Glove Won't Speak for the Deaf

From: Wired News - Aug 7, 2003

For years, researchers have worked to improve gloves that can translate American Sign Language into spoken and written speech. But despite many technical refinements, the deaf still give the idea a lukewarm response.

Some members of the deaf community are ambivalent about the technology, which aims to "fix" deafness, a trait they accept and even embrace as culturally unique. Many also are wary of a machine that can translate only a few hundred words -- much less the nuances crucial to human communication.

"It wouldn't be like a panacea for deaf people," said Paul Mitchell, director of the American Sign Language Institute . "I think the tendency in deaf culture is to use natural signing and human interpreters."

"I would prefer a more natural form of communication," said Mitchell, who is deaf.

Nevertheless, researchers continue to work on the glove.

Jose Hernandez-Rebollar has developed a sensor-studded glove that translates simple sentences from sign language into spoken and written speech. He is not the first to develop this kind of device, but he says his is the most robust.

His AcceleGlove, which he developed as a doctoral student at George Washington University, contains sensors that work with a micro-controller, also attached to the wearer's arm, which maps the movement of the arm and fingers. The information received by the glove is turned into data that a computer converts into words on a loudspeaker or into text on a screen.

Asimilar glove was developed a year ago that could translate the hand movements for all 26 letters of the alphabet -- although spelling out words a letter at a time is a painfully slow process for communication. In unfettered American Sign Language, a single gesture can represent complete words or phrases.

Hernandez-Rebollar's device, in contrast, can translate close to 200 words and even a few short phrases, like "What's the matter?" and "I'll help you."

For the glove to translate an entire vocabulary, the deaf person would need to wear two gloves -- to cover sign language that requires both hands -- and engineers would need to preinstall a dictionary with more gestures, he said.

"There have been other devices in the market," said Hernandez-Rebollar, who is not deaf. "This one translates both dynamic gestures and the alphabet."

There are about 28 million deaf or hard-of-hearing Americans, according to the National Campaign for Hearing Health, an organization that promotes research and education about hearing loss.

Scientists have created prototypes for sign language translation gloves since 1982. The gloves never took off because the technology was too complex, constantly changing and too expensive for the average consumer. Hernandez-Rebollar predicted it would take years before a functional and affordable translation glove would hit the market. He is seeking funding to further develop his idea.

"Of course, the final idea for the glove is it would not be required," Hernandez-Rebollar said. "You can wear the sensors in your hand without being noticed.... But that's way down the line."

Ryan Patterson, a University of Colorado student who won a $113,000 scholarship for his glove at the Siemens Westinghouse Competition in Math, Science & Technology early last year, echoed Hernandez-Rebollar.

"It is very difficult to include the whole (sign) language because it uses both hands and facial expressions," said Patterson, who is not deaf. "Facial expressions are difficult to do. We are basically limited to hand movements."

But perhaps the biggest reason deaf people aren't sporting the gloves is because they don't want to. None of the gloves is 100 percent accurate, which could further alienate people who use them.

"For people who are highly educated, how would the glove keep up with the nuances and the changes of the language?" Mitchell said.

Some question whether such a glove would present a setback for the hard of hearing. For years, organizations like the National Association of the Deaf have defended deafness as a unique trait, not a deficiency. It has pushed the hearing world to embrace deaf individuals rather than forcing them to use technology like cochlear implants to accommodate the hearing world.

"Many within the medical profession continue to view deafness essentially as a disability and an abnormality and believe that deaf and hard of hearing individuals need to be 'fixed' by cochlear implants," NAD says on its website. Doctors shouldn't force parents to view deafness as a disease that needs curing, the group says.

©Copyright 2003, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.