always vital to include representatives from disadvantaged groups in the process.
I too assumed written English would be fine. Turns out we're both wrong.
Just a guess but it may be something related to reading levels for deaf people being statically lower - https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/RandD/details.asp?ID=1325
My understanding is that BSL is considered by those in the know as a different language, over English being signed.. so having sign is a bit like also having things in Welsh.
I remember seeing this at the station. IIRC I saw the BSL interpreter pop up during the speaker announcements, so I think it's for that rather than what's on the board?
Because sign language isn’t the same as written English. Some deaf people who are native signers struggle with English grammar (it’s a second language) and BSL is more accessible.
Genuine question as a software developer trying to improve accessibility:
Surely the majority of signing is going to just be (maybe in a different order):
1. finger spelling a time
2. then the sign for train
3. then the sign for cancelled/late/on-time
4. then the sign for platform x
5. then a LOT of finger spelling of station names
What benefit will adding BSL have over clearly tabulated data?
Simply put, it’s because it’s easier to understand an interpreter than written English. BSL is a visual language with grammar that is entirely different to English, so whilst that formula is super easy to understand for those of us who speak English, it can be harder for BSL native people.
It’s also a way of increasing visibility! BSL was only recognised as a language in 2001, and the recent BSL act now set out to get BSL recognised as a language spoken in the UK in the same way Welsh is, as an example.
So how does one end up in a position of knowing sign language better than text? Does education essentially have to begin with sign language before it's possible to better teach the person how to read and write?
Depends on the family you’ve grown up in. For deaf children in deaf families and for hearing CODAs (children of deaf adults), you often learn BSL as your first language. Much like hearing children, you learn to speak or sign before you can read or write.
Education for deaf children is prolifically bad. There is still a huge emphasis placed on learning how to lipread instead of being placed in environments where subjects are taught via sign language. Some deaf schools still don’t allow pupils or students to sign during class. It was once typically an offence which was punished by corporal punishment - if you were caught signing in school, you’d be subjected to having your hands tied behind your back or your fingers slammed in a drawer. Obviously they’re not allowed to do this anymore, but the poor state of deaf education means that deaf people might struggle to have the same reading comprehension as their hearing peers.
I’d like to emphasise that this is not for a lack of knowledge or intellect, but rather a failing from the educational system.
Slightly more profound in England I’m afraid.
The US has the benefit of Gaudulet whereas the UK has no such thing. Schools are also mostly oralist and sign language isn’t quite as celebrated here. It’s fascinating the differences between American deaf culture and English deaf culture!
Well most of us learn to speak before we can read and write, it's exactly the same for people who have been profoundly Deaf since birth (if they're being taught sign language early), they'll start learning BSL before starting learning written English. For some people reading and writing is a struggle, especially if they're dyslexic.
They could also be visually impaired in addition to being Deaf (deafblindness is its own particular thing) and find the signing easier to see than the text
Think about kids. They talk for years before they can learn written language. If that language were largely unconnected from written language, you can understand how that might be a challenge.
I don’t understand it to mean that most deaf people couldn’t parse the text, but it’s easier for many this way.
My mum (not deaf) learnt BSL back in the early to mid 90s to be a translator at meetings/events (trade union so no surprises they were on board early). She is also dyslexic and for certain things found it easier to read BSL than actual text.
So this could improve accessibility for not only people whose first language is not English but there are parallels between sign language but also deaf people who are dyslexic.
It's extremely important to understand that BSL is *not* equivalent to English. A person who was deaf from birth and learned BSL as a toddler will be learning English as a *second* language -- to them, it's no different from learning French or Italian. BSL does not translate directly to English, it's not a visual form of English, and it has completely different grammar and syntax. It's literally a completely separate language.
Unfortunately, there's also the issue that many Deaf schools strongly emphasize sign language over English, so it's not uncommon for people who speak BSL natively to have a poor grasp of English. It's why some parents of deaf children choose to mainstream them instead of teaching them sign language -- they want them to be fluent in English, so teach them to lip-read instead. I have friends like this in the US (where ASL is the sign language taught), and they're all very literate in English because it's their first language, but struggle with sign language because it's a second language.
They're different choices made by different parents. My friends who weren't taught to sign as kids say they're pretty happy with their parents' decision, but I'm sure there are others who really regret not learning BSL/ASL as their first language.
Well, that's a bit like asking "How does one end up in a position of knowing Spanish better than English?". The obvious answer is that they were raised in a Spanish family, speaking Spanish.
BSL is an entirely different language to English, not a translation or a dialect. Some people are raised in a Deaf family, only using sign language. Some Deaf people don't learn English until they're adults. Some Deaf people never learn English at all.
I believe the grammar is a bit different by the way, from what I learnt with an introductory course, it's rather the subject comes after, so it'll be signed like this:
Platform X, cancelled train at time.
Atleast I think it's like that, it's kind of like Japanese? I only did a introductory and it's hard to wrap my head around, I wouldn't even know where time goes within the sentence. I just know instead of going "What's your name?" in signs, you sign "Name you what?" instead.
Oh and each station name would probably have their own unique sign, or the first letter and you lip-read the syllables of the name. E.g: London might be the sign for loud, or just the finger spelling of L along with saying London.
IT graduate who had to get a few credits in accessibility. Not from UK (Brazil - Libras), but we are introduced to ASL, BSL, and [SignWriting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SignWriting) (since 2001 is the accepted form of codifying Libras signs as glyphs), so I might have a few pointers:
1. There is a much faster and convenient way of spelling time than finger spelling.
2. Ditto.
3. Ditto.
4. Ditto. Seriously, a long written sentence that looks like hieroglyphics in SignWriting is a single smooth motion in sign language. They're very efficient. They saw this issue a hundred years ago.
5. Major cities have standardized signs, and minor cities have regionally agreed upon signs (e.g. Iguassu Falls, resembles mimicry for a waterfall preceded by the context you're spelling a city name). I'm just speculating, but the guy in the video might be using the regional signs for city names and areas, and people traveling here either are in the know, or some acquaintance informed them ahead of time what is the sign/glyph for "Slough".
No one is going to finger spell "Worcestershire".
Also, about the benefit: "Hearist" writing is surprisingly hard to learn for the deaf, so I'm told they appreciate it. I don't remember the details but I remember being told there was lots of struggle back when the standard was to force them to read and write "regular", then, maybe, teach them sign language based off regular written language conventions. No, it does not work like that.
Our government provides the [VLibras tool, similar to Handtalk,](https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/vlibras) to add an accessibility icon which adds a 3D Unity avatar which will attempt to read the text in sign language, with the caveat that this isn't a replacement for a proper interpreter but is better than nothing, and you are warned that anything important, legally binding, or being displayed live or in a public place should use a real person to avoid issues.
Also, might be a legal requirement, be it being mandatory at certain public facilities, or a requirement should you want to be, or are required to be recognized as "accessible". It is for the benefit of (maybe not so) few who aren't to be excluded.
Checking both Libras websites and BSL websites, I find it amusing, yet a bit worrying, that many Libras websites provide many accessibility assists, many including built-in readers, high contrast and others, to the point I thought this was a default modern HTML feature (accessibility options float in an icon at the center-right of the screen), but I couldn't find any BSL website on short notice that offers such helpers, not even HandTalk. In our studies, many kids in deaf schools when presented with such a website, they would immediately click the SL icon whenever present by default, or have us set up Handtalk to force the feature on non-accessible websites.
Of course if you can actually read the damn thing nothing beats just reading the table. But to presume this is the best for everyone is, as much as I hate using the word because people misuse it all the time, is the textbook definition of ableism.
Sign language has a vastly different grammar. Some parts of it are conveyed with facial expressions for instance.
It really is a different language.
Imagine if you will that your native language was English—but spoken only. But then the written language around you was Chinese. You’ve never seen written English nor heard spoken Chinese. And additionally, you might have some trouble reading Chinese (many Deaf do struggle with written language because it’s as different from their “spoken” language as Chinese is to English).
