QUESTION...Which do you prefer in ASL?

Wed Sep 22 18:52:46 UTC 2010

SignWriting List
September 22, 2010

Wonderful information, Adam and Gally friends - thank you so much. I will keep this message for when the time comes to start developing the numbers after 9-9-9 ;-)

The one thing I would not do, though, is add a comma to a page number, whether it is in English or in ASL...commas are used in English with numbers to help communicate the number within a sentence or when counting or adding etc, but I have never seen an Arabic (English) page number that has a comma, have you? Of course, it is rare that we see page numbers in the thousands even in English!

Thanks once again to all of you - and I will give you all the link when I have a folder up with all the page numbers in ASL- it may take several weeks, as like all of us, I am juggling several jobs at once...

Val ;-)

PS. I just saw your new message and I see you agree with me about no commas - very good!

------
On Sep 22, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Adam Frost wrote:

> After talking about with several people, signing 1000-21 would seem problematic just as 1-C-21 would be. Interesting thought about 10-21, but I have to agree with the quick dismissal as it "doesn't feel right for page numbers to be read like that." I was told that while 1-0-21 would seem odd if signed, reading it feels right since it follows the same idea as 1-0-1. 
> 
> I asked about 100. The uniform answer was 1-C looked best. When I asked about 1000, the group couldn't agree with either 1000 or 1-0-0-0. Then someone suggested using "commas" just like in English numbering. I am still not sure myself which would be best. I guess we'll have to play with it a little. ;-)
> 
> Adam
> 
> PS This discussion has gotten a few curious about SignWriting. I might have an underground going on here soon. ;-)
> 
> On Sep 22, 2010, at 2:21 PM, "Valerie Sutton" <sutton at SIGNWRITING.ORG> wrote:
> 
>> SignWriting List
>> September 22, 2010
>> 
>> Hi Adam!
>> OK. Thank your friend at Gally for the information about English page numbers ;-)
>> 
>> But what happened in the first 7 chapters of the Gospel According to John - I put in the C in, and now I need to take it out - 
>> 
>> but what about the 1000's...can you at least give me a suggestion? Should I write? 10-21 for 1021? Or do I write the sign for 1000 and then do 21? Or do I go 1-0-21? smile we are getting there faster than one realizes - the era of big SignWriting books are upon us ;-)
>> 
>> Val ;-)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 11:12 AM, Adam Frost wrote:
>> 
>>> I would say 100 would be 1-C just like 21 is 21 rather than 2-1. I guess we could do a "1-9" representation just like English does now, but a friend of mine made a comment about that. When English was first written, page numbers were spelled out. Then it went through several changes when numbers got larger and more complex. That is where we are right now with ASL. I guess we just have to try it out for a while and see what becomes the standard. ;-)
>>> 
>>> Adam
>>> 
>>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 1:11 PM, "Valerie Sutton" <sutton at SIGNWRITING.ORG> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> SignWriting List
>>>> September 22, 2010
>>>> 
>>>> Hello Adam!
>>>> Thanks for this great feedback, and please thank your friends around you at Gallaudet Univ for their feedback too...so Page Numbers should not be viewed as "counting", but instead are "names" or "labels" for pages...
>>>> 
>>>> How would you write just plain 100, 200, 300 and so forth...1-0-0 or 1C?
>>>> 
>>>> How would you write plain 1000, 2000, 3000?
>>>> 
>>>> How would you write 1001, 1018, 1162?
>>>> 
>>>> Val ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> --------
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Adam Frost wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I have been curious about the views of others on the topic. I can see everyone's point because it depends on what you feel page numbers are. If you feel that pages are counted, then the use of C would be correct (or even the pulled back bend like X for 100). If you feel that the numbers are the names of the pages, then it is the representation of the individual numbers. I am just taking the stand point of how someone in a classroom would tell everyone what page to turn to in a book. So with the page 101 example, I almost always see 1-0-1 rather than 1-C-0-1. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I was also asking some friends here, it seems that they feel that a page is a name rather than being counted. Also, when you look at pages numbered, you don't see it written out as one hundred one, which is what they (and I) feel that 1-C-0-1 would be more equivalent.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just my take on it. ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Adam
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 22, 2010, at 11:19 AM, Valerie Sutton wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> SignWriting List
>>>>>> September 21, 2010
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hello Kelly Jo and everyone!
>>>>>> I really appreciate your feedback...and hope others will also tell me how they feel...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ASL page numbers have really be a useful tool to start people reading SignWriting...everyone has to look down to find the page number, and when they do, they have the Arabic numeral on one side of the page, and the ASL page number on the other side of the page, and most ASL signers sit there and study the writing of the page numbers in ASL and don't even realize that they are getting reading experience from that...so it is one of many small ways to build reading skills in SignWriting...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But ASL page numbers are also different than when we are actually signing in sentences, because they need to be short and easy to glance at, to find what page you are on...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So for example, although I know ASL signers pull the hand back as you say, I wonder if for page numbers, that pull-back movement isn't too much detail? But if you are writing the number in the middle of an ASL sentence, then it would be a good idea to write the arrow pulling the hand back, to show accuracy...it is a question of how much detail we put into the writing of page numbers...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So I would love to see your writing of the page numbers in ASL in SignPuddle, Kelly Jo - thank you for offering this -
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For right now, to explain - I already have numbers 1-181 in the ASL dictionary in SignPuddle, following the rather formal writing with the full C for 100 (the first example in the attached)....and now I considering adding two more alternatives for book designers to choose from...that way there are choices...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Which of the three feels best for you? (please see attached)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ... imagine telling someone in ASL that you live in hotel room 181...which writing would feel best? I wonder if the third one, although not detailed, isn't the way most people would sign HOTEL ROOM 181? just three numbers 1...8...1 in a row? because it is a label on a door, rather than a part of a sentence? think of this at the bottom of page very tiny...
>>>>>> 
>>>> <181_ASL.png>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sep 21, 2010, at 8:35 PM, KJ wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Val,
>>>>>>> My pleasure - it's an interesting question!  I'm sitting here trying out different ways to sign 3-digit numbers, trying to feel which one is most natural.  For the 101, I would use the spelling with the C in the middle, definitely.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What I find really interesting, as I look at that spelling of 135, is that it feels like it should be a four-digit number because there are four handshapes!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The "hundred" - whether it's signed with the full C or just the crooked fingers - is always pulled back toward the body a little, which is why I included the movement arrow in my writing.  It also makes the two handshapes look like one unit, which is how it feels when I sign it - 1-C is one word, and the last two numbers are separate words.  Just my opinion . . . but I knew a Deaf child who actually signed 1-C-0-1 for 101!  It's like the C is a suffix on the hundreds digit.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I could write some other numbers the way I feel I'd sign them and save them into SignPuddle online, if you'd like. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Anyone else on the list have an opinion about this?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> KJ
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 