Valerie
you are correct my understanding in sign language is very limited
and I am working from a spoken perspective. The words I had organised to
use on my system were based on the most common 100 words that are spoken. I
didn't realise that I couldn't just translate word for word into sign
writing. Sorry for all the confusion. I've got the signs that I could get
from the dictionary, I was a bit afraid of using SW because I thought I
would need to know some sign language to get any sense from it. I got in
got the signs but counldn't prin tthem cause we are connected to at network
printed at college but I got it sorted after a short time. Set up printer
as postscript and printed to file and then printed them on the network, I
even exported the files as bit maps and I'm building up my database of signs
now, slow process but I'm getting there.
Thanks!!!!!
Tony!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Valerie Sutton"
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: Sign-To-Spoken Language Translations
> Angus wrote:
> > I'm not in complete agreement with either of you. :-) As an
> >accredited translator (French-English), I can state with some confidence
> >that translation is not exact. I think that the sign interpreters on
this
> >list will agree with me about translation between sign languages and
> >spoken languages. Maybe even complete agreement?
>
>
> Ha!! This is great ;-)
>
> Well - I think that the word "exact" in English has different
> interpretations - ha!!
>
> Two different meanings for the word "exact" and I agree with both of
> you - so there! ;-)
>
> Anny, I believe, was trying to explain that signed languages are as
> rich and sophisticated as spoken languages and that in the sense that
> the word "exact" means "precise", Anny was trying to explain that
> signed languages are indeed "precise"...Years ago, when I lived in
> Denmark, I remember that the word "exact" oftentimes was interpreted
> to mean "precision"... and it had nothing to do with computer
> translations...or "one-on-one kind of exact"...
>
> Anyway, in my original statement I was talking about "exact"
> "one-to-one" correlation...
>
> Did you agree with my original statement, Angus, or is that in
> disagreement too?! ;-)
>
> Val ;-)
>
|
SignWriting List Forum