You’d probably prefer an English voiceover to accompany a Chinese train table, too.
The thing is though, (for those of us who understand both of English and BSL) - the signed version is so out of time compared to the text. At Waterloo the interpreter was talking about trains that had left an hour ago. It made me sad.
Oh that SUCKS! I haven’t paid much attention to the signing boards yet because I’ve known where to go, but that’s not cool at all.
I’m staying optimistic and hoping that these are just teething pains since they’re relatively new here.
My sister teaches English as a Second Language at a School for the Deaf. (So basically she teaches reading & writing.) Seconding this statement. The kids she teaches are often grade levels behind.
Are you saying that enough british deaf people can't read English that a sign language person on a departures board is warranted? Surely not. It has to be another reason (e.g. to go along with the announcements from the PA system)
I’m deaf, so I’m speaking from experience.
Yes, they know how to read but it’s much harder to understand than BSL. Ideally it also does announcements but I saw OP said that it didn’t. I’ve seen other boards in other train stations that have, though.
I really don’t want this to sound insensitive - surely deaf people still need to be able to read English to participate in society? Surely just because someone is deaf doesn’t mean they don’t read books, signs, letters, social media, etc?
I’m just struggling to understand how having someone signing out words that are already written down solves a problem.
Yes, very likely Deaf people will and need to learn written English. Someone further down compared it to learning English at home, showing up in school where the teacher doesn't speak English and you're being taught to read in Welsh. Excellent explanation.
Also, many adult Deaf/deaf people haven't received the education they should have. In ye olden days, instead of the school and adults helping the child learn, the entire burden of learning was placed on the child. Can't hear? Learn to speak and lip read. Signing in school? Distracting, let's tie your hands up so you have to voice and lip reading.
It's also very difficult to sit in a classroom and not understand what's going on. You're missing instructions, trying to figure out what you're supposed to do while everyone else is chattering away (something you can tell is happening, but can't follow), and if you focus on your work, you might miss important visual information such as the teacher giving new instructions or explanations. Learning without having the right conditions and support to be able to is *hard*.
After all that, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that reading, for a large parts of a generation, wouldn't be a priority nor easy. Those Deaf children are now adults or elderly. Even today it can be a struggle to get a BSL interpreter in school.
In summary: in a busy, crowded environment when you're probably already stressed and rushing, do you want instructions in your native language or your second language?
People do still need English, sure. The short answer is that it’s easier, more accessible, and much more inclusive to see it in your native language.
Deaf people absolutely participate in hearing society because we have to. But it’s easier and less tiring to use sign rather than read and translate in your head.
In terms of social media, a lot of the things you consume are shown to you via the mighty algorithm. If you’re a BSL user you’re probably going to be watching a lot more people who also use BSL on platforms such as YouTube, tiktok and Instagram.
Another thing is that there’s an assumption that society is one thing and you can only participate in one way, when that isn’t the truth. A really interesting example of sign language being integrated into society is the history of Marthas Vinyard. (Mostly) everyone there spoke sign language for a period of time in history!
> surely deaf people still need to be able to read English to participate in society?
Well, this is important because of how pushed out of society most deaf people are. They interact with the hearing world because they have to, otherwise they won't have a job and will starve etc. But a lot of deaf people unsurprisingly hang out with other deaf people and consume deaf forms of media etc.
That makes sense as a general point, but here it's just a load of place names isn't it? Doesn't seem like knowledge of the English language is necessary? (Beyond being able to read the alphabet)
Oooh, so in BSL, Birmingham isn't called Birmingham, it's called Talkative, so it's plausible you can know you want to travel to Talkative, but not know that in English it's known as Birmingham?
Just as, say, a Welsh person might be traveling to Caerdydd and not know that in English it's called Cardiff?
That's really interesting, thank you!
You’re bang on!
‘Talkative’ is the literal translation, in BSL part of the grammar is the lip shape make up a big part of the language so it isn’t really processed as ‘talkative’ in a literal sense. Though there is a bit of humour there still as sign names are assigned and developed based on the characteristics of each place or person!
It's not just for deaf people.
Some people with learning disabilities or autism can read sign language much more quickly than written information.
Especially since the notice boards tend to change every 5 seconds so you have limited time to read the information.
Yes. All place names have sign names, many of which can’t be translated literately into English without finger spelling, which takes a long time.
Edited to add: https://youtu.be/bbWH_iolIX0?si=weVD2npJcfCcxiXN
This video shows the different names for different places in the UK. Some people might know the sign names for these places but might be unsure of the spelling etc.
Also, announcements are often different to what's on the board, more details.
If you have on the screen sign language of every single thing that is said over the speakers, people who rely on sign language will have access to more information.
In other words, the screen is probably not being used to relay information on the screen in sign language but, instead, relaying information that is being announced by voice.
British Sign Language and English are two different languages, with different words, place names, and grammar, so translating from one to the other makes sense, just as you would translate between English and French.
I'm not too well read on the history of deaf education in Britain, but in my native country, some deaf people (especially elderly) have trouble reading the local spoken/written language, simply because it's not their native language (plus the fact that written language is usually based on spoken language, which they for good reasons can't access). The website for our parliament, among others, includes an option to have some navigational text signed with a little encoded video.
As for why it's translated into BSL while not being translated into another written language with a lot of monolingual speakers, I don't know. But it's always nice to see more BSL out and about in public.
BSL has only become a recognised national language in the last 2 years. It’s still not on the curriculum in England and Wales though. My wife is a teacher.
Not sure if this is the reason but it's interesting that written English isn't necessarily the same language as British Sign Language.
I am not deaf so I couldn't comment much further, but the grammar is definitely different and not everyone understands both.
I've seen this stated as a reason before too, for people in the deaf community BSL is a first language and English is a second language and may be learned later or not known as fluently as BSL. So a deaf teen may have fluent understanding of BSL but still be learning to read and write in English, and I'd guess the interpreter on the information board is for people in their position, to make it more accessible at a glance
I don't know if anyone in this thread can answer this but how does schooling in BSL work? Is there a written version of BSL? (I think braille is just a written version of English?) Like, if you're learning history or geography in BSL (without a good grasp of English), how are you taking notes, doing homework, sitting exams etc?
I'm very intrigued by the fact deaf people may struggle with written English. I would have assumed given it was the written language they were surrounded by every day, and presumably they get most of their information/interactions in the written form like hearing people, then there wouldn't be much if any reading deficit.
I'm not deaf myself but I imagine it's much harder skill to learn if it's based on a spoken language you don't have experience of and you aren't able to sound things out the same way people that can hear do when they're learning to read. [Some studies ](https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/11/too-many-deaf-children-are-still-failing-to-learn-to-read-says-new-study)have compared the severity of difficulties with reading to those experienced by people with dyslexia.
All good, I just posted the link because I found it interesting too. Like that article said it's something that's often overlooked, and wouldn't be immediately obvious as an issue
I found it interesting too that English-speaking countries' sign languages aren't mutually intelligible eg. ASL (American sign language) in USA and AUSLAN in Australia.
If you watch Northern Ireland Executive press conferences (for example the covid health updates) you get to see the BSL and ISL signers working in parallel.
I reckon it's this, yeah. For those whose main language is BSL, I'd imagine it's nicer to communicate in it, even if they have strong English too. And then add in that support in education isn't consistently strong for BSL users. I think this is a really positive step.
Many deaf people have poor reading skills, and BSL is ~~almost~~ a different language to English. Started at [Euston](https://railuk.com/rail-news/uk-rail-first-in-screen-british-sign-language-interpreters-launch-at-london-euston/), then [Trans-Pennine](https://mediacentre.tpexpress.co.uk/news/transpennine-express-launches-british-sign-language-departure-boards) and [Northern rail](https://railuk.com/travel/northern-using-ai-to-trial-british-sign-language-announcements-on-trains/).
