SignWriting List Forum| Message 5966 | Previous | Next [ Up Thread ] | Message Index |
|
SignWriting List Forum |
|||
|
|
From:
Charles Butler Date: Mon Nov 26, 2001 11:39 am Subject: Re: How much SW detail to write? or...Standardized SW Spellings | ||||||||
|
From my experience in Brasil, I know that the dictionary feature was used quite often in preparing longer articles, in both directions. If an article had been written, we went through it, adding its signs to the 4.4 Dictionary. When I then compiled my comparative dictionary of ASL to Libras, it was working with signs that were clearly in the corpus from 10 or more different writers. Charles Butler ----- Original Message ----- From: Valerie Sutton To: Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 3:04 PM Subject: Re: How much SW detail to write? or...Standardized SW Spellings SignWriting List November 24, 2001 SW List members: Regarding Antonio Carlos' comments below.... Back when written English began, monks wrote Bibles in old English in solitude. Very few read their texts...It wasn't until centuries later, that the everyday citizen went to school and learned how to read and write...so they had centuries to standardize spellings and develop a way to teach reading and writing, which we now take for granted in school. SignWriting is only 27 years old... That is a baby of a writing system...Right now, beginning Sign-readers are reading texts written by beginning Sign-writers....Naturally they hesitate...not only to read the signs, but to write them too...there are no standard spellings yet...but that is exactly the way it was historically for written spoken languages....and we now have standardized spellings in spoken languages...so it is possible to develop them, with time. Regarding SW standardized spellings... They are developing right now. There are several reasons for this. Here is one: SignWriter 4.4 Typing Feature: Pasting Signs From The Dictionary Into Documents This feature in the SignWriter Computer Program was a surprise to both Richard Gleaves, the computer programmer of SignWriter, and myself. We never realized that this computer feature would contribute to standardized spellings! But it has in a major way, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where Deaf children are creating ASL sentences by finding signs in the dictionary and pasting them into their documents. They get used to the way the sign looks in the dictionary, so they slowly become used to reading those signs written in a standard way.... I don't believe you have been using the SW 4.4 dictionary feature with your SignNet group in Brazil? If so, you might consider building a good SW 4.4 dictionary in Brazilian Sign Language, since it can contribute to sign spelling standardization while typing... Val ;-) ---------------- Antonio Carlos da Rocha Costa wrote: >> There seems to be lacking a common background that would enable >>the reader to "fill in the blanks". Is that due to the fact that they >>are "new" to SignWriting? That they are very "few" and can't interact >>with others outside the hours they meet at the university? Or is that >>due to the preference for "simplified" writings that I may have >>induced in them :-) ? >> >> Does anyone working with larger groups noticed a different situation? >>Does anyone know of anybody using written sign languages outside the >>"formal" context in which (s)he has learnt (or is being taught) how to >>read and write? Does that person writes "detailed" or "simplified"? >> >> All the best, >> >> Ant ? io Carlos | ||||||||
|
|