Who\u27s speaking whose language? A study of contact signing between Deaf and Hearing co-workers

This study documents signed communication between a deaf woman and five hearing co-workers who have worked together for periods ranging from two and a half to twenty-three years. The study has two primary foci: (1) to describe the linguistic features observed during contact signing between deaf and hearing interlocutors, all fluent in English, who communicate in a manual, visual channel, and (2) to identify the dynamics affecting the linguistic choices made by both the hearing and deaf signers during contact signing. The primary data base for this study were videotaped recordings of conversational dyads consisting of the deaf woman and each of the five hearing co-workers recorded at the workplace. This linguistic data base was supplemented by information regarding their acquisition and use of sign language obtained from questionionnaires and from interviews and conversations with the six co-workers. The principal findings of the study are the following: (1) Contact signing exhibits lexical and syntactic features of both English and American Sign Language. Contact signing gives neither a full representation of standard spoken English, nor does it approximate native-like ASL as used in the Deaf community. Features unique to the contact situation such as code-mixing, code-switching and mouthing of English are frequently noted. (2) The features of the deaf signer\u27s language span a much broader spectrum than those of the hearing signers, and do not seem to be a function of the sign language fluency of the hearing interlocutor. Certain typical ASL features, labelled \u27irreducible\u27, are found in the signing of the deaf interlocutor with every hearing co-worker, regardless of that individual\u27s own linguistic competency. These irreducible features suggest the influence of a modality constraint on linguistic code. They are also noteworthy because they are used very little by the hearing signers and appear to be acquired with difficulty by language learners. 3) Language acquisition phenomena such as interlanguage and foreigner talk constitute a significant share of the dynamics of the language contact situation. 4) For both the deaf and the hearing colleagues, effective communication at the workplace seems to have primacy over any other considerations of language usage. This is particularly striking and easily documented in the linguistic choices made by the Deaf colleague, who draws on a wide range of linguistic features according to the communicative needs of her hearing interlocutor

ISS Expeditions 16 through 20: Chemical Analysis Results for Potable Water

During the 2-year span from Expedition 16 through Expedition 20, the chemical quality of the potable water onboard the International Space Station (ISS) was verified safe for crew consumption through the return and chemical analysis of archival water samples by the Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL) at Johnson Space Center (JSC). Reclaimed cabin humidity condensate and Russian ground-supplied water were the principal sources of potable water for Expeditions 16 through 18. During Expedition 18 the U.S. water processor assembly was delivered, installed, and tested during a 90-day checkout period. Beginning with Expedition 19, U.S. potable water recovered from a combined waste stream of humidity condensate and pretreated urine was also available for ISS crew use. A total of 74 potable water samples were collected using U.S. sampling hardware during Expeditions 16 through 20 and returned on both Shuttle and Soyuz vehicles. The results of JSC chemical analyses of these ISS potable water samples are presented in this paper. Eight potable water samples collected in flight with Russian hardware were also received for analysis, as well as 5 preflight samples of Rodnik potable water delivered to ISS on Russian Progress vehicles 28 to 34. Analytical results for these additional potable water samples are also reported and discussed

2014 ISS Potable Water Characterization and Continuation of the DMSD Chronicle

During 2014 the crews from Expeditions 38-41 were resident on the International Space Station (ISS). In addition to the U.S. potable water reclaimed from humidity condensate and urine, the other water supplies available for their use were Russian potable water reclaimed from condensate and Russian ground-supplied potable water. Beginning in June of 2014, and for the fourth time since 2010, the product water from the U.S. Water Processor Assembly (WPA) experienced a rise in the total organic carbon (TOC) level due to organic contaminants breaking through the water treatment process. Results from ground analyses of ISS archival water samples returned on Soyuz 38 confirmed that dimethylsilanediol (DMSD) was once again the contaminant responsible for the rise. With this confirmation in hand and based upon the low toxicity of DMSD, a waiver was approved to allow the crew to continue to consume the water after the TOC level exceeded the U.S. Segment limit of 3 mg/L. Several weeks after the WPA multifiltration beds were replaced, as anticipated based upon experience from previous rises, the TOC levels returned to below the method detection limit of the onboard TOC analyzer (TOCA). This paper presents and discusses the chemical analysis results for the ISS archival potable water samples returned in 2014 and analyzed by the Johnson Space Center's Toxicology and Environmental Chemistry laboratory. These results showed compliance with ISS potable water quality standards and indicated that the potable water supplies were acceptable for crew consumption. Although DMSD levels were at times elevated they remained well below the 35 mg/L health limit, so continued consumption of the U.S potable water was considered a low risk to crew health and safety. Excellent agreement between inflight and archival sample TOC data confirmed that the TOCA performed optimally and it continued to serve as a vital tool for monitoring organic breakthrough and planning remediation action

