SW Handwriting Course Lesson 1 Posted!

Paul Hendriks gebaerdenschrift at PLH.LU
Mon Jan 15 21:06:34 UTC 2007

Jonathan wrote:
> 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)
Yes, i done it the same way for the flathand, as seen on this older 
online-lesson (http://www.signwriting.org/lessons/cursive/curs011.html)
>   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.*/
Hmmm, maybe you're right. Must think about and see if i can familiar 
with topless flathand :-)
personally ... i think, that signwriting-handwriting will work the same 
way with every person than handwriting words from a spoken language. Ask 
ten (or even more) People to write by hand the same phrase in the same 
language, shure you will always see a difference in these handwriting, 
some will me good readable, others will only be readable by the writer 
himself. Every writer has his own way to write, i think so will 
signwriting-handwriting also be. For taking notes for your own purposes, 
it's not nessesary that other people are able to read, but if you will 
share signwriting-handwriting documents with other people it's a good 
idea (as you already mentionned) to have a basic standard (in my point 
of view, this standard will be close to signwriting-handprinting - as 
concerns exchanging documents).
> 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?*/???????
Good Question, i'm waiting for an answer too.
> 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.
> Jonathan
Hmmm, next Weekend i will show some horizontal-index-finger-handforms to 
Samuel, and ask him to write these down. I'm really curious to see if he 
realize if there ia a gap ;-)
But if the gap is the problem to read, what about Signwriting-Printing 
where has always been a gap in horizontal handshapes?
In sw-handwriting i try to make the gap bigger as the one i see in sw-print.

> 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/20070115/37b28a99/attachment.html>

More information about the Sw-l mailing list