SW Handwriting Course Lesson 1 Posted!

[Jonathan]

Paul Hendriks wrote:
> 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?
It seems to be mostly a problem when the gap isn't big enough to be noticed.
> In sw-handwriting i try to make the gap bigger as the one i see in
> sw-print.
>
> Paul
>>
>>
>> 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>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>>
>

-- 

Jonathan & Yolaine Duncan
8-)  & ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20070116/6015a1b8/attachment.htm>