International Space Station Potable Water Characterization for 2013

In this post-construction, operational phase of International Space Station (ISS) with an ever-increasing emphasis on its use as a test-bed for future exploration missions, the ISS crews continue to rely on water reclamation systems for the majority of their water needs. The onboard water supplies include U.S. Segment potable water from humidity condensate and urine, Russian Segment potable water from condensate, and ground-supplied potable water, as reserve. In 2013, the cargo returned on the Soyuz 32-35 flights included archival potable water samples collected from Expeditions 34-37. The former Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (now Toxicology and Evironmental Chemistry Laboratory) at the NASA Johnson Space Center continued its long-standing role of performing chemical analyses on ISS return water samples to verify compliance with potable water quality specifications. This paper presents and discusses the analytical results for potable water samples returned from Expeditions 34-37, including a comparison to ISS quality standards. During the summer of 2013, the U.S. Segment potable water experienced a third temporary rise and fall in total organic carbon (TOC) content, as the result of organic contamination breaking through the water system's treatment process. Analytical results for the Expedition 36 archival samples returned on Soyuz 34 confirmed that dimethylsilanediol was once again the responsible contaminant, just as it was for the previous comparable TOC rises in 2010 and 2012. Discussion herein includes the use of the in-flight total organic carbon analyzer (TOCA) as a key monitoring tool for tracking these TOC rises and scheduling appropriate remediation

International Space Station Potable Water Characterization for 2013

In this post-construction, operational phase of International Space Station (ISS) with an ever-increasing emphasis on its use as a test-bed for future exploration missions, the ISS crews continue to rely on water reclamation systems for the majority of their water needs. The onboard water supplies include US Segment potable water from humidity condensate and urine, Russian Segment potable water from condensate, and ground-supplied potable water, as reserve. In 2013, the cargo returned on the Soyuz 32-35 flights included archival potable water samples collected from Expeditions 34-37. The Water and Food Analytical Laboratory at the NASA Johnson Space Center continued its long-standing role of performing chemical analyses on ISS return water samples to verify compliance with potable water quality specifications. This paper presents and discusses the analytical results for potable water samples returned from Expeditions 34-37, including a comparison to ISS quality standards. During the summer of 2013, the U.S. Segment potable water experienced an anticipated temporary rise and fall in total organic carbon (TOC) content, as the result of organic contamination breaking through the water system's treatment process. Analytical results for the Expedition 36 archival samples returned on Soyuz 34 confirmed that dimethylsilanediol was once again the responsible contaminant, just as it was for comparable TOC rises in 2010 and 2012. Discussion herein includes the use of the in-flight Total Organic Carbon Analyzer (TOCA) as a key monitoring tool for tracking these TOC rises and scheduling appropriate remediation action

Chemical Analysis Results for Potable Water from ISS Expeditions 21 to 25

The Johnson Space Center Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL) performed detailed ground-based analyses of archival water samples for verification of the chemical quality of the International Space Station (ISS) potable water supplies for Expeditions 21 to 25. Over a 14-month period, the Space Shuttle visited the ISS on five occasions to complete construction and deliver supplies. The onboard supplies of potable water available for consumption by the Expeditions 21 to 25 crews consisted of Russian ground-supplied potable water, Russian potable water regenerated from humidity condensate, and US potable water recovered from urine distillate and condensate. Chemical archival water samples that were collected with U.S. hardware during Expeditions 21 to 25 were returned on Shuttle flights STS-129 (ULF3), STS-130 (20A), STS-131 (19A), STS-132 (ULF4) and STS-133 (ULF5), as well as on Soyuz flights 19-22. This paper reports the analytical results for the returned archival water samples and evaluates their compliance with ISS water quality standards. The WAFAL also received and analyzed aliquots of some Russian potable water samples collected in-flight and pre-flight samples of Rodnik potable water delivered to the Station on the Russian Progress vehicle during Expeditions 21 to 25. These additional analytical results are also reported and discussed in this paper

