SW Handwriting Course Lesson 1 Posted!

Jonathan duncanjonathan at YAHOO.CA
Mon Jan 15 01:05:25 UTC 2007

I did my homework before Val cleared up the topless issue the what was
confusing some of the participants.  I wasn't confused but I didn't do
it the way Val expected me too either.  For the horizontal flat hand I
put a line through the symbol to show that it was horizontal.   I did it
this way because this is how I had seen it on the website about
handwriting (not this course)  I left the fist with the index finger
topless because I figured that if the fist was topless the fist with
index should also be topless.  I didn't find it confusing, it just made
sense to me at the time.  In retrospect I would've made the horizontal
flat hand topless too.  That way I would of had everything topless.  I
think it is confusing having some horizontal symbols topless and others
not.  I guess I could put an extra line through all the symbols but that
is two lines longer to write that the topless method.  It would be nice
to have some kind of a standard.  If we do things one way for one symbol
and another for the same position on another symbol, it will get quite
confusing.  But one thing I was wondering, is it possible for all hand
shapes to be drawn topless???????? If not then we aren't any closer to
having a standard for handwriting horizontal symbols.
    I also share Stuart's point of view about the gap not always being
noticeable.  In fact, when I was trying to show Allan to draw the
horizontal handwriting index finger that Val had written and scanned
from the fixed up web page which I had printed out, he drew it without a
gap.  I told him, "Your's isn't the same as the one on the page".   He
looked at what he wrote and at the printed page and claimed that they
were the same.  I told him to look again.  He couldn't figure out what I
thought he was doing wrong.  Then he looked at it really closely and
realized that there was a gap there and fixed his lesson.


Stuart Thiessen wrote:
> I am wondering though if there would be a way to distinguish the floor
> handshapes without the finger gap (at least where it is individual
> fingers. In printing, I don't have a problem with the gap because the
> computer takes care of writing the symbol. But, I think that it is
> easier to miswrite the finger gap when handwriting. Just thinking
> about when we are doing quick writing or notes in a class. it seems to
> me that we would want to have the symbol be distinguishable enough
> that we don't have to worry about the finger accidentally looking
> connected or something. Just a thought.
> Stuart
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 22:22, Valerie Sutton wrote:
>> SignWriting List
>> January 8, 2007
>> Stuart Thiessen wrote:
>>> I worked on it as well during my lunch hour today. I did have one
>>> question on page 5 of the PDF, and the second sign down. For the
>>> index handshape there, I don't recall seeing that in your list of
>>> handwriting shapes that you taught in this lesson. I wondered if we
>>> should substitute a different sign or if you planned to show that
>>> one but forgot. (I understand how that can happen.)
>> Hello Stuart!
>> Thanks for this feedback. You are right. It should have been there in
>> that lesson. I didn't really forget, but because it was so late at
>> night, and I was so tired, I thought maybe it would be obvious that
>> it was the same as the Printing...so I left it out. Now I see it
>> confused lots of people so that was the wrong call...
>> So I will be posting this shortly...it is not on the web yet... but
>> here is an explanation...
>> <IndexFinger.png>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20070114/ee7c9cbe/attachment.html>

More information about the Sw-l mailing list