<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Val,<br>
The way I sign "hundred" is different, depending on the person.
Some perceive 1-C-0-1 easier, while others need 1-0-1 and some need
me to mouth each number rather than "one hundred" or even mouth "one
oh one." I'll often go through possible combinations until I see
that it clicks with them. Most of the reason is simply because
they're not expecting a number, so anything that helps them see that
I'm signing numbers instead of words would work. Sometimes I need
to sign "number", first, so they're prepared. All this, of course,
is during discourse. And, like Kelly Jo, I'll pull the hand back
from the 1 when making the C.<br>
<br>
When Kelly Jo mentioned that (appends the C onto the first 1), I
thought of subscripts.<br>
<br>
Can manual signs be used as subscript or superscript? Would it be
too complicated? Would any particular part of a sign be considered
that way? I'm curious whether using subscripts after a one to
denote hundred, thousand, million, billion, etc, would be a way of
writing numbers in Signwriting, even if there is no comparative
sign, similar to how commas are used in other alphabets but are not
part of the spoken number. For example, in English "one million,
one hundred thirty-five thousand, 3 hundred and twenty-five" is
written 1,135,325. Both ways use different conventions to show the
number.<br>
<br>
Of course, that also supports writing with just numbers. And if a
book such as War and Peace is ever translated into a signed
language, there would be a need for a thousands marker.<br>
<br>
Do we need to go there? Do we need to consider the full possible
spectrum of a numbering system when writing?<br>
<br>
Bill<br>
<br>
<br>
On 9/22/2010 11:19 AM, Valerie Sutton wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:E0CC12B3-A952-458C-AD59-20ADC5785BED@signwriting.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">SignWriting List
September 21, 2010
Hello Kelly Jo and everyone!
I really appreciate your feedback...and hope others will also tell me how they feel...
ASL page numbers have really be a useful tool to start people reading SignWriting...everyone has to look down to find the page number, and when they do, they have the Arabic numeral on one side of the page, and the ASL page number on the other side of the page, and most ASL signers sit there and study the writing of the page numbers in ASL and don't even realize that they are getting reading experience from that...so it is one of many small ways to build reading skills in SignWriting...
But ASL page numbers are also different than when we are actually signing in sentences, because they need to be short and easy to glance at, to find what page you are on...
So for example, although I know ASL signers pull the hand back as you say, I wonder if for page numbers, that pull-back movement isn't too much detail? But if you are writing the number in the middle of an ASL sentence, then it would be a good idea to write the arrow pulling the hand back, to show accuracy...it is a question of how much detail we put into the writing of page numbers...
So I would love to see your writing of the page numbers in ASL in SignPuddle, Kelly Jo - thank you for offering this -
For right now, to explain - I already have numbers 1-181 in the ASL dictionary in SignPuddle, following the rather formal writing with the full C for 100 (the first example in the attached)....and now I considering adding two more alternatives for book designers to choose from...that way there are choices...
Which of the three feels best for you? (please see attached)
... imagine telling someone in ASL that you live in hotel room 181...which writing would feel best? I wonder if the third one, although not detailed, isn't the way most people would sign HOTEL ROOM 181? just three numbers 1...8...1 in a row? because it is a label on a door, rather than a part of a sentence? think of this at the bottom of page very tiny...
</pre>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
On Sep 21, 2010, at 8:35 PM, KJ wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Val,
My pleasure - it's an interesting question! I'm sitting here trying out different ways to sign 3-digit numbers, trying to feel which one is most natural. For the 101, I would use the spelling with the C in the middle, definitely.
What I find really interesting, as I look at that spelling of 135, is that it feels like it should be a four-digit number because there are four handshapes!
The "hundred" - whether it's signed with the full C or just the crooked fingers - is always pulled back toward the body a little, which is why I included the movement arrow in my writing. It also makes the two handshapes look like one unit, which is how it feels when I sign it - 1-C is one word, and the last two numbers are separate words. Just my opinion . . . but I knew a Deaf child who actually signed 1-C-0-1 for 101! It's like the C is a suffix on the hundreds digit.
I could write some other numbers the way I feel I'd sign them and save them into SignPuddle online, if you'd like.
Anyone else on the list have an opinion about this?
KJ
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>