|
| Harold Buck wrote:
quote:
> In article <1140220671.799708.316050@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> "Nick" <nickbourbaki3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
The context was snipped by Harold Buck.
Here's a relevant part of that context:
"There's a *practical issue* that tends to be overlooked by
most people: the two players may *not have equal abilities to
communicate* their concerns and complaints with the arbiter."
--Nick
It should be clear enough that I was writing about a practical issue
of players 'not hav(ing) equal abilities to communicate'.
Harold Buck snipped my example of a language difference.
quote:
>
> This is a contrived example,
Some deaf persons do play chess.
quote:
> since presumably both the deaf player and the arbiter have
> access to pencil and paper and the ability to read and write.
'...the ability to read and write' the *same language*?
Harold Buck seems to be arguing (above) that it's *not impossible*
for a deaf player to communicate with an arbiter.
For the record, I did *not* claim that it's impossible.
Harold Buck then snipped what I wrote to place my comment (above)
in the proper context. Here's what I wrote:
"I am *not saying that it's impossible*, given enough time and
attention, to overcome such problems. I am saying that *it's often
inconvenient*, for both players and arbiters to consider such problems.
Given that the arbiter's limited time may have to be divided among
resolving several problems that arise in the same round, it seems
to me that some players may be unfairly disadvantaged because
they are less able to communicate their concerns and complaints."
--Nick
I would submit that it's usually less convenient for a deaf player to
communicate with an arbiter, assuming that the deaf player has
succeeded in getting the arbiter's attention in the first place, by
exchanging written notes in the same language than for a hearing
player to communicate with an arbiter by having a conversation in
the same language.
My deaf acquaintances have informed me that they usually find
it less convenient for themselves to communicate their concerns
and complaints with hearing persons, who do not comprehend
their sign language(s), than for hearing persons to communicate
their concerns and complaints with other hearing persons.
In short, being deaf places one at a general disadvantage in
communicating with most hearing persons. I am not saying
that it's impossible for deaf persons to communicate with most
hearing persons, only that it's often less convenient to do so.
quote:
> As for the language issue, this is likely unavoidable and must be
> accepted as a handicap when traveling somewhere where you don't
> understand the language. I think it would be no different in a running
> race--you might not understand the pre-race instructions nor would
> yoube able to effectively communicate a protest. I'm not sure it is a
> race or tournament organizer's responsibility to be able to handle people
> who don't understand the language which will be used.
Given his practice of snipping my context, Harold Buck again may
have misunderstood what I wrote. I have simply observed that not
all players have 'equal abilities to communicate' their concerns and
complaints, whether on account of language differences or physical
differences, and that fact places some players at a disadvantage.
I did *not* attribute blame to anyone in particular or propose a
particular way to ameloriate these communication problems.
--Nick
|
|