	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Deaf

	This article is part of WikiProject Deaf, the WikiProject which seeks to improve articles relating to all aspects of deaf-related and Deaf culture. For the Project guidelines, see the project page or talk page.DeafWikipedia:WikiProject DeafTemplate:WikiProject Deafdeaf articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Only one signer?[edit]

This "language" has been an anomaly ever since it was first stuck in Ethnologue back in 1987. There only ever was one deaf person who used this language, so it seems to have been only a home sign system, not a full language. Accordingly, I have today submitted a proposal to ISO 639-3 to have its code retired from the standard, because if it was proposed today as an addition to the standard, it would certainly be turned down. The only reason it is in ISO 639-3 at all is that it got inherited from the old Ethnologue codes, back when the Ethnologue editors didn't have a clear understanding of home sign systems and how they are different from languages. The proposal won't actually get posted until after the current round of change requests are processed and the results announced in January. So, there is nothing to do on the article until the proposal is "official" and available on the ISO 639-3 website. But, I thought some people, especially user:kwamikagami, might want to know about what is planned. AlbertBickford (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC), revised AlbertBickford (talk) 04:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This language may be retired from ISO 639-3 soon[edit]

According to this request : [1]

"The "language", as described by Kuschel 1974, would clearly be considered a home sign system today, since it was only ever used by one deaf person and his hearing associates. This is not to criticize the Deaf person's intelligence and inventiveness, but simple to say that his communication system does not fit the criteria for inclusion in ISO 639-3. There never was a community of users in the usual sense, something that Kuschel goes to great lengths to demonstrate. Further, it is extremely unlikely that it ever developed the structural complexity of a full language; Kuschel documents 217 signs, and claims that there are certainly more He was unable to ever document any grammatical structure, although he claimed there was some. Still, none of this is enough to demonstrate that it was a full language."

Regards, Şÿℵדαχ₮ɘɼɾ๏ʁ 19:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]