CRITICAL EXPERIMENT WITH BORAX-V. Internal Superheater

A critical experiment was performed with 12 BORAX-V superheater subassemblies in a central voidable region plus 1228 to 1525 UO/sub 2/ fuel pins (3 wt% enriched) in a peripheral region. Removing water (28% of superheater volume) at room temperature decreased reactivity by 2.2%. The midplane (two- dimensional) peak-to-average power distribution in the voided superheater was approximately 1.24, mostly attributable to flux depressions within insulated fuel boxes. Cadmium ratios are also reported. The experiment was initiated to supplement computational information which might have affected plans for loading the superheater zone into the BORAX-V reactor. No changes were indicated by the experiment. (auth

ISS Expeditions 16 Thru 20: Chemical Analysis Results for Potable Water

This slide presentation reviews the results of the chemical analysis of the potable water supply from the International Space Station (ISS) expeditions 16 thru 20. Both Russian ground water and shuttle-transferred water are available for the use of the ISS crew's requirements. This is supplemented with condensate water and water form the Water Recovery System (WRS). An overview of the condensate H2O recovery system is given and the WRS is described and diagrammed. The water quality requirements, the handling, and analytical methods for the inorganic and organic tests are reviewed. The chemical analysis results for expeditions 16-20 archival water samples collected from the various water sources indicate that all of the ISS potable water supplies were acceptable for crew consumption

Chemical Characterization and Identification of Organosilicon Contaminants in ISS Potable Water

2015 marked the 15th anniversary of continuous human presence on board the International Space Station. During the past year crew members from Expeditions 42-46, including two participating in a one-year mission, continued to rely on reclaimed water as their primary source of potable water. This paper presents and discusses results from chemical analyses performed on ISS water samples returned in 2015. Since the U.S. water processor assembly (WPA) became operational in 2008, there have been 5 instances of organic contaminants breaking through the treatment process. On each occasion, the breakthrough was signaled by an increase in the total organic carbon (TOC) concentration in the product water measured by the onboard TOC analyzer (TOCA). Although the most recent TOC rise in 2015 was not unexpected, it was the first time where dimethylsilanediol (DMSD) was not the primary compound responsible for the increase. Results from ground analysis of a product water sample collected in June of 2015 and returned on Soyuz 41 showed that DMSD only accounted for 10% of the measured TOC. After considerable laboratory investigation, the compound responsible for the majority of the TOC was identified as monomethysilanetriol (MMST). MMST is a low-toxicity compound that is structurally similar to DMSD

ISS Potable Water Quality for Expeditions 26 through 30

International Space Station (ISS) Expeditions 26-30 spanned a 16-month period beginning in November of 2010 wherein the final 3 flights of the Space Shuttle program finished ISS construction and delivered supplies to support the post-shuttle era of station operations. Expedition crews relied on several sources of potable water during this period, including water recovered from urine distillate and humidity condensate by the U.S. water processor, water regenerated from humidity condensate by the Russian water recovery system, and Russian ground-supplied potable water. Potable water samples collected during Expeditions 26-30 were returned on Shuttle flights STS-133 (ULF5), STS-134 (ULF6), and STS-135 (ULF7), as well as Soyuz flights 24-27. The chemical quality of the ISS potable water supplies continued to be verified by the Johnson Space Center s Water and Food Analytical Laboratory (WAFAL) via analyses of returned water samples. This paper presents the chemical analysis results for water samples returned from Expeditions 26-30 and discusses their compliance with ISS potable water standards. The presence or absence of dimethylsilanediol (DMSD) is specifically addressed, since DMSD was identified as the primary cause of the temporary rise and fall in total organic carbon of the U.S. product water that occurred in the summer of 2010