SW Video Captions Receptive Expressive

[Tini Pel]

I agree whole heartedly with Ingvild,

Tini.


On 18-Apr-07, at 6:56 AM, Ingvild Roald wrote:

> You ask why caption signed videos?
>
> I would say it will be a great help in teaching and learning  
> SignWriting,
> and it helps spreading the message. Otherwise I agree with you:  
> captioning
> in the same signed language is not a great market. But captioning in
> another signed language might be ... Then the video would have to be
> edited to make pauses at natural places in the signed text, so that a
> viewer could digest both the signed and the written message. This  
> would be
> a great tool for teaching a second (or third, or.. ) sign language.
>
> Ingvild
>
> sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu skrev 15. april 2007 kl. 06:08 +0000:
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: "Valerie Sutton" <signwriting at MAC.COM>
>>> Reply-To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>>> To: sw-l at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
>>> CC: "Short James" <jshort at harkle.com>
>>> Subject: [sw-l] SW Video Captions Receptive Expressive
>>> Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 12:07:33 -0700
>>>
>>> SignWriting List
>>> April 14, 2007
>>>
>>> Ingvild Roald wrote:
>>>> I agree that for transcription and captioning, receptive is easier.
>> But
>>>> we should all agree on some way to tell that we are writing   
>>>> receptive,
>>>> say we used the qutation mark symbols for that? Just a  suggestion
>>>
>>> Hello Ingvild and Everyone!
>>>
>>> You are absolutely correct that there are several issues  
>>> connected  with
>>> captioning, whether it be Receptive or Expressive, that need to  be
>>> discussed by all of us...This is an exciting time...
>>>
>>> I have changed the name of this thread to SW Video Captions  
>>> Receptive
>>> Expressive, so we can discuss the issues...
>>>
>>> I am also including James Short in the discussion. James works in
>>> captioning video and media on the internet, and directs  
>>> Harkle.com  (Hi
>>> James!)....and is also on our Board, and has helped us with our   
>>> videos
>>> before...
>>>
>>> So here is what is on my mind...
>>>
>>> I believe there will be a need for BOTH kinds of   
>>> captioning..Receptive
>> and
>>> Expressive, depending on the circumstance...
>>>
>>> For example, when I transcribed Goldilocks from video, we created
>> printed
>>> books from that transcription. The printed books are in the   
>>> Expressive.
>>> That is what Deaf people have requested for printed books.
>>>
>>> Let us imagine creating a Goldilocks video with captions to   
>>> coordinate
>>> with those books. In that case, wouldn't the teacher want  the  
>>> captions
>> to
>>> match the printed books?
>>>
>>> So we could do BOTH a Receptive and Expressive captioning of the  
>>> same
>>> video, for different purposes....
>>>
>>> Or do you all disagree? What is your opinion?
>>>
>>> Val ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> I have one question about captioning signed videos... As a hearing
>> person, I
>> know I like captioning on my favourite TV shows because I can read  
>> the
>> captioning if I miss what the actors said... but I can look at the
>> captioning and listen to the dialogue at the same time because I'm  
>> using
>> two
>> different senses.  With signed videos, you have to choose whether  
>> you're
>> reading the captioning or watching the signing.  Is it really that  
>> useful?
>>
>> I like the SW captioning, don't get me wrong... I just think it  
>> would be
>> more useful on spoken videos than signed videos.  Just a thought...
>>
>> As for receptive vs. expressive captioning (on the assumption that  
>> nobody
>> else agrees with what I said above - smile!), I personally like
>> expressive
>> because that's what I'm used to reading... even though it doesn't  
>> match
>> what
>> I see the signer doing, it looks more natural to me.  Of course, for
>> people
>> who are used to reading receptive SW like Val, Charles and some of  
>> the
>> others... for you, it might look more natural to see receptive  
>> captioning.
>>
>> What would be a reason for switching from expressive to receptive  
>> within
>> a
>> document?  I know there was a suggestion that in a conversation one
>> "speaker" might be written expressively and the other receptively,  
>> but
>> having the three lanes to mimic body posture would handle that more
>> naturally than even quotation marks.  Are there any other reasons?
>>
>> Just asking...
>> KJ
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Fine Dining & Fancy Food. Check Out This Collection Of Good Eats.
>> http://local.live.com/?mkt=en-ca/?v=2&cid=A6D6BDB4586E357F!378
>>
>>
>
>
>
>