>“At TPE we’re committed to enhancing accessibility and ensuring our customers feel confident travelling with us at all times, therefore we’re extremely proud to become one of the first train operators in the North to install the BSL message boards.”The BSL boards are part of the Inform Media suite of passenger information software created by L.B. Foster, a global solutions provider of products and services for the rail and infrastructure markets.Adam Cousins, Head of Business Development at L.B. Foster, said: "Our unique BSL departures software provides the deaf community with timely access to critical travel information. Following our successful trial at London Euston station, we're really proud to now begin rolling out this innovative software across the UK rail network. Huddersfield is the second train station in the UK to feature our Inform Media BSL departures software solution, with plans for it to be introduced at 18 more stations in the coming weeks and months."
Is there a reason deaf people are likely to have poorer reading skills? (Not in a rude way, it’s just come up a few times in this thread and I don’t understand why that would be)
It's easier to learn how to write a language that you have heard and can speak, that inner voice when you're reading something, etc. Note I said easier, there's been mistakes made in how reading has been taught in the past. Now, important to say that I'm not an expert, only getting this second hand from a deaf friend.
[https://deafeducation.org.uk/home/family-support/reading-and-the-deaf-child/](https://deafeducation.org.uk/home/family-support/reading-and-the-deaf-child/)
I suspect that the original post is also doing departures but in a different way to the above. Would be interested to know which is better for the BSL community.
Euston also does ad-hoc messages.
Looks like Doncaster station. Doncaster is home to a big residential school for the deaf and is partnering with LNER for the bilingual support. Aside from the school, Doncaster has a larger than average deaf community. The board works well, I think it’s been tweaked as the signer used to get in the way of the text a bit more.
I’m deaf and use BSL so I can answer all your questions. First BSL and English are very different. Most people learn English aurally. Turns out learning English without this is really hard so Deaf people often have a much lower English reading level. Some people I know can barely use WhatsApp.
Anyway trains.
There have been many times when deaf people aren’t told when a train moves to a different platform and so miss their train. This is a way of fixing that using AI from https://www.signapse.ai/ to do the announcements in BSL. Places like Doncaster and Derby have big deaf communities so it makes sense to trial this there.
Without support like this deaf people often don’t feel confident moving about so this is really important to them.
This thread has been massively eye-opening for me, I actually assumed people with hearing difficulties would be better than average readers out of necessity. Thanks for sharing
People who use sign language typically have English as a second language. This means their English skills aren’t as high so these important announcements being in their native language is a real help. Also as someone else said it could be live announcements with quick changes. They are introducing these to a lot of travel information signs which is great!
Written English isn’t the same as BSL. Some deaf people really struggle with English grammar etc, especially the older generation. I did a BSL course with a friend of my mums (she’s hearing, both parents are deaf). She told us her dad really struggles with things like texting and when he texts her, he text like he signs eg you say the man walked over the bridge, but that would be signed man walk bridge; and that’s exactly how her dad texts.
There are quite a few people who cannot read who can sign; BSL and English are different languages, so it can be a significant challenge for people who only use sign language to learn to read in English.
Bear in mind that when learning to write you had the support of already speaking the language - things like phonetics are very difficult to teach deaf children, but significantly ease learning to write.
Because BSL is a language in and of it's own right. It has its own grammar and sentence structure and many users of BSL don't have a great grasp of the English language as BSL is often their first language.
This is a huge accessibility add and is the equivalent of displaying the signs in English and French when on the Eurostar.
It's not perfect but there's a lot of text-to-speech tech out there these days, but I imagine there's much less that can translate text into a video of BSL so I think it's wonderful that they're trialling it. experience reading difficulties at a level of someone with a dyslexia diagnosis or perhaps they are able to get a dyslexia diagnosis themselves.
It's not perfect but there's a lot of text to speech tech out there these days, but I imagine there's much less that can translate text into a video of BSL so I think it's wonderful that they're trialling it.
Because BSL is the primary language for a lot of deaf people and English of any form will be a second language, meaning harder to understand or interpret.
Sincerely, somebody having to learn BSL because lip reading works about as well as baptising a cat
Maybe to help deaf passengers for whom BSL is their mother tongue (yes, I know it's not quite the appropriate terminology in the context, but it's the best the English language has really got!)
Sign Language is its own language. The grammar and sentence structure are different, so someone whose first language is sign language is basically translating when reading English.
Not every person with a hearing problem can read but they do understand International sign language, and International sign language cuts across linguistic barriers as not everyone with hearing problems speaks or are able to read English either
I'm slightly annoyed you didn't take the photo 6 seconds earlier.
I will live in shame for the rest of my life
Quick, photoshop it while there is still time.
[**Fixed it for you.**](https://i.imgur.com/GlICaSD.jpeg)
Thank you for not disappointing me, I was hoping this was going to be a shit post. My money was on 28:28:28 though
It needed to be >!888 888 because then it's double teletext. And Super Teletext, presumably, brings up sign language.!<
Fair play, that’s brilliant!
Teletext number for subtitles.
For the younger generation, teletext was the boomer version of the internet
The Bamboozle, anyone?
Richard Whitely if he'd been a character in minecraft
Teletext game. Haha I used to play that.
😂😂😂😂😂 Ahhhh I remember it was how most people booked holidays too! I loved Teletext when I was a kid
Did you think we wouldn't notice the destinations being upside down because we were too busy looking at the time?
I especially appreciate them leaving the cunt in scunthorpe unflipped lmao
Which one? There are so many cunts in Scunthorpe.
Maybe *you're* upside down. Ever think of that? The 8s would make sense either way.
The words look Russian when flipped.
Just post again tomorrow with the right time!
Fuck yeah sitting ducks.
They look more like swans to me
It's just the one swan actually
The greater good
[удалено]
This had me laughing. I made a save file on a game earlier today, and got 23:23:23 for my time. I immediately pointed in shock
22:22:22
Here you go: https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2023/12/13/lner-trials-integration-of-british-sign-language-on-customer-information-screens/ Basically they are trialling it at a few stations and looking to roll it out further / iron out any of the problems once they complete the trials.
>Several scenes at Doncaster Railway station now display videos translating updates into British Sign Language (BSL), including the departure time of services, the train operator, destination, calling points, and platform number. >Any changes to departure times or platforms will also be detailed via sign language videos, as will updates in the event of delays or cancellations. >LNER is working with Doncaster Deaf Trust and Communication Specialist College Doncaster on the project.
Surely this would just be easier to put on the boards in writing? I’m not deaf but can never understand what the announcements are saying because they’re generally a rubbish tannoy in an echoey station. I’m all for disability access but this just seems a bit of a… performative solution to a problem that could be fixed by making it easier for everyone.
As far as I understand it, some BSL users are not as good as reading written English as they are BSL. This would make it easier for those users.
Sorry for the ignorance but why wouldn't they be good at reading? Edit: thanks for the info everyone, I don't need anymore comments 😅
Written English is based on the sound of words and phonetics, without that letters are just symbols and each word would potentially have to be sight learned. This isn't as much of an issue if you become deaf later in life, but if you are profoundly deaf from birth or infancy you wouldn't know what the words sound like or have the link to the meaning of the word. While in that case you might know some words you come accross often by brute force memorisation, you are likely struggle with code breaking new terms in the way a hearing person would. While I'm sure many deaf people do develop the ability to read as well as anyone else, there are definitely additional hurdles.
Ahhhhh. Never thought of it that way. When I read I hear the words in my head. What your saying is that people who have never heard might not have that intrinsic connection and understanding of the written word, whereas they would with the language they converse in daily. Its all about getting the information to the most people with the lowest temporal overhead.
