AW: [sw-l] Re: How many symbols do we use in SignWriting?

Wed Aug 19 14:00:48 UTC 2009

Hi Maria, 

first of all - what an interesting project - smile. 

Second: the two spellings in your example are very, very different
performances - (handshape, movement, contact, ... )   From my point of view
you cannot talk of simplification. 

It might be a different question what kind of variation in spelling is
within an acceptance area to read different spellings of a sign as the
meaning and same performance of that given sign  - or when should we talk of
a different sign ( smile) 

Third:  Show a specific very short SL - video (1 phrase!!!) to 10 different
persons who are familiar with the SL and ask them to repeat what say saw.
You should videotape this performance. What will happen? Well I guess you
will get at least 5 different versions of this phrase.... 

Fourth: If all of them are pretty good SignWriting Scribes - well wow great
- but not too often to found (smile)  what will they write? Writing is a
difficult multi-step task. So many options to choose between ... Compared to
that reading is so easy!!! 

We can do such an experiment on the SW-List - and it will be fun to compare
the outcomes. 

One problem is that a specific signer Sign Language 

"What I have to be careful here is that the data I am to use comes from
'highly competent' signwriters - so that it won't simply correcting
mistakes, but rather simplifying something which doesn't have any
mistakes, but just needs to be simplified :)"

Yes - this is what I am interested in. Perhaps we need some kind of measure,
test or procedure to estimate someone to be a "highly competent "signwriting
-reader"  and/ or "SignWriting-scribe" 

Thanks for sharing your ideas 

Stefan ;-) 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: sw-l-bounces at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
[mailto:sw-l-bounces at majordomo.valenciacc.edu] Im Auftrag von MARIA
AZZOPARDI
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 19. August 2009 14:04
An: Valerie Sutton
Cc: MARIA AZZOPARDI; SignWriting List
Betreff: Re: [sw-l] Re: How many symbols do we use in SignWriting?

Dear Valerie,

Yes that would be another interesting thing to look at - whether Deaf
foreigners could produce the signing of Maltese Sign Language. Thank you
for this suggestion!

In fact in the examples given- you are right the brush is completely
different to the rub - however many signers confuse these two symbols -
when the rub is 'gentle' they often use the brush symbols. In fact I would
consider the two 'brush' symbols in the first example as a mistake. So in
fact in the first example there should be two rub symbols there instead of
two brush symbools.

The handshape you described 'ASL T' is not used in LSM. As far as I know
it's not considered to be a rude sign here :) But I've never seen it used.
Again the signer who signed this handshape - thought that the handshape
symbol looked familiar to his handshape and he use that symbol - see this
is what happens when there is such a wide choice of symbols open for
signers to choose - choosing the right handshape is more difficult to do
so.

What I have to be careful here is that the data I am to use comes from
'highly competent' signwriters - so that it won't simply correcting
mistakes, but rather simplifying something which doesn't have any
mistakes, but just needs to be simplified :)

maria

> SignWriting List
> August 18, 2009
>
> On Aug 18, 2009, at 2:58 PM, MARIA AZZOPARDI wrote:
>> Just to illustrate an example of how a sign in LSM, may become
>> standard
>> see attachment. The first example has been written by a signer who
>> configured his hands
>> slightly differently - he just wrote what he saw. However a more
>> frequent
>> handshape used in Maltese Sign Language was chosen as 'standard' - and
>> when checked with several Deaf people the second simplified version
>> was
>> read with no problem whatsoever. Maria
>
> Hi Maria!
> I really enjoyed looking at your attached document in Word, and I
> created a graphic from it, for this email message...see attached
> below...
>
> I really applaud the work you are doing. It is a hard job, but that is
> the point of the dissertation is to do that kind of hard work...
>
> One of the reasons I love Nancy Romero's writing in SignWriting is
> because she has a very simplified style of writing...Nancy has been
> writing signs since 1981, and knows DanceWriting well too, and that is
> one of the reasons, when she started her Bible translations, that she
> was able to write the signs themselves in such a simplified manner,
> because she has been writing volumes by hand for so many years, that
> simplifying spellings became a natural kind of quest for her...Nancy
> doesn't write with many contact symbols if they are not needed. For
> example, if the two hands look like they are touching each other, she
> doesn't bother to write the Touch star, because that is obvious with
> the two hands written close to each other. At first that would not
> seem like much of a simplification, but actually the documents in the
> Gospel According to John do have a simple writing feeling to them
> because of that...and as I read the documents the simplification
> really started to grow on me...and became very comfortable to
> read...so I am glad you are doing similar kind of work, and going to
> the Deaf Community to test it is so great...congratulations on this...
>
> The one problem with this kind of simplification, as you have already
> clearly understood, is that it is important that everyone can read
> it...so testing this with readers is really a good deal of the work...
>
> And a foreigner to Maltese Sign Language, but a person who knows the
> symbols, might not read these signs the same either...and that is a
> whole different story...can foreigners to the sign language who
> already know SignWriting read your documents too? Not from a meaning
> point of view, but from a "production" point of view...that might
> depend I guess and is another interesting question to consider...
>
> So as a foreigner, let me explain to you how I would read these two
> writings...just for feedback...I believe that the two writings could
> never be the same, based on the definitions of the Rub Contact
> Symbol...The Rub Contact Symbol, when it is combined with arrows of
> different kinds, moves in the direction of the arrows, but stays on
> the surface. But when the arrows are taken away, the Rub Contact
> Symbol means to move in a circular motion, while staying on the
> surface...like the sign for COFFEE or CHOCOLATE in ASL...the hand
> stays on the surface but moves in a circular motion like the symbol
> looks...
>
> So reading your two signs in the attache diagram...
>
> The first one reads like this:
> Two " ASL T" hands brush each other's palms up and down, alternating.
>
> The second one reads like this:
> Two "A" hands contact each other at the palm and rub in a circle.
> (like washing something)
>
> The movements are so different that I wonder if one can be a
> standardization for the other? I mean the movements are very
> different. I can certainly see how the two handshapes could be
> interchangeable, although I am surprised that you use an "ASL T" hand
> in Malta because in Denmark they told me that it was a bad handshape
> to them...that it meant something naughty and they never put the thumb
> between two fingers...I had been told that was true throughout
> Europe...but maybe not so in all European countries ;-))
>
> So many things to discuss! See below...
>
> Val ;-)
>
> -----
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

____________________________________________

SW-L SignWriting List

Post Message
SW-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu

List Archives and Help
http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist/

Change Email Settings
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/sw-l

____________________________________________

SW-L SignWriting List

Post Message
SW-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu

List Archives and Help
http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist/

Change Email Settings
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/sw-l