In this direction, Sacks (1998, P. 44) clarifies that: ' ' The language of signals must be introduced and be acquired more early possible, seno its development can permanently be delayed and wronged, with all on problems to the capacity of ' ' proposicionar' ' … The deaf children need to be ece of fishes in first contact with fluentes people in the language of signals, they are its parents, professors or others. As soon as the communication for signals will be learned, and it can be fluente to the three years of age, everything then can elapse: it exempts intercurso of thought, it exempts flow of information, learning of the reading and writing and, perhaps, of fala' '. Of this form one perceives that the language of signals is important and indispensable for making possible the linguistic domain and the capacity to express of full form and insurance with its pairs; the official language of the country (in the case of the Brazilian deaf person the Portuguese) verbal and/or writing will make possible the communication with the half listener.
The exposition to the language of signals, since the beginning of the life of the deaf children would guarantee the right to a language in fact e, in result of it, a satisfactory cognitivo functioning, thus facilitating the education of the Portuguese language. Inside of the proposal bilingual, the language of signals is a natural language, acquired of spontaneous form for the deaf person in contact with people use who it. In the direction of this to think these guided people they have the right of being alfabetizadas and, in the academic life, language of signals. According to Goldfeld (1997), it has two distinct forms of definition of the bilingual philosophy, which are: the first one believes that the deaf child must acquire the language of signals as L1 and the verbal modality of the language of its country as L2.