<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
Hi Oscar,<br><br>I'm sorry, but I do not think that mirroring the video is a solution. It would be like viewing a left-handed signer, and you would have to remember the other conversions. <br>Mathematically, the receptive/expressive signing spaces are symmetrically placed/ mirrored according to a vertical line halfway between the signer and the viewer. <br>If all symbols were following the same rule when swirched between left/right and forward/backward, this could be managed mathematically. <br>In SignWriting, some symbols change filling (hand symbols), as well as orientation; whereas other symbols just change direction (forward/backward) and others stay just the same. <br>It is possible to work through the whole set of symbols and make sets/ groups of symbols that behave in the same way, and write the rules for them. But it is a big job.<br><br>I still wish you good luck with your work, and I'm sure that one day we will get this program, when someone gets the funding,<br><br>Ingvild
<br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div>> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 17:17:37 +0200<br>> From: oscar.koller@GMAIL.COM<br>> Subject: Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point<br>> To: SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> <br>> Just another idea:<br>> <br>> what about simply mirroring the video to be transcribed? That could be <br>> easily done! And then, the transcription is easily done in expressive form.<br>> <br>> Oscar.<br>> <br>> Am 02.10.2012 14:56, schrieb Charles Butler:<br>> > Thanks Ingvild,<br>> ><br>> > I am steadily going through the DEIT LIBRAS dictionary and putting it on<br>> > line (with permission). It gives me a chance to read the description,<br>> > look at both the illustration and the signwriting and transcribe it<br>> > again. It's more than 8000 signs, so by the time we get it all in, it<br>> > should rival the ASL dictionary in scope. I'm hoping to get permission<br>> > to work with INES (the sign language school in Rio de Janeiro) to add<br>> > the signs they have which are not currently in DEIT Libras.<br>> > Charles Butler<br>> > chazzer3332000@yahoo.com<br>> > 240-764-5748<br>> > Clear writing moves business forward.<br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > *From:* Ingvild Roald <iroald@HOTMAIL.COM><br>> > *To:* SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 7:02 AM<br>> > *Subject:* Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point<br>> ><br>> > Hi Charles,<br>> ><br>> > I was answering to the 'translate in your head' problem - which I see as<br>> > easier if it is done manually, not just cognitively. I do understand the<br>> > differnce between machine translation and manual/ personal translation,<br>> > and I do see your point. I hope that someday w will have an automatic<br>> > translation from video, but that will be at least as hard as<br>> > voice-recognition systems. For natural langugaes, that is most often a<br>> > huge task, because of the many personal and dialectical differences. - I<br>> > think that making an avatar signing from what is written in expressive,<br>> > to be viewed in receptive mode, is an easier and therefore more<br>> > available sort of program. To acheive this, the automatic transformation<br>> > between expressive and receptive writing would be a step. But this needs<br>> > time, and funding. In teh meantime, we have to struggle along doing this<br>> > tranformation by body and mind, and making the dictionary puddles as<br>> > well as the litterature puddles and others seadily bigger and better.<br>> ><br>> > Ingvild<br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 03:36:31 -0700<br>> > From: chazzer3332000@YAHOO.COM<br>> > Subject: Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point<br>> > To: SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> ><br>> > Ingvild, I understand, what I am talking about is machine translation,<br>> > and the machine has to be taught to read a video, as is, receptive, and<br>> > translate that into expressive. The point of machine translation is just<br>> > that, having a sufficiently large recognition program to translate a<br>> > third-party into expressive. Humans can internalize and write, a machine<br>> > has to be taught to do so.<br>> ><br>> > Sometimes watching a video I may get a hand wrong, or a twist in the<br>> > wrong direction, and if I write down what I see, I can then correct it<br>> > to the opposite. That's my bias, and my early history with SignWriting,<br>> > writing whatever I see, whether on my hands or someone else's.<br>> > Charles Butler<br>> > chazzer3332000@yahoo.com<br>> > 240-764-5748<br>> > Clear writing moves business forward.<br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > *From:* Ingvild Roald <iroald@HOTMAIL.COM><br>> > *To:* SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 6:09 AM<br>> > *Subject:* Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point<br>> ><br>> > As I see it, the easier way to convert from receptive to expressive for<br>> > writing, is to view the video and copy the sign you see by doing it<br>> > yourself. Then you write what you do, the sign as you are making it from<br>> > viewing the video. That is, do the translation /transistion manually<br>> > rather than 'in your head'.