Writing Dialogues in Signed Languages

Thu Sep 8 14:51:07 UTC 2005

Valerie,

    I'm very curious about what you are saying on writing dialogues.

    1) How to display the signers: from top, around the common space 
betwen them? side by side, in a line, all seem from a distant point of view?

    2) How to display the dialogue objects )reference points as you 
mentioned them): in the common space between the signers, with the 
signers around them? spread along the line of signers, in the second 
case above?

    3) In any case, how to display spatial relations between the dialog 
objects? For instance, if we are talking about a pencil that is on a 
book that is on a table?

    Of course, I'm not asking that you have ready made solutions for 
those aspects :-) Neither for all the other aspects that I'm not aware 
of, but that will certainly arise when trying to solve the problem.

    But the reason I'm bringing the issue to the list is that I felt, 
from the talks with the french colleagues, that the problem of 
representing dialogues is a central one for them. To the point that I 
would say that the acceptability of SignWriting to them depends 
precisely on it. Sure, they are all lecturers and researchers, and 
almost all are non deaf. But I feel that, at the moment at least, they 
are having a strong say on SignWriting in France.

   By the way, do you know that Marianne Stumpf spent six months this 
year, in Toulouse and Paris, teaching and explaining SignWriting in 
various universities and deaf schools, including deaf associations? All 
interested in the subject of writing sign languages had the opportunity 
to meet her, and squeeze her :-) to solve their doubts about SignWriting.

   The talks I had with some of them happened after Marianne's stay, and 
I felt that the issue of writing dialogues is the crucial one for them.

   Just to let you know my personal view of what is happening in France.

   All the best,

   Antônio Carlos

Valerie Sutton wrote:

> SignWriting List
> September 7, 2005
> 
> Steve Slevinski wrote:
> 
>> It seems we are talking about two related, but different topics:  
>> Written dialogues by a writer and transcribed dialogs by an observer.
>>
> 
> 
> Val writes:
> I can see how you might think that, but actually no. I could write a  
> dialogue between three people signing around a common reference point  
> without seeing it on video, although I would prefer to use video,  
> because I am not a native signer and I don't want to hurt the  languages 
> with my non-Deaf accent...but having said that...we are  talking about 
> something unique to signed languages that does not  exist in written 
> English that I know of...namely pointing to a common  reference point, 
> or referring to that object, within a group of five  people let's 
> say...and they all point in the direction of the common  reference 
> point, and since they are standing at different angles to  that 
> reference point, the arrows change visually because it depends  on the 
> direction of where the reference point is to their body in the  
> conversations...
> 
> 
>>
>> In movie scripts, there is never any confusion about who is saying  
>> what. There is always the character’s name, followed by what they  said.
>>
> 
> Sure. In that kind of a script, using spoken languages. But that does  
> not have anything to do with this very unique issue that belongs to  
> signed language scripts...whether you write from video or not...it is  a 
> little like Lanes....there is a special Lane for reference  points...we 
> can talk more about that when someone gives us a video  clip that we can 
> transcribe to show people what I mean...then later  we could program 
> that into SignPuddle Lanes someday....
> 
> This is like writing group dances with many people holding on to the  
> same prop...
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> In fictional novels, the speaker is not always identified. The  
>> speaker can be assumed by context and convention. Or the speaker  can 
>> be left ambiguous for dramatic effect. When the speaker is  
>> identified, the most often used convention is "he said". This  
>> convention is so well used and expected that it often disappears  into 
>> the background. Some inexperienced writers try to improve the  
>> convention "he said" by using different synonyms for "said".  However, 
>> "he yelled, he slurred, he murmured, he lisped, he  whimpered, he ..." 
>> is not an improvement because it draws attention  to itself, while 
>> continuous use of "he said" informs the reader  while not drawing 
>> attention to itself.
>>
> 
> Yes. This is true in English. But it has nothing to do with common  
> Reference Points in signed languages.
> 
> 
>>
>>
>> Because most sign languages use a topic-comment sentence structure,  I 
>> think it makes sense to put the character’s name first. The  character 
>> is the topic and what the person said is the comment. If  used 
>> consistently, it should blend into the background and become  similar 
>> to "he said": informative and unobtrusive. I do believe  that changing 
>> the color of the signers name helps differentiate  between who is 
>> signing and what they sign. For black and white  printing, the name of 
>> the signer could be gray rather than color.
>>
> 
> I love the color markers. I agree that color could be used for PDF  
> documents and not everyone has to print it out...and color costs for  
> printing are going down anyways...
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> And while a transcribed dialog would most likely be third person,  it 
>> is also possible to write in first and second person as well.  Sign 
>> language writers and readers have a lot of fun work ahead.
>>
> 
> OK. Well when we see some Signwritten documents with a conversation  for 
> 5 people or whatever, we can re-visit your points here and try to  apply 
> them...Many thanks for this...
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Using different columns for different characters is an interesting  
>> idea. It allows for simultaneous signing between multiple signers.  I 
>> usually dislike the idea of adding special purpose symbols to the  
>> IMWA, however some type of markup is needed to illustrate that two  
>> signers are signing at the same time, rather than one after the other.
>>
>>
>> What an interesting time we live in..
>>
> 
> 
> Yes. We don't have any choice but to write Reference Points in  
> conversations in signed languages, Steve...It is a part of the  language 
> and the symbols for it already exist in the IMWA...it is how  to apply 
> them in columns that is the point and we will learn through  experience!!
> 
> Val ;-)
> 

-- 
Antônio Carlos da Rocha Costa
Escola de Informática - UCPel