AW: [sw-l] Mixing plane

[Charles Butler]

Hi Stefan, Sergio, et al,

Here is how I see it, after much review.



Valerie, you are the inventor, please show all facings for these two hands as still so that we can see what combinations of hands actually show the same hand positions.  You are the authority here.  I agree with you, Stefan, position 3 is clearer, one doesn't have to remember (o yeah, the hand is split, which means it MUST be palm facing the reader rather than position 2, edge on).

Charles



Stefan Wöhrmann <stefanwoehrmann at GEBAERDENSCHRIFT.DE> wrote:
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
Hi Charles –



well I would like to understand your point of view.



For me both different spellings are the description of a “two hands still  “   - no movement involved



both graphics describe the same .-



I prefer the spelling with the combination of two different  planes ( top down and  wall plane )



Stefan ;-)



---------------------------------


Von: owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu [mailto:owner-sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] Im Auftrag von Charles Butler
Gesendet: Montag, 6. Juni 2005 23:45
An: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
Betreff: Re: [sw-l] Mixing plane




I look at your example, Sergio, and I see two different signs.  In one, the two-hand is pointed forward with the back of the hand up, going apparently under a flat hand with the palm toward the reader.  In the second, the two hand is going under a flat hand facing down, different orientation, not the same two hands at all.  I would, for myself, not even write the split in the flat hand in the second instance as the hand is pointed to the side, and therefore you see the edge of the hand, not the split.





 This is the sign for "prophesy" (to foresee the future).  Very similar to your sign.

Valerie Sutton <sutton at signwriting.org> wrote:


SignWriting List
June 6, 2005

Hello Sergio!
I prefer your first writing. Yes. We mix two planes within one sign
all the time. I believe the first one is better, because the symbols
are less complex. There may be others who disagree,
though..smile...So you can technically write it either way and it is
correct.... Val ;-)

----------------------




Sergio wrote:

> Dear SW List,
>
> I want ask to you if can I mixing two plane or point of view in a
> Sign. Example:
>
>
>
 Or the rule say that I need make it in the same plane, example:
>
>
>
 What is better ?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Sergio Ribeiro


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050608/7fed514e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: swsample.JPG
Type: image/pjpeg
Size: 20202 bytes
Desc: 68273970-swsample.JPG
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050608/7fed514e/attachment.bin>