Advantages of ASL GLoss for SignWriting

[Stephen Slevinski]

Hi Dan,

Good points.  Thanks for the feedback.

You are right... Once ASL becomes more standardized, ASL Gloss would not to
be needed.  However, I think it may serve as a good tool for deaf to learn
English and for hearing to learn ASL

Another point questions linguistic change versus terminolgical change.  This
is an excellent point because I have only accounted for terminology change.
This is an (incorrect) assumption that I made.  However, some sophistication
could be build into the translation program that could handle some of the
linguistic change.

I guess my question is how ASL Gloss would have handled translating the
speeches from 1917 and 1970 and if the result would be any better.

And the last point about teaching children...  That depends on the method
for teaching.  I support ASL first, SignWriting by hand then SignWriter, ASL
Gloss, and then Written Communication to teach English.

ASL Gloss becomes an official subject.  It will improve with time.  It
should be understood as an attempt to capture a signed language in text
form, and so imperfect.  It would be an easier way to teach English
vocabulary without teaching English grammar.

Written Communication is a method for teaching deaf students to learn to
read and write English by having them read and write English.  It's a mix
between a classroom and a online chat session.  The children communicate
with text: reading and writing.  The teacher is present to correct the
students in their English usage.  Over time, they learn English the same way
that hearing children learn English: they use it.  However, for the deaf,
English does not sound right, but it reads right.

Thinking out loud,
-Stephen Slevinski
www.pudl.info