[sw-l] Detailed and Simplified Entries in Dictionaries

[Bill Reese]

Steve,

I'm just thinking of all the little things that we find in dictionary 
entries.  For instance, the main word is in a boldface font- would we 
need to similarly have a way to focus on the defined sign?  Perhaps, it 
too could be in bold - written with thicker lines.

And notice how the word is broken into syllables - with a short hyphen 
separating them.  Can we do something similar in SignWriting?

The pronunciation of the sign could include the pronunciation guides 
that Val has made.  Like the body symbol that makes it possible to show 
where on the body the sign is made.  We've been talking about simple 
versus detailed writing but I haven't seen those symbols utilized yet.

Notice that some of the words are italic - could we do something similar 
in SignWriting?

What I'm suggesting is to see if we could come up with something that 
could, as near as possible and with the many symbols already available 
to us, duplicate the look and feel of a dictionary entry.

Bill


Steve Slevinski wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> I do not believe we need new symbols for dictionary entries.  For sign 
> language dictionaries, each entry has three sections of information.  
> Spelling, Sequence, and additional.  This relates to your example of 
> spelling, phonetics, and everything else.
>
> Spelling
> --------
> IMWA symbols in space. 
> This is the sign image that we read.
>
>
>
>
> Spelling Sequence
> ------------------
> An ordered list of IMWA symbols used for dictionary lookup.
>
>
>
>
> Additional information
> ----------------------
> Any other informaiton about the sign. 
> This information can be text, SignWriting, image, video, whatever.
>
> For additional information, I am currently considering... role of 
> sign, variants, and synonyms.
>
> Role of sign
> -----------
> Verb, noun, classifier...  Anyone have a complete list or a better title?
> What about directional verbs?
>
> Variants
> --------
> Variants are different spellings for the same sign.  For any sign, 
> there are a huge number of variants because of the amount and type of 
> detail that is recorded.  Some signs can be written on the vertical or 
> horizontal plane.  Signs can be written detailed or simplified. Symbol 
> placement alone allows for a near unlimited number  of variants. 
>
> Synonyms
> ----------
> Synonyms represent the same idea, but different signs.  Dialects and 
> generations are the greatest source of synonyms. 
>
> some of my thoughts,
> -Steve
>
>
> Bill Reese wrote:
>
>> Val,
>>
>> One of the purposes of the question was to explore the issue and 
>> determine if there are any areas that may need further symbols.   
>> It's an exploratory process.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> Valerie Sutton wrote:
>>
>>> SignWriting List
>>> June 19, 2005
>>>
>>> Bill Reese wrote:
>>> ....For instance, the following is an entry in an english dictionary 
>>> for "pronunciation."   How could this be done in SignWriting?
>>>
>>> Main Entry: pro·nun·ci·a·tion 
>>> Pronunciation: pr&-"n&n(t)-sE-'A-sh&n also ÷-"naun(t)-
>>> Function: noun
>>> Etymology: Middle English pronunciacion, from Middle French 
>>> prononciation, from Latin pronuntiation-, pronuntiatio, from pronuntiare
>>> : the act or manner of pronouncing something
>>> - pro·nun·ci·a·tion·al  /-shn&l, -sh&-n&l/ adjective
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------
>>>
>>> Bill - This is a great question!
>>> Ha...I am new to this too...but for now, regarding the detailed and 
>>> the simplified...examples are clear in this attachment...see number 
>>> 4..it is very very detailed...but in your entry above there are not 
>>> only detailed and simplified spellings, but also a definition about 
>>> the English word described in English, and we have the equivalent 
>>> definitions written in ASL about ASL starting in SignBank now, 
>>> thanks to Deaf contributor Adam Frost, who is writing the ASL 
>>> definitions for us...so the layout style of the dictionary has to be 
>>> determined by the editors of that dictioinary, and then create a 
>>> standard throughout the book...SignBank is the closest we have to 
>>> that idea right now...I can share some of this with you tomorrow - 
>>> Thanks for your input... Val ;-)
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050619/21793cb8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1728 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050619/21793cb8/attachment.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3372 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050619/21793cb8/attachment-0001.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 11576 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20050619/21793cb8/attachment.gif>