UK Deaf leader argues for video technology

[Sandy Fleming]

I thought I'd try listing some of the more serious problems with video, 
as opposed to SW. Not forgetting that I'm not an educator, so my 
emphasis might be different from what the many teachers on this list 
would see as at the forefront.

1. I'm a writer in English and in Scots dialect - I've had a fair number 
of stories and poems published in these languages. Whenever I write a 
story it starts off as fairly poor compared to what I'm aiming for. It 
might take me five or six hours to write the first draft, and then 
there's much crossing out and writing extra bits, reading over and over 
again to see if it's just right and sounds natural, and general editing. 
Then comes copying the whole thing into the computer, and then more 
editing. By the end I'm changing very small details indeed, trying to 
get it just right. How am I supposed to do this in BSL with video? I'd 
have to somehow edit the whole story over and over again in my head, get 
it all memorised word-for-word, then get the whole thing told in one go, 
without mistakes - though I could try to tell the whole thing again and 
again until I fot it right! I think it has to be said that it would be 
impossible to produce a body of literature purely by video that would 
come anywhere near the quality (or even quantity) achievable in written 
languages.

2. What about supporting material such as glossaries, indexes and tables 
of contents? Again, completely impossible with video. Any researcher 
trying to locate a quote or cross-reference in a collection of video 
documentation is going to have a very hard time.

3. How would we accomplish other technological marvels and conveniences, 
such as Googling and Wikipediaing, in video?

4. In a language-learning situation, how do we emphasise in video the 
important aspects of the language? Currently, people learning BSL (for 
example), will try to improve their language skills by watching videos 
over and over, but unless they have a very dedicated and knowledgeable 
teacher, they don't pick up easily on what's important: is it meaningful 
that the signer raises one eyebrow, or looks to one side, or that his 
hands are slightly clawed rather than flat? In SW it's possible to see 
what matters in the language because the writer only writes what's 
meaningful. Video shows everything, which is often not what we want.

I think these are worthwhile points, because they're not just things 
that don't work very well with video - they're things that don't work at 
all with video.

I think with some detractors there's the unspoken assumption that the 
Deaf aren't going to even want to accomplish anything in literature like 
the hearing world has, and it boils down to an equality issue once again.

Sandy

Valerie Sutton wrote:

> SignWriting List
> October 19, 2006
>
> Thank you, Sandy and Bill, for your input, and thanks for telling  
> people about SignWriting, Bill. More people are open to the idea now,  
> so it actually helps quite a bit if you casually mention it to  
> people...it is the only way they will learn about it...I am not  
> surprised at their curiosity...that is a common reaction too...
>
> Val ;-)