[sw-l] Handwriting and idiosyncratic SW

[Sandy Fleming]

Hi All!

Antônio Carlos wrote:

>     Handwriting the symbols of SignWriting may help to ease the writing of
> sign languages, but it seems to me that it will not be enough. At some
> point in the future (after the SignWriting system is well assimilated by
> everybody), people will be forced to start to establish conventions
> about what details are irrelevant in the production of a sign and, thus,
> what should be left out of the standard representation of each sign.

I decided to translate the BSL potted autobiography I wrote into
straightforward English to make a comparison. In the English I counted 42
words but in the SW BSL I counted only 23 signs. That's really about the
nature of the languages, so we can't change that - but it does show that
although signs may be more complicated to form than words - eg, there's
orientation and suchlike to think about - there are only about half as many
of them.

Ignoring punctuation and spaces, in the English I counted 166 letters, but
in the SW BSL I counted only 111 symbols. That was counting each head and
handshape as a single symbol (plus each arrow, contact symbol &c), but
counting smaller details doesn't make a huge difference. For example, if I
add a count of the number of symbols making up a facial expression, counting
each eys separately and puffed cheeks and suchlike, it still only comes to
127 symbols.

Admittedly handshapes can be more complicated to write than letters, but not
by as much as you might think, once you're used to writing them properly (ie
as in Val's block printing manual). Roman letters are _also_ complicated,
we're just so skilled at writing them that we forget that they're not so
simple when starting out!

So with this preliminary examination I tend to conclude that the actual
amount of writing currently required for SW BSL versus alphabetic English is
comparable, and there's no need to go overboard with trying to simplify SW.

For handwriting, all that I think is required to put SW on a par with the
Roman alphabet is:

1. people to reach the same writing proficiency in SW as in oral alphabets;

2. simplification of some very common symbols that take a lot of strokes,
for example, the asterisk and the three arrows representing a shaking
movement. The three arrows probably work just as well without the
arrowheads, and I'm trying out practicing writing something cursive that
_looks_ quite like an asterisk at the moment (see attachment ;)

I've a feeling the ideas Val is going to put down in her forthcoming
handwriting manual will go beyond this, so I'm quite content with SW as it
is (or will be when that manual comes out!  :)

Funny thing, though - I used to think the "flat hand" shape was the real
bugbear of the SW system, but now I've written it so often it doesn't seem a
problem any more.

Sandy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: aste_risk.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 14577 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20041006/e0f6ccbb/attachment.gif>