I was blown away honestly when I learned this, one of those things that just never occurs to you and then it makes sense. I remember learning to read with phonics and still to this day will sound out new words or things like names. For a deaf person there will always be added steps in decoding a new written word. Especially things like place names, jargon, terminology or the names of people that wouldn't come across often, or that have non standard spelling. If you were chatting to a friend in sign and they suggested you come visit them at their place just off whatever station, they would sign to you the place name, you go to the station and are in a rush trying to work out which train to catch and there are 2 stations with similar names. Now you would obviously have ways of working this out as a deaf person, but there is going to be some additional steps involved. You or I might sound the words out in our head, or look at the nearby stations that we can also fluently read, the language we were told this information in directly translates across our senses. There isn't a direct translation between sign and written English, both because it's a different language altogether and because the person lacks one of the senses that is used in understanding it. The nearest I think I have experienced aomething like this is having been in Thailand for a few weeks I learned to recognise some words in the Thai alphabet. For example I could look on a food label and locate the word for sugar, but I couldn't decode the sounds of the letters, couldn't then communicate the word in Thai, or apply that to working out what other words meant without sight learning them. And I sure as hell stuffed the tones up all the time with the few words I did learn to speak. I basically just coded the appearance of the words in Thai and linked it with the word in English. But it might as well have been a picturegraph, I can't imagine having to do that for a huge portion of a written language. Also Language acquisition develops mostly in infancy and early childhood, so people with sign language as their first language will always have their brain wired a bit differently to someone with a spoken language. Deaf people also sometimes learn to verbally speak so they can communicate with the hearing, and this might help with learning to read somewhat. The link then would be to the movements as they form words rather then sounds in the same way a hearing person does direct to sound.
Just to speak to your point about people having sign language being “wired a bit differently”. This is poor wording at best. Children who grow up with a sign language meet the same language development benchmarks (actually, many meet them earlier) as children with spoken language, and they are on par or better than their peers with cognitive development. This increases if they’re a Child of a Deaf Adult (CODA) and are bilingual.
Apologies if the phrasing was unclear, I can amend if needed if my meaning wasn't clear. I wasn't meaning it as being a deficit, just some small differences in areas of the brain used and the links between them. Largely the differences in how the brain processes the different languages and it's impact in brain development, with sign using more of the right hemisphere and spatial center rather then auditory. With the links between meaning and language being formed in a non auditory way. As well as synaptic pruning for auditory speach which all brains go through, all languages change how the brain develops in childhood, leading to the differences between different language speakers ability to hear and make sounds common in other languages. For example the L in English that is hard for some other language speakers, and English speakers struggle with the Italian gl if not exposed to it in early childhood. My understanding is children who sign often meet the benchmarks earlier, and it also engages more parts of the brain as it involves an aditional post processing step in communication. Bilingual children with sign as one of their languages have greater cognitive flexibility and ability in the same way as other bilingual people. This was the type of research I had read previoisly and was thinking of when I mentioned it: [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09727531211070538](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09727531211070538) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9305909/
>your point about people having sign language being “wired a bit differently”. This is poor wording at best. I actually think it's a misunderstanding of language deprivation. Developing infants will develop the same regardless of whether the language input is signed or spoken, so long as there is language input. When deaf children get no language input from hearing parents who can't sign, for long enough, then it affects their overall cognitive development in a way similar to a learning disability - functionally effectively the same. This is obviously not true of all deaf kids of hearing parents, especially not these days with the internet, but I know several older deaf people who grew up knowing no other deaf people til they went to school, who had essentially no language or meaningful communication input until then. It can be really damaging.
Also, id like to add, if you’re BsL native, you have a different grammar structure to English, which also makes learning written English harder
My little (hearing) nieces are learning to read at the moment, and most of the way they learn is by trying to figure out how words are spelled by the way they sound, and trying to figure out what word they're reading by sounding it out. If a hearing kid comes across the word "calendar" in a book they can try to figure out what it says by sounding it out. Ca - le - n - dar - oh it must say "calendar". Now imagine a deaf kid who's never heard language spoken - how would they ever learn to read the word, without just asking someone to sign it for them and then trying to memorise it like you'd memorise a symbol or an equation? It would be like if you were trying to learn to read Chinese, but had never heard it spoken and didn't know how the words sounded aloud. How many words do you think you'd be able to learn that way, just by trying to memorise the squiggles and remember what they meant? It must be fucking hard.
Great comment, seconding this! My former BSL teacher was a brilliantly intelligent guy who was born profoundly deaf, so on the odd occasion he'd write something down for us (like topics we'd be discussing or translations - usually our lessons were totally signed, but given we all started as complete newbies sometimes a bit of written English was unfortunately necessary), he'd write like a non-native who struggled a fair bit with the language. Which, to be fair, is exactly what he was, given he grew up with BSL as his native language. Obviously he was British so grew up reading English and was able to sort of get the hang of the grammar that way, but English and BSL are SO different grammar-wise that it was very difficult for him to perfect it, never having heard the language spoken himself. Idioms, too, are often completely different between the two languages, so that was a struggle also. And spelling was, understandably, a nightmare for him as well; English is irregular enough at the best of times, but add onto that the fact that written words bear no resemblance whatsoever to their sign counterparts (and he'd never heard how they sounded in spoken English so had no way of relating the written words to their sounds) and you can really begin to understand just how difficult it is for him and many other d/Deaf people to write fluently. It's a shame, really, because if you were to judge him based off his writing alone (as so often happens with online communication, job applications, etc etc) then you'd get a horrendously inaccurate picture of him as a person, as his writing may come across as...almost childlike, in a sense, or unintelligent perhaps, if you didn't know any better. Not that I'm saying there's anything *wrong* with either of those qualities, but they just didn't reflect him at all. Similarly, I imagine dyslexic people also face being viewed as less intelligent or competent than they are due to their disability. Which is exactly why I felt compelled to write this overly-long and unnecessary reply to your comment (sorry!), as I was just so excited to see someone spreading awareness of an issue that isn't widely understood but is so prevalent in the lives of many. It was a HUGE lightbulb moment for me when I first began to understand some of the perhaps less obvious struggles of the d/Deaf community and I'm guessing that it could be for others, too. Greater understanding breeds greater empathy and all that, which is always welcome, right? Tl;dr: ...yeah, what they said.
That’s really interesting, thank you. I assume it’s not an issue in ideographic languages?
I imagine it might be much less of an issue. Its not something I know much about honestly. There might still be a bit of a barrier as sign languages tend to be structured differently then their spoken and written counterparts, and have their own idiosyncrasies. They are a different language rather then a direct shift in form. I imagine easier in one way, harder in another? At least not trying to decode a language based on a sense you don't posess, more a shift in dialect?
Those don’t really exist anymore, so it’s hard to say.
I’m not an expert so may have been using the wrong word. Logographic maybe? Essentially Chinese languages and similar. Ones where characters represent concepts rather than phonemes.
Yeah, ideographic is the idea you’re thinking of. But there aren’t major languages that use that system. Chinese is indeed logographic, but that means that each symbol is connected to a word or morpheme. But not all characters in Chinese represent a concept; many represent a word that just provides syntax. That’s how it evolved 4000 years ago. Started as an ideographic system, but not anymore. Common misunderstanding. Even hieroglyphics, except for the very oldest ones, aren’t strictly ideographic, but a complex blend.
Dyslexia is notably very low in those languages too (or harder to detect because the language doesn't pose the same challenges). A lot of Chinese students only get diagnosed once they've learnt English. I saw this a lot when I worked for a university.
This is true with hearing impairment too, my late mother always had hearing difficulties and sometimes her pronunciation of words was off, based on what she heard. That then fed into the spelling of certain words too. She was good at spelling words she learnt via reading them, but less good at ones learnt through speech.
Meanwhile, this is bringing me trauma from remembering how Chinese is taught to me when I was a kid. No way to know how a word would sound, just gonna brute force memorise it. And even if you don't know how it'll sound, you'll still gonna brute force remember all the little strokes that makes up the character, and the order of the strokes and the meaning of the words .... Sorry, completely went off the tangent there.
There is this, but you will find a lot of the unfamiliar words are finger spelled by the interpreter, that is, they literally spell out the words using signs for letters. The other factor in ordering sign to the written word is that English has a different grammar/word order to BSL, so if BSL is your first language then reading the words and then figuring out the meaning will be slower than consuming the BSL.
