Voting on PUDLs dictionary

Wayne Smith wayne at MRLANGUAGE.COM
Fri Mar 26 23:36:19 UTC 2004

Bill -
     Well thought-out listing of what a good dictionary should include.
I'll be referring to it as I put my TSL dictionary together.  Footnote:
"entymology" is the study of bugs.  You mean "etymology", no?
      - Wayne

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Reese" <wreese01 at TAMPABAY.RR.COM>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 2:18 PM
Subject: Re: Voting on PUDLs dictionary

> Stephen,
> Don't let the following discourage you.  :-)
> It's a "wish list" of what a dictionary could be - with the aim at
> enhancing the literacy of the one using the dictionary.
> 1. "Me help you" seems more like a "Usage" rather than a "Definition".
> Perhaps a separate field could be created for Usage.
> 2. We could have a "Pronunciation" listing which could use the special
> symbols Val has created to aid in forming a sign.
> 3. "(Verb)" is a "Parts of Speech" item and could be a separate
> listing.  Some signs may be nouns and verbs and a separate entry could
> be used for both.  Then there are signs used as pronouns, adjectives,
> adverbs, prepositions, or conjunctions.
> 4.  Then there are Inflected Forms.  For instance, when we sign "you" or
> "me" using the index finger and pointing, we are using the same basic
> handshape.  But when we make the plural sign "us" we use a different
> sign altogether.  This is an inflected form.  I'm not sure if signing
> "before" or "future" before or after a verb sign (such as "come") would
> constitute an inflected form of the main entry ("come") but it would be
> interesting to explore this possibility.  Whatever, the idea is that we
> could have an entry for inflected forms.
> 5. Of course, Definitions would be just that and we could list them
> according to which ones are most frequently used with the most
> frequently used definition first.  That could be a voting item.  And how
> do we define ASL?  With English gloss, with ASL, or both?  :-)
> 6. We could have Restrictive Labels.
> This could be something that is "Slang" or "Informal."
> It could  include "Illiterate" forms of a sign (like home signs) and
> "Dialectal" forms (signs that are used in a certain area - like "New
> York" or "Boston").
> Some signs could be listed which are "Archaic" or "Obsolete," such as
> the old signs for "China", "Japan" and "Russia", which were changed to
> be more politically correct.  The old signs could still be listed but
> labeled as "Obsolete."  And there are many signs that are said to be
> used by the "older signers" and their use may be deemed "Archaic."
> We could have some Locality Labels as well, which may indicate the
> country of use.  For instance, ASL may be used outside of the U.S. and
> there may be an ASL sign in that other locality that would be different
> than the one used in the U.S.
> Field Labels could identify signs that are used in a certain field of
> endeaver, such as "Chemistry" or "Biology."
> We could have a Foreign label also for any signs that are of a foreign
> sign language but used in day-to-day ASL conversation.  Off hand, I
> can't think of any sign but in English we may be familiar with "Hasta la
> Vista!"  While not adopted in the language itself, it's still used and
> we could give the language from which it originates.
> 7. Rolling right along ... a Varient Form of a sign could be listed
> under the main entry.  This could be used where the sign is basically
> the same but has some minor variation.  For instance, some people may
> sign the basic sign for "help" by moving the dominant hand onto the
> non-dominant hand and others may put both hands together and make a
> short movement of both hands.  They both are meant to be "help" without
> any direction (such as "you help me") yet one way may be the most
> commonly used and the other can be listed as a variant.
> 8. There could be Cross-references as well, where it would be useful to
> direct attention to the definition of another sign.  For instance, the
> sign for "Father" may say "see Mother" where you can make a comparison
> noting the similarity between the signs.  Of course "Mother" could say
> "See Father" ... they usually do ... ;-)
> 9. Entymology.  This is a useful field in ASL when we would like to know
> which signs are native and which came from the French sign language that
> was adopted as the basis of ASL.  We could even list signs that ASL has
> adopted from SEE or CASE.
> 10. We could even have "Synonyms" where two completely different signs
> have the same meaning and each are listed with the other sign.  Or even
> "Antonyms" which shows a sign that has the opposite meaning.
> Just food for thought.
> Bill
> Stephen Slevinski wrote:
> >Hi Adam,
> >
> >I have changed the voting page.  It should make more sense now.  I hope.
> >
> >And about the definitions...  The definitions can be used for many
> >They can describe the origins of the sign, where it is used, what the
> >means, ...
> >
> >I do not know what form they should take.  However, the definitions will
> >displayed in SignWriting.  Here is a suggestions that I made for help_3:
> >"(verb) me help you."
> >
> >So before you suggest a definition, you may want to use the translation
> >to verify that it looks the way that you want.
> >
> >-Stephen Slevinski
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: SignWriting List [mailto:SW-L at ADMIN.HUMBERC.ON.CA]On Behalf Of
> >Adam Frost
> >Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 9:37 PM
> >Subject: Re: Voting on PUDLs dictionary
> >
> >
> >Stephen and everyone,
> >
> >I tried PUDL with the voting. I was confused. Is the yes or no question
> >asking if the old name should be kept? Or is it the new name? I wanted to
> >cast my vote, but I wasn't sure what to put.
> >Also, about the definitions, what form do you want them to follow, if
> >.....A dictionary form that has the part of speech etc, or just
> >"what-the-sign-means" definition?
> >
> >Adam
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar  o  get it now!
> >
> >---
> >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
> >Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 3/5/2004
> >
> >
> >

More information about the Sw-l mailing list