Katawa Shoujo Forums

nemz wrote:For the hearing among us, when you hear yourself thinking, do you hear it in your ACTUAL voice or in the way your voice sounds from inside your own head? For me it's the latter, which makes it a bit startling sometimes to hear myself on a recorded message, being confronted with how different a voice can sound when you don't get reverb from your own sinuses and such. The "mind's ear" is quite a bit more flexible than that though. I also think in other's people's voices occasionally when lost in a mental scene of some sort. Or after reading too much Shakespere I find myself thinking and speaking with odd phrasings for a little while unless I consciously stop it. I've had dreams that were in the form of prose, no actual sense information at all though sensations were described.

If I spend a lot of time studying my ASL stuff I find it a lot easier to do the 'think in sign' thing than if I just try and turn it on and off. Ever notice how it takes a few moments of driving before your mind's completely switched over into 'car' mode?

Then again, consciousness is overrated. Recent neruoscience experiments have shown support for what I've suspected for a long time now, that consciousness is just the brain's awareness of what it's already thought. Researchers have been able to detect a decision being made up to 8 seconds before the subject is aware they've done so, meaning that acting without thought is actually better described as acting without waiting for the self-monitoring system to keep up. When you make take your time to ponder a tricky situation the 'you' that thinks isn't actually doing anything but waiting to see what your brain comes up with.

That's fascinating, it's like the time-delay with live TV/radio broadcasts. All the more reason to think before you speak, if only so you're not having a shower the next day and suddenly angrily think 'THAT'S what I shoulda said to that jerk!'

metalangel wrote: I will do my best not to bounce every deaf-related question I have off you I will warn you, I am waiting acceptance on an ASL & Deaf Studies course and I'm hoping to do the interpreter course after that, which is why I've got all these questions percolating away.

Well I'm Kutagh on FreeNode IRC (often in #eon) if you wanna talk directly I don't mind answering questions, I just can't answer everything since there are different kinds of deaf people with different histories... And if I don't want to answer, I can always say that

@Nemz: As I said before, I don't hear myself thinking in my voice but in a 'neutral' voice... It's hard to describe, it's not male or female... It's more thinking of words than talking... And the 'in a way we ALL live in our own VNs', when reflecting back on the pivotal moments that define my life (and could drastically have changed my life if played out differently) makes me feel like that a lot... As well as how we can have an algebraic system with so many formula's perfectly describing some of the things of the universe and nature. I don't think that there is a god, but if anything I sometimes have the feeling that it is too much of a coincidence the way everything plays out. But I'm going a bit off-topic here

Brogurt wrote:Glasses. Why else would Shizune have them?

But in all seriousness, this is some pretty good information I'm getting from you guys, moreso from Kutagh (If you post here so often, just register dammit) and Mirrormn. Very thought-provoking stuff. I wonder how the 'neutral' voice would sound like though? Maybe a bit like Microsoft Sam? I guess the only way to find out would be to become deaf, but that would only apply to people deaf from birth. If I was to become randomly deaf, I'd probably still think in my voice, at least until I forgot what I sounded like. I'm kinda surprised this question hasn't been brought up sooner.

Loving the insight about hearing one voice from the point of view from a deaf person, Kutah. I've ben curious about this kinda shit myself for a while.

metalangel wrote:If I spend a lot of time studying my ASL stuff I find it a lot easier to do the 'think in sign' thing than if I just try and turn it on and off. Ever notice how it takes a few moments of driving before your mind's completely switched over into 'car' mode?'

I've spent a lot of time studying Japanese, and it is the same for me -- sometimes I don't think in words, and when I do it is either English or Japanese, depending on the situation.

My dreams are the same. Sometimes I just dream in images and emotions, but sometimes I dream in English and sometimes in Japanese.

Since deaf people have their own language, I am sure it is the same for them -- either concepts, or words in ASL.

BobBobberson wrote:

Brogurt wrote:Glasses. Why else would Shizune have them?

img

But in all seriousness, this is some pretty good information I'm getting from you guys, moreso from Kutagh (If you post here so often, just register dammit) and Mirrormn. Very thought-provoking stuff. I wonder how the 'neutral' voice would sound like though? Maybe a bit like Microsoft Sam? I guess the only way to find out would be to become deaf, but that would only apply to people deaf from birth. If I was to become randomly deaf, I'd probably still think in my voice, at least until I forgot what I sounded like. I'm kinda surprised this question hasn't been brought up sooner.

Fine! I've registered....
The best description I can come up with it for the 'neutral' voice is a voice devoid of intonation, characteristics like how high pitched it is and so on...

And yes, there is no way to properly explain the real difference between hearing normally and hearing with a cochlear implant. After the implantation itself, you need to let your inner ear recover at least a month from the surgery, then you got to start wearing the CI occasionally and adjust the frequency loudness ranges (not sure how to call it) while your brain is learning to interpret the signals from the electrodes on the implant as specific sounds... All together you've not heard like I can hear now for at least several months... And in that time frame the memory of how you heard things gets warped. Play Katawa Shoujo a few months after you've played it for the last time and I guarantee you you'll encounter scenes you forgot about. You'll have remembered a lot but not everything. That is without any significant change in how your brain works or interprets things.