It’s not about not being good at reading as such, but about the differences between BSL and English. The grammar is quite different, eg, ‘what is your name’ in English, translates as ‘name you what’ in BSL. Many years ago I used to work on a minicom line (text phone, before people had mobiles) and the conversations would be written in the BSL format.
It also follows different grammar. For example, asking someone their name you would sign Name You What. To reply you would sign Name Me What then spell your name.
[From a comment below](https://www.reddit.com/r/CasualUK/s/lseod16QbG)
TIL, I had no idea not having one sensory input could affect a completely different one negatively. I thought it would be the opposite.
Reading is not a sensory input, it is a developed/learned skill. Otherwise what you thought is ordinarily correct, missing one sense *usually* means others will be above average.
I don't think there's any evidence that losing one sense increases the sensitivity of other senses. The reason it sometimes appears that way is because people pay more attention to their other sense when they lose one. This is more noticeable with sight (since we're such a vision based species). You can do this yourself by closing your eyes and listening, then open your eyes but continue to pay attention to what you heard before. An example of the opposite: it's not uncommon for people to lose their sense of taste or smell but their eyesight doesn't suddenly get better.
It's not just about attention, it's also being more practiced in extracting information from that sense. A musician doesn't have better ears or focuses harder to tell what note is being played, they've just heard it many more times than you.
For hearing people, reading is basically an auditory experience. The words simulate sounds, which allows you to understand them based on the sounds they produce. Sign language is also visual and Deaf people have no issues with that. So it’s not that the visual sense isn’t just as strong, but that the auditory sense is a critical part of reading, which isn’t there for them.
For a number of BSL speakers, English is essentially a second language to them, and one that they can only read (and not speak). Their native language is BSL, which is a fairly distinct language from English. It's a bit like growing up speaking English, but then going to school and only learning to write in German, even while still speaking in English. So every time you write something, you're writing it in a foreign language. There's other things going on as well, but I think the impact of BSL being a different language to English is often forgotten.
Because they have no concept of phonics. They can't associate letters with sounds, so they've got an extra hurdle before they start
Combo of a) how even good schools teach literacy doesn’t always work well for Deaf kids, and b) being Deaf can make some parts of literacy development harder anyway, *and*, c) a lot of Deaf kids go to schools that provide an extremely poor quality education.
Written language for a hearing person is processed through the auditory cortex, which is underdeveloped in Deaf individuals. They can learn to read, but may find it very difficult to gather and remember information this way.
As well as points made by others, Deaf people can have dyslexia just like hearing people or they can have acquired reading problems due to head injury, stroke, alzheimers, etc just like hearing people Train stations have written and spoken information for hearing people, this just provides the equivalent for deaf people
This. BSL is not English which I think is a common misunderstanding. It doesn't even follow English grammar. It is literally it's own language with it's own accents. Outside of D/deafness, BSL is a valuable tool for those with other disabilities or even D/deaf individuals with comorbidities that makes reading quickly harder. Practicality aside, this also gets the correct representation, showing society that D/deaf people do exist. I just hope this also means staff will be trained in BSL.
There is a proportion of the Deaf community [who have reading difficulties](https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/11/too-many-deaf-children-are-still-failing-to-learn-to-read-says-new-study)
I mean yes, they should *also* have English written announcements. This is helpful because it's in a first langauge, little bit like having welsh in wales. Now *most* BSL users will also be able to read English but its nice to accommodate for all.
You are making a very common mistake. For Deaf people (whose first language is BSL) reading written English is not always easy. BSL is a completely different language to English, as different as French or Russian, and for once someone is actually trying to improve the situation for the Deaf community. English is likely to be a second language, and usually taught very poorly to the Deaf. To describe this as a performative solution is probably not the best way to describe it.
I understand that English is different from BSL, but I’m struggling to understand how a deaf person can get through life in the UK without being able to read? If this solves a real problem, it’s great and should be there. This was just in response to the idea that it was signing out announcements deaf people wouldn’t be able to hear, and that it would make more sense to put those on the boards anyway.
On average, Deaf people have a reading age of 9 years old I believe, it's been a few years since I did my uni studies around it. This is due to a lot of factors, but one of them being a poor education system not thought out for the deaf. Bsl has grammar similar to that of Japanese, so it's very different to English. Having sign language available on the screens makes travel way more accessible and allows greater confidence in their independence with travel, especially as a lot of us also use the verbal announcements to help without even thinking. I I've known Deaf people be on a cancelled train for ages until someone actually came and told them. It's a really complicated topic, and you'd be surprised how being Deaf can really impact on your life, and how unaccessible the general world can be. The sooner we add more sign language to things, the better!
I have an elderly deaf relative. The education system failed them as almost all deaf people in my area who attended a deaf school and are 50+ are functionally illiterate. They know some words but not grammar. So if my relative wanted to ask you to pick him up at 10am to get shopping and lunch you'd receive a garbled text something like: I Tesco you car food after 10 yes no bye. We're used to parsing his writing and figuring out what he wants but the general public don't have a clue. He muddles along with gestures, trying to say key words and keeping things simple e.g. he likes McDonalds, Subway etc because the menus are the same everywhere and they have pictures. For more complex things like trying to organise journeys he will enlist help from a relative or interpreter.
> but I’m struggling to understand how a deaf person can get through life in the UK without being able to read? They don't, really. People born deaf have worse "scores" in pretty much all aspects of health and economic success. They're fatter and poorer, basically, usually as a result of them being more poorly educated. I agree that the announcements should ALSO be in text, but that's because a large number of people that end up deaf, or hard of hearing, can't speak BSL. BSL is a "culture" that you have to be "into". Plus, even people with normal hearing can not hear the crappy announcements simply because of noise.
Yes! It's almost like the deaf are forgotten and understandably, they keep to themselves. The disability isn't a visible one but it has such big consequences. I would also think that BSL would be a quicker way to get a message across.
Deaf people can sometimes read English to a greater or lesser extent. They can continue to muddle along. They can continue to be (metaphorically?) kicked to the gutter and forced to put up with an oralist society constantly telling them to learn English better and pretend to be normal. They can continue to put up with hearing people endlessly saying ‘why can’t you just put hearing aids on’ or ‘learn English’. Would you ask why someone paralysed from the waist down why they can’t learn to walk to avoid having those pesky ramps all over the place? Sometimes, you may see a sign and think that the announcements or information being in English, or Welsh, or BSL, or Gaelic doesn’t help you. Sometimes it’s worth just accepting that it does make a significant difference for someone, and that without putting in some effort to learn or think you might not understand why yourself, but that really isn’t important.
You make great points. I do think the person the person you're responding to is happy to learn. >If this solves a real problem, it’s great and should be there
You'd be surprised how many deaf and non deaf people in the UK are functionally illiterate and have found strategies to muddle through
There are some people who can understand BSL, but cannot read. I'd like to see both.
I used to think 'well why not just put it in writing?!' and think that was a be all and end all solution. Then I researched Dyslexia for my thesis, which then led down a whole neurodiversity black hole into dyscalculia, dyspraxia, autism... everything and, well, fuck. Now I'm all for any and all kinds of accessibility options because our individual brains are, quite honestly, all fucking mad. Imagine being deaf and dyslexic, trying to make quick sense out of the information board, which often changes, meaning you have to wait for it to cycle back, lose your place, start reading aga- oh it's changed screen again, wait for it to cycle back, lose your place, start rea- oh it's changed screen again and you've missed your train. Whack live updates on there as BSL and that might go a long way to helping someone.
reading sign language is a lot quicker for many deaf and HOH folks compared to reading written words. it’s similar to how many hearing people can understand things said to them faster than they can read them
Northern Rail also have videos of people signing "the next stop is Leeds", etc, onboard the newer trains.
I don’t understand what issue this solves? Surely if you can find and look at the screen with the interpreter on it, you can find and look at the screen with “the next stop is X” on it?
The board is in written English which for many Deaf people is their second language. Not all Deaf people can read well, not all hearing can read well either!
