I don't know about autistic, but dyslexia and certain facets of dyspraxia both can be identified in part from looking at hand writing and spelling and word usage. They're standard enough to be diagnosed, so it's not totally out of the 'regular acquisition' scale.
It's kind of fascinating, language acquisition - although I think there certainly can and I'm sure are exceptions, it's such an important *human* thing that it appears to all extents and purposes to be pretty hard wired provided there are other humans around at all.
But I don't know about any studies around writing vs. typind, and I think it's a good distinction.
We used quite a bit of typing in the learning centre where I worked. I don't remember there being a lot of double letters in that, but I wasn't at the time looking for anything to do with lilspeak so I can't say for sure.
What *was* really common was leaving letters out, especially vowels (I remember that 'cause we would try to emphasize that every syllable has a vowel, which is one way to check). That's totally not-phonetic whereas a lot of lilspeak is *extremely* phonetic. I think that's one reason why, although we hadn't thought it through much, when we came across lilspeak on the 'net, we adults were generally a bit suspicious.
To the broader question - I wouldn't try to evaluate a specific system on their typing ability no matter what. And I do believe that people in different systems can display different abilities and disabilities - but I also think that if only the kids type one way and only the adults type another, that is probably more the acquisition of Lilspeak as a dialect than something like a learning difficulty or non-standard acquisition.
In other words there are so many systems out there where the adults type fine and the kids type lilspeak that I don't think specific other factors are probably all that relevant. Not scientific though. :)
Just on a personal note, one reason I got into all this before, actually, being selves-aware is that we had a really bad accident when our body was 14 and we became learning disabled in a very odd way.
We got studied because it was so specific - the brain damage could be traced to a specific area and so learning disability researchers were all over it. For us it created a real division in our life because certain things that were easy before are difficult or close to impossible now.
(For example, if I take off my rings, I cannot tell my left from my right and can't figure out which hand to hold the pen in, despite still being strongly right-handed; if I end up with the pen in the wrong hand I can't figure out why it doesn't work, except for telling myself "if it doesn't work /change hands/ you dummy"... see, wierd stuff. And it's not just me, it's across our system as far as I know. :))
So for me personally I have a slight bias that there is a biological basis for a learning difficulty.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: what about typing? And non-standard people?
Date: 2005-07-02 01:43 am (UTC)It's kind of fascinating, language acquisition - although I think there certainly can and I'm sure are exceptions, it's such an important *human* thing that it appears to all extents and purposes to be pretty hard wired provided there are other humans around at all.
But I don't know about any studies around writing vs. typind, and I think it's a good distinction.
We used quite a bit of typing in the learning centre where I worked. I don't remember there being a lot of double letters in that, but I wasn't at the time looking for anything to do with lilspeak so I can't say for sure.
What *was* really common was leaving letters out, especially vowels (I remember that 'cause we would try to emphasize that every syllable has a vowel, which is one way to check). That's totally not-phonetic whereas a lot of lilspeak is *extremely* phonetic. I think that's one reason why, although we hadn't thought it through much, when we came across lilspeak on the 'net, we adults were generally a bit suspicious.
To the broader question - I wouldn't try to evaluate a specific system on their typing ability no matter what. And I do believe that people in different systems can display different abilities and disabilities - but I also think that if only the kids type one way and only the adults type another, that is probably more the acquisition of Lilspeak as a dialect than something like a learning difficulty or non-standard acquisition.
In other words there are so many systems out there where the adults type fine and the kids type lilspeak that I don't think specific other factors are probably all that relevant. Not scientific though. :)
Just on a personal note, one reason I got into all this before, actually, being selves-aware is that we had a really bad accident when our body was 14 and we became learning disabled in a very odd way.
We got studied because it was so specific - the brain damage could be traced to a specific area and so learning disability researchers were all over it. For us it created a real division in our life because certain things that were easy before are difficult or close to impossible now.
(For example, if I take off my rings, I cannot tell my left from my right and can't figure out which hand to hold the pen in, despite still being strongly right-handed; if I end up with the pen in the wrong hand I can't figure out why it doesn't work, except for telling myself "if it doesn't work /change hands/ you dummy"... see, wierd stuff. And it's not just me, it's across our system as far as I know. :))
So for me personally I have a slight bias that there is a biological basis for a learning difficulty.