Writing Dialogues in Signed Languages

[Stuart Thiessen]

I would agree that the time has come for more direct typing as opposed 
to the dictionary approach as it has been.  I do think we could get the 
best of both worlds through an auto-completion feature because that 
would allow the beginners to try the symbols they know, then the 
dictionary can suggest signs that fit some of the symbol criteria.  
This would completely avoid the spoken language interference problem 
that we currently have with glossing-based dictionaries.

If the gloss is needed as an added teaching tool for bi-lingual 
instruction, then the gloss could still appear next to signs in the 
auto-completion process. That could be done as part of the 
autocompletion window or perhaps even as a "hint" that could appear 
over a sign. I assume there would be a setting somewhere to enable or 
disable the appearance of glosses.

Thanks,

Stuart

On Sep 15, 2005, at 10:56, Valerie Sutton wrote:

> SignWriting List
> September 15, 2005
>
> Antônio Carlos da Rocha Costa wrote:
>> The problem that those linguists seem to see is not with SignWriting 
>> itself. The problem they seem to see is with the use (and abuse) of 
>> dictionaries: the over emphasis in the use of electronic dictionaries 
>> to support the writing of sign languages in computer editors may 
>> inhibit the creativity of the language, specially in connection with 
>> the iconicity needs of expressive conversations.
>>
>>   I think this is another important point that french sign linguists 
>> are making, and that the SignWriting community has to think about:
>>   - should dictionaries be really present in SW text editors?
>>   - should they be easily accessible to support text writing?
>>   - or, should they be provided as a very separate feature, to be 
>> used just for consultation purposes as conventional printed 
>> dictionaries of oral languages are?
>>
>
> ------------------------
>
> Hello Everyone, and Antonio Carlos -
> Yes. This issue of dictionary usage when typing goes back to the 
> history of SignWriting on computers. The placement of the dictionary 
> feature in SignWriter 2e did not happen immediately. The dictionary 
> features were added later to the SignWriter program. (Note: the first 
> SignWriter was developed not for DOS, but for the Apple 2e and 2c 
> computers back in 1985-1986).
>
> In the beginning of SignWriter development, we were typing directly in 
> SignWriter without any dictionary, and slowly skills were developed to 
> type directly in SignWriting. But it was hard for people who were 
> beginners in SignWriting itself, to also be beginners in typing the 
> symbols. In other words, there was so much to learn that it became 
> overwhelming for people.
>
> So when Rich Gleaves built in the dictionary feature into SignWriter 
> 1.0 for the Apple 2e, it was very welcome, because beginners did not 
> feel frightened any longer...They could see how someone else wrote a 
> sign...not because they didn't want to learn to type directly in 
> SignWriting, but because they didn't know SignWriting itself. Through 
> the experience of searching for signs in the dictionary, and then 
> pasting those signs into documents, people were able to learn to read 
> SignWriting symbols. So the dictionary feature became BOTH a teaching 
> tool and a document creator...
>
> So I will tell you my positive point of view on this issue. I think 
> the researchers whom you refer to, Antonio Carlos, are correct. It is 
> best to type directly in a language rather than being dependent on 
> pasting from dictionaries. I think we have graduated now to a new era 
> for SignWriting. There are many people now, who can read SW documents, 
> through the experience of the dictionaries...and that has made some 
> skilled signwriters. Now the skilled signwriters may be more ready for 
> direct typing, but perhaps back in the 1980s this was not possible, 
> since SignWriting was so new...
>
> So perhaps both methods of input will always be needed...Direct typing 
> is for advanced signers and signwriters is my guess...because they 
> have to know the standard spellings of their written language and be 
> able to think directly in their signed language, without thinking in 
> any spoken language...
>
> That is the wonderful experience of typing directly in SignWriting 
> without a dictionary...you live and compose your document in a world 
> with no spoken language and it is wonderful!
>
> (This has nothing to do with teaching Deaf children...I know that is a 
> different world)...
>
> My thoughts for what it is worth!
>
> Val ;-)
>
>
>