<br>> ><br>> > All the best,<br>> ><br>> > Ingvild<br>> ><br>> > > Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:02:50 +0200<br>> > > From: oscar.koller@GMAIL.COM<br>> > > Subject: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point<br>> > > To: SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> > ><br>> > > Hi Charles,<br>> > ><br>> > > thanks for your answer.<br>> > ><br>> > > > Oscar, as you have an assistant annotating video tapes, trying to<br>> > > > translate in your head to an expressive point of view may be driving<br>> > > > you crazy.<br>> > ><br>> > > Yes, I have been thinking about that too. And it would be preferable to<br>> > > do annotation from the receptive view point. However, I need the<br>> > > transcriptions in an expressive view point in order to match all the<br>> > > other entries in SignPuddle (as I use them to initialise my system). The<br>> > > manual annotations are intended to serve as evaluation of the<br>> > > initialized system, thus they need to match.<br>> > ><br>> > > If there was an automatic (mathematical) way of converting receptive<br>> > > into expressive view points, then we could do the "easier" annotation.<br>> > > But I learnt from Steve Slevinski, that this has not been implemented<br>> > > and to me it doesn't seem trivial to implement it.<br>> > ><br>> > > Or does anybody think differently?<br>> > ><br>> > > Regards, Oscar.<br>> > ><br>> > ><br>> > > Am 28.09.2012 13:51, schrieb Charles Butler:<br>> > > > Oscar, as you have an assistant annotating video tapes, trying to<br>> > > > translate in your head to an expressive point of view may be<br>> > driving you<br>> > > > crazy. One project in Belo Horizonte is using receptive SignWriting<br>> > > > specifically when annotating video tapes so that you see parallel<br>> > > > movements, not mirror movements when you look at them side by side. You<br>> > > > write what you see on the videotape, not reverse it to your own hands.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > What this means is that the videotaped person's left hand is on your<br>> > > > right, and the videotaped person's right hand is on your left. You have<br>> > > > to remember that you are writing another person's hands, not your own,<br>> > > > so when you look in a dictionary like Delegs or any of the current<br>> > > > SignPuddles, you will not find what you see on a videotape, but its<br>> > > > expressive equivalent.<br>> > > > Charles Butler<br>> > > > chazzer3332000@yahoo.com<br>> > > > 240-764-5748<br>> > > > Clear writing moves business forward.<br>> > > ><br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > > > *From:* Charles Butler <chazzer3332000@YAHOO.COM><br>> > > > *To:* SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> > > > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 7:29 AM<br>> > > > *Subject:* Re: help with signwriting<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Oscar,<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Reply, in the first sign, you are using a "both hands" arrow when the<br>> > > > hands are moving separately. If you are bringing the hands back toward<br>> > > > yourself, you need two arrows toward yourself, put them next to each<br>> > > > hand rather than in the middle. This is a common mistake as I'd be able<br>> > > > to read it, but the hands are not moving in a common path. This is a<br>> > > > common mistake, a single arrow is only used when both hands are<br>> > actually<br>> > > > together.<br>> > > ><br>> > > > In the second sign, your left hand is pointed downward, but you are<br>> > > > using a right hand arrow moving twice. Use a left hand arrow or a right<br>> > > > hand, not a mix. You could move your right hand in this fashion, but<br>> > > > your hand would be twisted outward rather awkwardly, unlikely that this<br>> > > > is what you mean.<br>> > > > Charles Butler<br>> > > > chazzer3332000@yahoo.com<br>> > > > 240-764-5748<br>> > > > Clear writing moves business forward.<br>> > > ><br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > > > *From:* Oscar Koller <oscar.koller@GMAIL.COM><br>> > > > *To:* SW-L@LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU<br>> > > > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 6:06 AM<br>> > > > *Subject:* help with signwriting<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Hello everybody,<br>> > > ><br>> > > > I added following appended 4 entries to the German Sign Puddle. The<br>> > > > editors noted in each case that the writing is not correct. Could<br>> > > > anybody explain to me, what should be changed?<br>> > > ><br>> > > > Thanks<br>> > > > Oscar.<br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > > ><br>> > ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> <br></div> </div></body>
</html>