@Ravenlord: 'deaf people have their own language' is a bit naively said IMO. Sign language is a representation of the 'normal' language, with changes to better suit the sign language (for example in Dutch Sign Language we don't have 'the' or 'a' and of course the different grammar rules) but it is not universal (though unlike most spoken languages Sign Language has a lot of common ground worldwide, on a holiday in Italy I met a Hungarian deaf guy in the train, we could understand each other reasonably well with Sign Language...). Braille is the same in that aspect, it is a different representation of the 'normal' language but since it is written text in a different representation the grade 1 braille doesn't differ that much from the normal language. So essentially you're saying they're thinking in their 'speaking' representation of that language.

I'm not sure if that's actually a bit sad... is it better for these alternate languages to keep the 'flavor' of local dialects or for them to form the basis of a truely global language? Feels a bit like a lost opportunity to me, like those who have all senses have forced others to play the same stupid language game that separates us all too much already.

And I'm -horrible- at learning languages... I think being a native English speaker might in some way actually be a bit of a handicap, as so much of the world automatically accommodates me (providing very little motivation) and the language steals words and phrases from everywhere else so haphazardly that nearly the whole spectrum of language feels both familiar and wrong at the same time.

nemz wrote:I'm not sure if that's actually a bit sad... is it better for these alternate languages to keep the 'flavor' of local dialects or for them to form the basis of a truely global language? Feels a bit like a lost opportunity to me, like those who have all senses have forced others to play the same stupid language game that separates us all too much already.

And I'm -horrible- at learning languages... I think being a native English speaker might in some way actually be a bit of a handicap, as so much of the world automatically accommodates me (providing very little motivation) and the language steals words and phrases from everywhere else so haphazardly that nearly the whole spectrum of language feels both familiar and wrong at the same time.

Yeah, sometimes it is very annoying that I cannot communicate with some regions. But a global language will be difficult for some populations to learn, basically requiring several generations of actually using it everywhere. In some world parts they have difficulty recognizing the difference between a sound that doesn't exist in their language and one that does (like the 'would you like some lice?' joke about the Japanese and Chinese). And yeah, my good grasp on English was because the majority of games and online communities are in English so you keep learning to get access to them. Beyond that I haven't got any motivation to learn other languages (or get a proper grasp on Sign Language since I haven't got any ties to the Deaf community). And in sign languages there are signs that come from the local culture or language. For example in Dutch Sign Language the sign for toilet is a W going to a C in the Sign alphabet (crudely said, just check this youtube movie) because WC is a synonym for toilet in Dutch. ASL uses the T in Sign alphabet, shaking it sideways.... Simple signs but not universal. Language in Dutch is written 'Taal' and the sign for that is a T moving sideways and transforming at same time into a L.
Hell, I think even the Sign alphabet is not universal either.... That Hungarian guy I met in Italy, he was selling the Sign alphabet on postcards and some were different.

Hmm...interesting question.

Our mind is made up of conscious and subconscious elements, and it's often geared to how we see the world. So if its the blind for example, they'll think through sounds or voices so it's not much of a problem--we think that way too.
What about the deaf?

Someone earlier said they think with a 'neutral' voice. If I'm interpreting it--correct me if I am wrong or went too far--you're thinking with images/actions that you will do? Like moving pictures? I mean for example you want to eat cake, instead of thinking (with a voice) "I want to eat cake), you instead imagined the cake and you eating it. I think it goes to be like that, just saying...maybe.

Kutagh wrote:

nemz wrote:I'm not sure if that's actually a bit sad... is it better for these alternate languages to keep the 'flavor' of local dialects or for them to form the basis of a truely global language? Feels a bit like a lost opportunity to me, like those who have all senses have forced others to play the same stupid language game that separates us all too much already.
-snip.

...and now I feel somewhat *proud* for being a multilingual student

Megumeru wrote:Hmm...interesting question.

Our mind is made up of conscious and subconscious elements, and it's often geared to how we see the world. So if its the blind for example, they'll think through sounds or voices so it's not much of a problem--we think that way too.
What about the deaf?

Someone earlier said they think with a 'neutral' voice. If I'm interpreting it--correct me if I am wrong or went too far--you're thinking with images/actions that you will do? Like moving pictures? I mean for example you want to eat cake, instead of thinking (with a voice) "I want to eat cake), you instead imagined the cake and you eating it. I think it goes to be like that, just saying...maybe.

Kutagh wrote:

nemz wrote:I'm not sure if that's actually a bit sad... is it better for these alternate languages to keep the 'flavor' of local dialects or for them to form the basis of a truely global language? Feels a bit like a lost opportunity to me, like those who have all senses have forced others to play the same stupid language game that separates us all too much already.
-snip.

...and now I feel somewhat *proud* for being a multilingual student

You've interpreted it incorrectly. I'm consciously thinking in words, just not in my own voice or any voice I know but in a 'neutral' voice.

nemz wrote:I'm not sure if that's actually a bit sad... is it better for these alternate languages to keep the 'flavor' of local dialects or for them to form the basis of a truely global language? Feels a bit like a lost opportunity to me, like those who have all senses have forced others to play the same stupid language game that separates us all too much already.