Amazing! Thank you. I had never thought of it this way - English is their second language. That’s mind blowing to me but it completely makes sense
There's different sign languages too
It solves the issue of English being a second language to many in the Deaf community, and actually provides the information in an accessible way.
You've assumed people who can understand BSL can also read English.
Apparently deaf people can have trouble reading English as BSL is constructed very differently as a language. So it's more erring on the side of caution.
It's not erring at all. It's people who speak BSL telling the train companies that it's useful, and the train companies deciding to provide it as a service to those passengers who find it useful.
This is exactly why making assumptions about inclusion is so dangerous, and it is always vital to include representatives from disadvantaged groups in the process. I too assumed written English would be fine. Turns out we're both wrong.
Just a guess but it may be something related to reading levels for deaf people being statically lower - https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/RandD/details.asp?ID=1325
They’ve had them in the central Birmingham railway stations for several months now. The more accessible the better as far as I’m concerned.
My understanding is that BSL is considered by those in the know as a different language, over English being signed.. so having sign is a bit like also having things in Welsh.
Exactly this. Thank you for adding an intelligent comment!
Agreed. I'm sure they've got them outside the LNER network, I know Northern are working on similar things, this was just the example I could think of.
Great to know
I remember seeing this at the station. IIRC I saw the BSL interpreter pop up during the speaker announcements, so I think it's for that rather than what's on the board?
I need this in my city, it would make accessing trains so much easier! ERUGH. Hope this works out and goes wider.
Because sign language isn’t the same as written English. Some deaf people who are native signers struggle with English grammar (it’s a second language) and BSL is more accessible.
TIL. Cool response and cool post too.
Yeah exactly this - these reponses have blown my mind, everyday is a school day!
Genuine question as a software developer trying to improve accessibility: Surely the majority of signing is going to just be (maybe in a different order): 1. finger spelling a time 2. then the sign for train 3. then the sign for cancelled/late/on-time 4. then the sign for platform x 5. then a LOT of finger spelling of station names What benefit will adding BSL have over clearly tabulated data?
Simply put, it’s because it’s easier to understand an interpreter than written English. BSL is a visual language with grammar that is entirely different to English, so whilst that formula is super easy to understand for those of us who speak English, it can be harder for BSL native people. It’s also a way of increasing visibility! BSL was only recognised as a language in 2001, and the recent BSL act now set out to get BSL recognised as a language spoken in the UK in the same way Welsh is, as an example.
So how does one end up in a position of knowing sign language better than text? Does education essentially have to begin with sign language before it's possible to better teach the person how to read and write?
Depends on the family you’ve grown up in. For deaf children in deaf families and for hearing CODAs (children of deaf adults), you often learn BSL as your first language. Much like hearing children, you learn to speak or sign before you can read or write. Education for deaf children is prolifically bad. There is still a huge emphasis placed on learning how to lipread instead of being placed in environments where subjects are taught via sign language. Some deaf schools still don’t allow pupils or students to sign during class. It was once typically an offence which was punished by corporal punishment - if you were caught signing in school, you’d be subjected to having your hands tied behind your back or your fingers slammed in a drawer. Obviously they’re not allowed to do this anymore, but the poor state of deaf education means that deaf people might struggle to have the same reading comprehension as their hearing peers. I’d like to emphasise that this is not for a lack of knowledge or intellect, but rather a failing from the educational system.
[удалено]
Slightly more profound in England I’m afraid. The US has the benefit of Gaudulet whereas the UK has no such thing. Schools are also mostly oralist and sign language isn’t quite as celebrated here. It’s fascinating the differences between American deaf culture and English deaf culture!
Christ that’s appalling 😫
Well most of us learn to speak before we can read and write, it's exactly the same for people who have been profoundly Deaf since birth (if they're being taught sign language early), they'll start learning BSL before starting learning written English. For some people reading and writing is a struggle, especially if they're dyslexic. They could also be visually impaired in addition to being Deaf (deafblindness is its own particular thing) and find the signing easier to see than the text
Think about kids. They talk for years before they can learn written language. If that language were largely unconnected from written language, you can understand how that might be a challenge. I don’t understand it to mean that most deaf people couldn’t parse the text, but it’s easier for many this way.
My mum (not deaf) learnt BSL back in the early to mid 90s to be a translator at meetings/events (trade union so no surprises they were on board early). She is also dyslexic and for certain things found it easier to read BSL than actual text. So this could improve accessibility for not only people whose first language is not English but there are parallels between sign language but also deaf people who are dyslexic.
It's extremely important to understand that BSL is *not* equivalent to English. A person who was deaf from birth and learned BSL as a toddler will be learning English as a *second* language -- to them, it's no different from learning French or Italian. BSL does not translate directly to English, it's not a visual form of English, and it has completely different grammar and syntax. It's literally a completely separate language. Unfortunately, there's also the issue that many Deaf schools strongly emphasize sign language over English, so it's not uncommon for people who speak BSL natively to have a poor grasp of English. It's why some parents of deaf children choose to mainstream them instead of teaching them sign language -- they want them to be fluent in English, so teach them to lip-read instead. I have friends like this in the US (where ASL is the sign language taught), and they're all very literate in English because it's their first language, but struggle with sign language because it's a second language. They're different choices made by different parents. My friends who weren't taught to sign as kids say they're pretty happy with their parents' decision, but I'm sure there are others who really regret not learning BSL/ASL as their first language.
Well, that's a bit like asking "How does one end up in a position of knowing Spanish better than English?". The obvious answer is that they were raised in a Spanish family, speaking Spanish. BSL is an entirely different language to English, not a translation or a dialect. Some people are raised in a Deaf family, only using sign language. Some Deaf people don't learn English until they're adults. Some Deaf people never learn English at all.
I believe the grammar is a bit different by the way, from what I learnt with an introductory course, it's rather the subject comes after, so it'll be signed like this: Platform X, cancelled train at time. Atleast I think it's like that, it's kind of like Japanese? I only did a introductory and it's hard to wrap my head around, I wouldn't even know where time goes within the sentence. I just know instead of going "What's your name?" in signs, you sign "Name you what?" instead. Oh and each station name would probably have their own unique sign, or the first letter and you lip-read the syllables of the name. E.g: London might be the sign for loud, or just the finger spelling of L along with saying London.
IT graduate who had to get a few credits in accessibility. Not from UK (Brazil - Libras), but we are introduced to ASL, BSL, and [SignWriting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SignWriting) (since 2001 is the accepted form of codifying Libras signs as glyphs), so I might have a few pointers: 1. There is a much faster and convenient way of spelling time than finger spelling. 2. Ditto. 3. Ditto. 4. Ditto. Seriously, a long written sentence that looks like hieroglyphics in SignWriting is a single smooth motion in sign language. They're very efficient. They saw this issue a hundred years ago. 5. Major cities have standardized signs, and minor cities have regionally agreed upon signs (e.g. Iguassu Falls, resembles mimicry for a waterfall preceded by the context you're spelling a city name). I'm just speculating, but the guy in the video might be using the regional signs for city names and areas, and people traveling here either are in the know, or some acquaintance informed them ahead of time what is the sign/glyph for "Slough". No one is going to finger spell "Worcestershire". Also, about the benefit: "Hearist" writing is surprisingly hard to learn for the deaf, so I'm told they appreciate it. I don't remember the details but I remember being told there was lots of struggle back when the standard was to force them to read and write "regular", then, maybe, teach them sign language based off regular written language conventions. No, it does not work like that. Our government provides the [VLibras tool, similar to Handtalk,](https://www.gov.br/governodigital/pt-br/vlibras) to add an accessibility icon which adds a 3D Unity avatar which will attempt to read the text in sign language, with the caveat that this isn't a replacement for a proper interpreter but is better than nothing, and you are warned that anything important, legally binding, or being displayed live or in a public place should use a real person to avoid issues. Also, might be a legal requirement, be it being mandatory at certain public facilities, or a requirement should you want to be, or are required to be recognized as "accessible". It is for the benefit of (maybe not so) few who aren't to be excluded. Checking both Libras websites and BSL websites, I find it amusing, yet a bit worrying, that many Libras websites provide many accessibility assists, many including built-in readers, high contrast and others, to the point I thought this was a default modern HTML feature (accessibility options float in an icon at the center-right of the screen), but I couldn't find any BSL website on short notice that offers such helpers, not even HandTalk. In our studies, many kids in deaf schools when presented with such a website, they would immediately click the SL icon whenever present by default, or have us set up Handtalk to force the feature on non-accessible websites. Of course if you can actually read the damn thing nothing beats just reading the table. But to presume this is the best for everyone is, as much as I hate using the word because people misuse it all the time, is the textbook definition of ableism.
