Comments
foozballisdevil t1_iu3z9gf wrote
Unless you aren't super fluent in sign language and it takes you much less time to say the word while you try to remember the sign associated.
DeaddyRuxpin t1_iu40mqg wrote
Since signing is often slower than speaking you would finish talking and the sound arrives before the signing could finish making signing the slower form of communication. However, now I want to know where the break even point is. How far away do you need to be for signing out a speech to arrive before the sound of that speech arrives (assuming the sound could travel infinitely far without degrading and we could see the signing from an infinite distance away).
chemist612 t1_iu40p2a wrote
You have to consider the total package. Signs may travel at the speed of light, but fingers must move much slower. Sound travels at the speed of sound, but vocal cords can modulate much quicker. Think singing "Rap God" vs trying to sign it.
mangomaster6969 t1_iu4llch wrote
Language doesn't travel at the speed of light or sound it travels at the speed you can speak it or in this case act it. So spoken languages are still faster.
stumblewiggins t1_iu4mso6 wrote
I'd have to assume that sign language speed versus spoken language speed depends primarily on which version of each language you are using, and what you are saying.
Hungrymaster t1_iu5b8ey wrote
I wouldn't use the word travel in your argument. If we're getting nitpicky, spoken language does travel at the speed of sound, but it is produced much slower ofcourse.
eternalankh t1_iu5fmqa wrote
The break even point would be:
343(x - y)
where 'x' is the length of the signed speech (in seconds) and 'y' is the length of the spoken speech (in seconds).
This gives you the answer in meters.
Showerthoughts_Mod t1_iu3z1t7 wrote
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.