<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
<P>Hello list,</P>
<P>I read in a book about sign linguistics that the term 'classifier' indicates the shape of the hands. There are numerous terms for the constructions discribing a situation. Polycomponential verb, polysynthetic sign, ...</P>
<P>I use the prefix 'Cl-' in the Flemish signpuddle.</P>
<P><A href="http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-BE-nl/search.php?sign=cl-bergen&search=cl&type=any">http://signbank.org/signpuddle/sgn-BE-nl/search.php?sign=cl-bergen&search=cl&type=any</A></P>
<P>Greetings Kathleen<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Nancy Emery" <nemery@u.washington.edu>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu
<DIV></DIV>>To: sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: [sw-l] Adding Classifiers to SignPuddle Dictionaries
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:13:26 -0800
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>that will be very cool in future when that is possible, Stephen! you are
<DIV></DIV>>right, I am interested in being able to modify for temporary uses - because
<DIV></DIV>>a classifier construction is like packing a whole sentence into the space of
<DIV></DIV>>a sign, and there are too many possible classifier-sentences to put them all
<DIV></DIV>>in the dictionary. When that feature is possible I may use Signmaker for
<DIV></DIV>>transcribing videos, since I can't print from SW Java now anyhow, I can just
<DIV></DIV>>as well make a screen capture of an e-mail as of a SW Java page.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>for now it seems like putting the classifier handshapes in, using the CL:3
<DIV></DIV>>style notation, makes sense just to let people know what they are, even if
<DIV></DIV>>they can't use them directly from the dictionary.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Nancy
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>on 3/15/05 3:41 PM, Stephen Slevinski at slevinski@signwriting.org wrote:
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> > Hi Val,
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > I think she was refering to sending mail with SignPuddle. When you send
<DIV></DIV>> > mail, you use gloss. You have no chance to modify the signs.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > This will change. In the future, you will be able to build emails
<DIV></DIV>> > interactively. First you could search for signs (by gloss or symbol),
<DIV></DIV>> > modify the sign (using SignMaker), and then add it to the email. When this
<DIV></DIV>> > is possible, having general classifiers in a dictionary would be more
<DIV></DIV>> > useful.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > -Stephen
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > -----Original Message-----
<DIV></DIV>> > From: owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu
<DIV></DIV>> > [mailto:owner-sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu]On Behalf Of Valerie Sutton
<DIV></DIV>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 6:23 PM
<DIV></DIV>> > To: sw-l@majordomo.valenciacc.edu
<DIV></DIV>> > Subject: Re: [sw-l] Adding Classifiers to SignPuddle Dictionaries
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > SignWriting List
<DIV></DIV>> > March 15, 2005
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > On Mar 15, 2005, at 2:26 PM, Nancy Emery wrote:
<DIV></DIV>> >> But for actually using them - since the location, movement and
<DIV></DIV>> >> orientation
<DIV></DIV>> >> have to be added anyway, since they depend on what is being said with
<DIV></DIV>> >> the
<DIV></DIV>> >> classifier, I'm not sure that it would be much more helpful to take the
<DIV></DIV>> >> handshape from the dictionary than just to compose the sign from
<DIV></DIV>> >> scratch....
<DIV></DIV>> >> It's just that in certain texts some classifier constructions are used
<DIV></DIV>> >> over
<DIV></DIV>> >> and over, and it is nice to be able to cut, paste and modify rather
<DIV></DIV>> >> than
<DIV></DIV>> >> rebuild the whole thing. But I don't know that dictionary signs can be
<DIV></DIV>> >> modified by the user anyway...
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > Signs can be modified in the public SignPuddles, if you are a
<DIV></DIV>> > Dictionary Editor with a password. I can invite you to be an Editor, if
<DIV></DIV>> > you wish, and you could try to enter a few classifiers and then point
<DIV></DIV>> > us to them on the web and we can all look at them...how about that? A
<DIV></DIV>> > good way to discuss the issue...
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > Val ;-)
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> </html>