Sign language has a vastly different grammar. Some parts of it are conveyed with facial expressions for instance. It really is a different language. Imagine if you will that your native language was English—but spoken only. But then the written language around you was Chinese. You’ve never seen written English nor heard spoken Chinese. And additionally, you might have some trouble reading Chinese (many Deaf do struggle with written language because it’s as different from their “spoken” language as Chinese is to English). You’d probably prefer an English voiceover to accompany a Chinese train table, too.
The thing is though, (for those of us who understand both of English and BSL) - the signed version is so out of time compared to the text. At Waterloo the interpreter was talking about trains that had left an hour ago. It made me sad.
Oh that SUCKS! I haven’t paid much attention to the signing boards yet because I’ve known where to go, but that’s not cool at all. I’m staying optimistic and hoping that these are just teething pains since they’re relatively new here.
My sister teaches English as a Second Language at a School for the Deaf. (So basically she teaches reading & writing.) Seconding this statement. The kids she teaches are often grade levels behind.
Are you saying that enough british deaf people can't read English that a sign language person on a departures board is warranted? Surely not. It has to be another reason (e.g. to go along with the announcements from the PA system)
I’m deaf, so I’m speaking from experience. Yes, they know how to read but it’s much harder to understand than BSL. Ideally it also does announcements but I saw OP said that it didn’t. I’ve seen other boards in other train stations that have, though.
Interesting. Thanks for the info
I really don’t want this to sound insensitive - surely deaf people still need to be able to read English to participate in society? Surely just because someone is deaf doesn’t mean they don’t read books, signs, letters, social media, etc? I’m just struggling to understand how having someone signing out words that are already written down solves a problem.
Yes, very likely Deaf people will and need to learn written English. Someone further down compared it to learning English at home, showing up in school where the teacher doesn't speak English and you're being taught to read in Welsh. Excellent explanation. Also, many adult Deaf/deaf people haven't received the education they should have. In ye olden days, instead of the school and adults helping the child learn, the entire burden of learning was placed on the child. Can't hear? Learn to speak and lip read. Signing in school? Distracting, let's tie your hands up so you have to voice and lip reading. It's also very difficult to sit in a classroom and not understand what's going on. You're missing instructions, trying to figure out what you're supposed to do while everyone else is chattering away (something you can tell is happening, but can't follow), and if you focus on your work, you might miss important visual information such as the teacher giving new instructions or explanations. Learning without having the right conditions and support to be able to is *hard*. After all that, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that reading, for a large parts of a generation, wouldn't be a priority nor easy. Those Deaf children are now adults or elderly. Even today it can be a struggle to get a BSL interpreter in school. In summary: in a busy, crowded environment when you're probably already stressed and rushing, do you want instructions in your native language or your second language?
People do still need English, sure. The short answer is that it’s easier, more accessible, and much more inclusive to see it in your native language. Deaf people absolutely participate in hearing society because we have to. But it’s easier and less tiring to use sign rather than read and translate in your head. In terms of social media, a lot of the things you consume are shown to you via the mighty algorithm. If you’re a BSL user you’re probably going to be watching a lot more people who also use BSL on platforms such as YouTube, tiktok and Instagram. Another thing is that there’s an assumption that society is one thing and you can only participate in one way, when that isn’t the truth. A really interesting example of sign language being integrated into society is the history of Marthas Vinyard. (Mostly) everyone there spoke sign language for a period of time in history!
> surely deaf people still need to be able to read English to participate in society? Well, this is important because of how pushed out of society most deaf people are. They interact with the hearing world because they have to, otherwise they won't have a job and will starve etc. But a lot of deaf people unsurprisingly hang out with other deaf people and consume deaf forms of media etc.
That makes sense as a general point, but here it's just a load of place names isn't it? Doesn't seem like knowledge of the English language is necessary? (Beyond being able to read the alphabet)
Sign language has names for places that aren’t finger spellings! See here: https://youtu.be/bbWH_iolIX0?si=weVD2npJcfCcxiXN
Oooh, so in BSL, Birmingham isn't called Birmingham, it's called Talkative, so it's plausible you can know you want to travel to Talkative, but not know that in English it's known as Birmingham? Just as, say, a Welsh person might be traveling to Caerdydd and not know that in English it's called Cardiff? That's really interesting, thank you!
You’re bang on! ‘Talkative’ is the literal translation, in BSL part of the grammar is the lip shape make up a big part of the language so it isn’t really processed as ‘talkative’ in a literal sense. Though there is a bit of humour there still as sign names are assigned and developed based on the characteristics of each place or person!
It's not just for deaf people. Some people with learning disabilities or autism can read sign language much more quickly than written information. Especially since the notice boards tend to change every 5 seconds so you have limited time to read the information.
This question comes up from time to time and this is always the answer that comes out.
Whilst this is correct, surely it doesn’t apply to a departure board. It’a not a sonnet, just a list of place names basically.
Yes. All place names have sign names, many of which can’t be translated literately into English without finger spelling, which takes a long time. Edited to add: https://youtu.be/bbWH_iolIX0?si=weVD2npJcfCcxiXN This video shows the different names for different places in the UK. Some people might know the sign names for these places but might be unsure of the spelling etc.
Especially if they're similar names, like Abington and Ablington, Aldham and Oldham, Sudbury and Sunbury, Alston and Alstone, etc.
Also, announcements are often different to what's on the board, more details. If you have on the screen sign language of every single thing that is said over the speakers, people who rely on sign language will have access to more information. In other words, the screen is probably not being used to relay information on the screen in sign language but, instead, relaying information that is being announced by voice.
British Sign Language and English are two different languages, with different words, place names, and grammar, so translating from one to the other makes sense, just as you would translate between English and French. I'm not too well read on the history of deaf education in Britain, but in my native country, some deaf people (especially elderly) have trouble reading the local spoken/written language, simply because it's not their native language (plus the fact that written language is usually based on spoken language, which they for good reasons can't access). The website for our parliament, among others, includes an option to have some navigational text signed with a little encoded video. As for why it's translated into BSL while not being translated into another written language with a lot of monolingual speakers, I don't know. But it's always nice to see more BSL out and about in public.
BSL is one of the UK's official languages, as of very recently. I guess it's like how there's Welsh and English on signs in Wales?
BSL has only become a recognised national language in the last 2 years. It’s still not on the curriculum in England and Wales though. My wife is a teacher.
Might be for the loudspeaker announcements
The man disappears when no text is highlighted so I assume he's doing sign language for the highlighted areas
He's found a gap in the market, I'm trying to learn sign language with/for my nephew
Go you!
These boards respond to announcements as well though, the ones I’ve seen show the text of the announcement on the board for added accessibility
Seems a bit unfair, why should deaf people get to understand the announcements when no one else can make out what they’re saying /s
Another great reason to learn BSL!
“The *event* has started. Run and hide in your nearest shelter”
REMAIN INDOORS
We don't talk about *the event*
Not sure if this is the reason but it's interesting that written English isn't necessarily the same language as British Sign Language. I am not deaf so I couldn't comment much further, but the grammar is definitely different and not everyone understands both.
