|SignWriting List Forum|
Ingvild Roald |
Date: Wed Feb 7, 2001 11:21 pm
Subject: Re: Brazilian Sign
This is what I thought too.
I completely agree.
>From: Charles Butler
>Reply-To: SignWriting List
>To: SignWriting List
>Subject: Re: Brazilian Sign
>Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 01:51:52 -0500
>I am concerned at this latest. The Parkhurst book may be published, but if
>it is consistently applied to all handshapes--the purpose of a writing
>sysem--then there are no diagonals for any sign at all, including flat
>hands, pointer fingers, and any other handshape, and that is just plain
>wrong, regardless of charts or graphs. Objects do move diagonally. Hands
>are held in diagonal positions and the writing system and the computer
>software should not only accomodate it, but use it.
>If you do not write a diagonal orientatiom on one handshape, then that
>should, if it is to be consistent, applied everywhere. If my writing is 25
>years old--and still readable after 25 years, then there is something
>seriously wrong with a new system that can look at my old handshapes and
>declare them "unreadable" under a new system. I have not ever wrote as I
>"felt like it". I have tried to be consistent, extremely careful, and
>precisely the orientation which my hand actually has, not a "convention"
>which uses only right angles.
>The 4.3 system gives 45 degree angles in its rotational possibilities for
>all handshapes. If they aren't to be used in this system, then they should
>not be possible to produce on the software anywhere, and you-yourself,
>every one of those orientations. The purpose of the software is to produce
>a uniform, clearly typed system. If an "upgrade" removes a whole set of
>handshape orientations, then the system being taught is WRONG, not the
>software. I honestly believe the Parkhurst book to be mistaken, and I will
>not teach that page. Attached is the page I will teach, consistently, and
>if that becomes the "BUTLER" accent, then so be it.
><< Orientat.jpg >>