You can't force any language, especially to be a global standard. There have been attempts in the past and those have failed too. They are organic things that develop on their own and trying to coerce it just stifles it. Dialects will always develop, because they develop to suit whatever the people using it in that area want or need. The language is for their everyday life, not a dictionary.

For sign language specifically, many of them developed naturally as they were needed by deaf communities around the world. That ASL and BSL are so different is down to BSL teachers in the 19th century being unwilling to share with American deaf teachers who then turned to the French for help instead.

EDIT: Mrs Metal just made an interesting point to me: accents captured in text! She agrees that she doesn't read in any particular voice when reading books, but that when a writer tries to force a character's voice through by writing their dialogue in an 'accent' it can get very annoying. I've found myself put off some characters by this.

I thought when people say they "hear" themselves think it's just a figure of speech. I don't exactly get a voice talking back when I think, it's more like a fury of disjointed sentences that form a general idea. Except when I speak or write, I'd have to form what I want to say or write in my head first but I never get a voice unless I say it out loud.

I guess it's only natural to think in your own voice. But it really doesn't make sense to have someone telling you what to do in a logical manner when you think.

Cabulb wrote:I thought when people say they "hear" themselves think it's just a figure of speech. I don't exactly get a voice talking back when I think, it's more like a fury of disjointed sentences that form a general idea. Except when I speak or write, I'd have to form what I want to say or write in my head first but I never get a voice unless I say it out loud.

I guess it's only natural to think in your own voice. But it really doesn't make sense to have someone telling you what to do in a logical manner when you think.

I'm much like that, too. For example when I type a post, and hit a rough spot and try to figure out how to go on, I often repeat random fragments of what I've previously typed in my mind, but what I'm really doing is search for something to say and/or a way to say it. My thoughts are much less ordered than my speech.

***

Also: sign language isn't a language. It's a means to represent a language, like speaking and writing. Since you have signs for concepts, signing can be international (given that the respective grammars are similar enough). But the words the respective communicators associate with the signs will still be in the language they're thinking in. It's possible that you only think of the sing, and by-pass the - um - word? No, that's not the right way to put it.

A word has two components: a concept and a representation. Speech is one such representation. Writing is another. And sign language is yet another. The relations between these systems are intricate. Japanese hiragana, for example, is much more phonetically constant than English.

An example from Katawa shoujo: the rooftop scene where Misha talks to Hisao about sign language made me curious on two counts: (a) She uses the alphabet (romaji). I'd have expected the primary signs to be for hiragana. Rather than "a b c...", I'd expect an order I know from the tables: "a e i u o ka ke ki ku ko...". I then wondered whether they transport the difference between hiragana and katakana into sign, too, or if that's not significant enough (since signing's supposed to replace speaking, not writing). Things like that. I didn't research, because I was lazy. (b) Misha says that people tend to forget that there are signs for words. I wondered if that's true for Japan, where people are used to learning knaji from when they're little. Wouldn't they be used to that?

Basically, sign language seems to have aspects from both speaking and writing, but functionally it's supposed to replace speaking (that is: in the situations you use it). It's rather intricate and - I think - very interesting.

***

Also about the relationship between "hearing a voice" and "thinking": Here's a little thought experiment. Many people read a lot quicker silently (even if they read every word) than aloud. What do they hear? Do you think they hear a voice speaking very quickly? (Personally, I find that idea comical.) (A speed reader told me he trained himself to turn off vocalisation to be able to read quicker. Reading is now only visual pattern recognition to him.)

Dawnstorm wrote: Also: sign language isn't a language. It's a means to represent a language, like speaking and writing. Since you have signs for concepts, signing can be international (given that the respective grammars are similar enough). But the words the respective communicators associate with the signs will still be in the language they're thinking in. It's possible that you only think of the sing, and by-pass the - um - word? No, that's not the right way to put it.

A word has two components: a concept and a representation. Speech is one such representation. Writing is another. And sign language is yet another. The relations between these systems are intricate. Japanese hiragana, for example, is much more phonetically constant than English

Sign language doesn't represent a language, it represents concepts in the same way that spoken or written words do (I think that's what you're saying, right?). The only time it represents another language is when you spell out a word that there's no sign for.

KS is interesting because it translates all signed communication into grammatically correct English*, regardless of whether someone is interpreting or if both participants are signing. I don't know much about JSL, but I am doubtful that it uses proper spoken grammar.

*I don't know if this is true for the translations into other languages.

I speak English, French, my native language and a bit of Japanese, and I find myself thinking in the language that is needed for the task at hand, which nowadays is often English (when I program, etc.). It does sound a bit like a voice in my head that matches the thoughts with words in the language I am currently thinking in, but it's hard to say if it's the same as my own voice... perhaps not quite. But the fact that I can attach different words to similar thoughts means that the thoughts must be non-verbal in essence. So the idea that there's a part of the brain that just sits there and verbalizes is probably true for me.