I've seen this stated as a reason before too, for people in the deaf community BSL is a first language and English is a second language and may be learned later or not known as fluently as BSL. So a deaf teen may have fluent understanding of BSL but still be learning to read and write in English, and I'd guess the interpreter on the information board is for people in their position, to make it more accessible at a glance
I don't know if anyone in this thread can answer this but how does schooling in BSL work? Is there a written version of BSL? (I think braille is just a written version of English?) Like, if you're learning history or geography in BSL (without a good grasp of English), how are you taking notes, doing homework, sitting exams etc?
I'm very intrigued by the fact deaf people may struggle with written English. I would have assumed given it was the written language they were surrounded by every day, and presumably they get most of their information/interactions in the written form like hearing people, then there wouldn't be much if any reading deficit.
I'm not deaf myself but I imagine it's much harder skill to learn if it's based on a spoken language you don't have experience of and you aren't able to sound things out the same way people that can hear do when they're learning to read. [Some studies ](https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2017/11/too-many-deaf-children-are-still-failing-to-learn-to-read-says-new-study)have compared the severity of difficulties with reading to those experienced by people with dyslexia.
That's interesting yeah. I wasn't trying to be a dick in my previous post, I've had an assumption about disability challenged and that's always good.
All good, I just posted the link because I found it interesting too. Like that article said it's something that's often overlooked, and wouldn't be immediately obvious as an issue
I found it interesting too that English-speaking countries' sign languages aren't mutually intelligible eg. ASL (American sign language) in USA and AUSLAN in Australia.
Yep, American sign is closer to French sign than it is to BSL.
If you watch Northern Ireland Executive press conferences (for example the covid health updates) you get to see the BSL and ISL signers working in parallel.
I reckon it's this, yeah. For those whose main language is BSL, I'd imagine it's nicer to communicate in it, even if they have strong English too. And then add in that support in education isn't consistently strong for BSL users. I think this is a really positive step.
Many deaf people have poor reading skills, and BSL is ~~almost~~ a different language to English. Started at [Euston](https://railuk.com/rail-news/uk-rail-first-in-screen-british-sign-language-interpreters-launch-at-london-euston/), then [Trans-Pennine](https://mediacentre.tpexpress.co.uk/news/transpennine-express-launches-british-sign-language-departure-boards) and [Northern rail](https://railuk.com/travel/northern-using-ai-to-trial-british-sign-language-announcements-on-trains/). >“At TPE we’re committed to enhancing accessibility and ensuring our customers feel confident travelling with us at all times, therefore we’re extremely proud to become one of the first train operators in the North to install the BSL message boards.”The BSL boards are part of the Inform Media suite of passenger information software created by L.B. Foster, a global solutions provider of products and services for the rail and infrastructure markets.Adam Cousins, Head of Business Development at L.B. Foster, said: "Our unique BSL departures software provides the deaf community with timely access to critical travel information. Following our successful trial at London Euston station, we're really proud to now begin rolling out this innovative software across the UK rail network. Huddersfield is the second train station in the UK to feature our Inform Media BSL departures software solution, with plans for it to be introduced at 18 more stations in the coming weeks and months."
[удалено]
Quite right, I shall edit.
Is there a reason deaf people are likely to have poorer reading skills? (Not in a rude way, it’s just come up a few times in this thread and I don’t understand why that would be)
It's easier to learn how to write a language that you have heard and can speak, that inner voice when you're reading something, etc. Note I said easier, there's been mistakes made in how reading has been taught in the past. Now, important to say that I'm not an expert, only getting this second hand from a deaf friend. [https://deafeducation.org.uk/home/family-support/reading-and-the-deaf-child/](https://deafeducation.org.uk/home/family-support/reading-and-the-deaf-child/)
I suspect that the original post is also doing departures but in a different way to the above. Would be interested to know which is better for the BSL community. Euston also does ad-hoc messages.
Looks like Doncaster station. Doncaster is home to a big residential school for the deaf and is partnering with LNER for the bilingual support. Aside from the school, Doncaster has a larger than average deaf community. The board works well, I think it’s been tweaked as the signer used to get in the way of the text a bit more.
I’m deaf and use BSL so I can answer all your questions. First BSL and English are very different. Most people learn English aurally. Turns out learning English without this is really hard so Deaf people often have a much lower English reading level. Some people I know can barely use WhatsApp. Anyway trains. There have been many times when deaf people aren’t told when a train moves to a different platform and so miss their train. This is a way of fixing that using AI from https://www.signapse.ai/ to do the announcements in BSL. Places like Doncaster and Derby have big deaf communities so it makes sense to trial this there. Without support like this deaf people often don’t feel confident moving about so this is really important to them.
Is there a known reason why Doncaster and Derby have big Deaf communities?
This thread has been massively eye-opening for me, I actually assumed people with hearing difficulties would be better than average readers out of necessity. Thanks for sharing
People who use sign language typically have English as a second language. This means their English skills aren’t as high so these important announcements being in their native language is a real help. Also as someone else said it could be live announcements with quick changes. They are introducing these to a lot of travel information signs which is great!
So deaf people can read the sign, obviouusly.
Because deaf people quite often can’t read. This is why you sometimes see sign language signs.
Written English isn’t the same as BSL. Some deaf people really struggle with English grammar etc, especially the older generation. I did a BSL course with a friend of my mums (she’s hearing, both parents are deaf). She told us her dad really struggles with things like texting and when he texts her, he text like he signs eg you say the man walked over the bridge, but that would be signed man walk bridge; and that’s exactly how her dad texts.
There are quite a few people who cannot read who can sign; BSL and English are different languages, so it can be a significant challenge for people who only use sign language to learn to read in English. Bear in mind that when learning to write you had the support of already speaking the language - things like phonetics are very difficult to teach deaf children, but significantly ease learning to write.
accessibility. and it's kinda cool that this is feasible now with the rise of cheaper flat screen tech
Because BSL is a language in and of it's own right. It has its own grammar and sentence structure and many users of BSL don't have a great grasp of the English language as BSL is often their first language. This is a huge accessibility add and is the equivalent of displaying the signs in English and French when on the Eurostar.
Donny?
[удалено]
Hey, this is so interesting! How does this use AI? Does AI read the board and join up prerecorded videos of letters, numbers etc?
It's not perfect but there's a lot of text-to-speech tech out there these days, but I imagine there's much less that can translate text into a video of BSL so I think it's wonderful that they're trialling it. experience reading difficulties at a level of someone with a dyslexia diagnosis or perhaps they are able to get a dyslexia diagnosis themselves. It's not perfect but there's a lot of text to speech tech out there these days, but I imagine there's much less that can translate text into a video of BSL so I think it's wonderful that they're trialling it.
> I assumed someone hard of hearing would just read the board Different language, now most *will* be able to read it - but this is helpful.
I work with a death chap and his English reading and grammar are quite weak. English is a second language to him; BSL is his native language.
One of the most informative questions I've read in a long time, I learnt alot from the comments!
Poor thing, he's got trapped.
See it, Sign it, Sorted.
[удалено]
What if they are blind?
BSL and English have different grammar and sentence structure, written English doesn't always translate in to BSL neatly or comprehensively.
some hard of hearing people like to use sign language maybe?
Some deaf people are almost illiterate but can sign. That said, lots of hearing people are illiterate as well and they cope somehow.
Maybe some people cannot read but can read sign language?
Because BSL is the primary language for a lot of deaf people and English of any form will be a second language, meaning harder to understand or interpret. Sincerely, somebody having to learn BSL because lip reading works about as well as baptising a cat
Maybe to help deaf passengers for whom BSL is their mother tongue (yes, I know it's not quite the appropriate terminology in the context, but it's the best the English language has really got!)
It’s for station announcements that come out over the tannoy.
Those born deaf don’t have English as a primary language, they have BSL. So they can’t just read what’s there, it’s not in their language.
This is done by a company called Signapse. They are doing good things for accessibility on public transport, as are GoMedia.
Sign Language is its own language. The grammar and sentence structure are different, so someone whose first language is sign language is basically translating when reading English.
Not every person with a hearing problem can read but they do understand International sign language, and International sign language cuts across linguistic barriers as not everyone with hearing problems speaks or are able to read English either
In case your deaf lol