Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of sign language

Thu Dec 12 16:17:23 UTC 2013

Hi Steve and the List,

Could I just point out an issue that has come up recently when
investigating SignPuddles and using them as a tool to extract information
about the writing system for different sign languages..

You see, some reviewers have been very critical about the symbol frequency
count - not in itself naturally, but with the lack of information it
provides about the inputters (writers), their expertise and even the lack
of having an exact figure of how many people have written in a given
Puddle. Without such information not much can be concluded from the
results, since you would need exact figures of how many writers have
inputted into a given Puddle, dates of when they inputted, and some
information about their level of skill, whether they are native signers or
otherwise.. i understand your point Charles, that the Puddles are there to
be used 'naturally' by whoever (as this is the way with natural writing),
however it would be a pity not to include such information (if it is
possible) for the sake of future research.

Just to give an example, say you would like to investigate the writing
system of the Spanish Literature Puddle (for instance you are investigating
the symbols/glyphs used for Spanish sign language) - without information
about the number of writers, whether they are native signers or hearing
students, and dates of when the writing was created - there is not much you
can conclude about the writing system of Spanish sign language (because if
if it was written by one person this would be much more different than if
it were written by say 15 people)...do you see my point?

I have no idea if such information can somehow be stored, as i have no
expertise with programming at all; i can also see the problem with
data-protection acts (but hey- what happened with the boom of
social-networks such as Facebook!) but it would be great to somehow store
such information for future research...

Thanks
maria

On 12 December 2013 12:38, Stefan Wöhrmann
<stefanwoehrmann at googlemail.com>wrote:

>  Hi Valerie, Steve...
>
>
>
> Well I haven´t got the time, the knowledge, the energy to work with more
> options as I do right now. I am happy that “find by word” with different
> options ...and find by symbol is possible,
>
> For my work at school there is nothing more needed – as far as I can see
> now...
>
>
>
> All best
>
>
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *Von:* SignWriting List: Read and Write Sign Languages [mailto:
> SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] *Im Auftrag von *Charles Butler
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 11. Dezember 2013 23:53
> *An:* SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
> *Betreff:* Re: Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of
> sign language
>
>
>
> My only comment is that I hope all dictionary entries don't require a
> linguist to actually put them in or to find them. I have been excited about
> SignWriting because it has allowed me to write what I actually sign, not
> describe it in a spoken language for a third party.
>
>
>
> That will become an impossible burden to lexicographers. Creating a search
> engine that can handle a bunch of parameters is fine, but who is going to
> go through every single sign and assign them all possible entries? The
> burden becomes impossible, and is no longer useful to an actual user of
> SignWriting as a writing system, not a linguistic tool.
>
>
>
> Charles Butler
> chazzer3332000 at yahoo.com
> 240-764-5748
> Clear writing moves business forward.
>
>
>    ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Rachel Channon <rchannon1 at VERIZON.NET>
> *To:* SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 11, 2013 5:13 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of
> sign language
>
>
>
> That diagram is interesting.  hmm.  A complete list of morphological
> characteristics might be hard – I don’t think it is as settled as parts of
> speech.
>
> In my mind, morphology really translates to: some named characteristic of
> a group of signs or a group of morphemes.  Practically speaking, in most
> sign languages, a sign is almost the same thing as a morpheme – that is in
> most sign languages most simple signs are one morpheme.  (This is quite
> different from spoken languages where many word are made up of two or more
> morphemes as in *disinterested* which has at least 3 morphemes: dis +
> interest + ed.)   However, this isn’t always true.  For example, ASL has
> a negative incorporation element of the hand twisting/rotating (as in
> DON’T-KNOW, DON’T-WANT) that is at the morpheme level.   Compounds are
> usually two morphemes. Furthermore, under some theories, classifiers can be
> considered to be bundles of many morphemes – the handshape is one or more
> morpheme, the location another set, the action another set, orientation…etc
> etc.
>
> So there are really at least four elements of this information:  1) How
> many morphemes are there in a sign (usually 1, sometimes 2, sometimes
> many, other choices less common). 2) are the morphemes simultaneous or
> sequential and 3) for each morpheme, what is its morpheme group, if any?
> and 4) is the sign as a whole in some morphological group?
>
> Examples:
>
> DON’T-WANT: 2 simultaneous morphemes:  WANT + Negative incorporation
>
> WOMAN: 2 sequential morphemes: GIRL + FINE.  The sign is a compound
>
> J-B (job): 2 sequential morphemes: J + B.  Each element is fingerspelling;
> the entire sign is a fingerspelled loan sign.
>
> MOTHER: 1 morpheme
>
> BAKE-ER: 2 sequential morphemes BAKE + ER (person affix).  Some people
> might classify this as a compound, some might call it an affixed form
>
>
>
>
>
> Given this complexity, it might make sense to set up
>
> 1) a simple set of choices that allow multiple choices, so that I could
> select for example classifier AND compound. An initial list:
>
>
>
> Classifier, compound, fingerspelling – one handed, fingerspelling – two
> handed, fingerspelled loan sign, character sign, assimilated compound,
> compound, negative incorporation, clitic, affix, initialized sign, phrase,
> inflected verb, uninflected verb, locational verb, noun-verb pair,
> repeating or non-repeating signs, numbers, gestural, pantomimic, iconic.
> Classifiers are subdivided in many ways by different linguists, so some
> linguists might want to add to the list of classifiers – for example,
> classifiers for handling objects vs. motion vs. drawing-in-the-air and so
> on.
>
>
>
> 2) a second set of choices specifying number of morphemes that defaults
> to 1 and allows numeric write-ins plus the choices innumerable, uncertain,
> and many,
>
> 3) a fixed choice set for either simultaneous or sequential,
>
> and 4) a free form area for additional information.
>
> I hope that I haven’t forgotten something utterly obvious.
>
> Rachel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* SignWriting List: Read and Write Sign Languages [mailto:
> SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Stephen E Slevinski Jr
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 11, 2013 11:33 AM
> *To:* SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
> *Subject:* Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of
> sign language
>
>
>
> Hi SignWriting List,
>
> This has been a great year, but I'm woeful behind on several project.  I
> appreciate all of the positive work people have been able to do with
> SignPuddle.  The long awaited work on SignPuddle 3 continues. Next year
> will be a break out year for written sign language across the globe.
>
>
> https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Incubator:Test_wikis_of_sign_languages
>
> I'm finalizing the database for SignPuddle 3.  I'm very impressed with
> MySQL Workbench and the diagramming tool in particular. (image below)
>
> Database design
> --------------
> For individual entries, I have designed the parts-of-speech solution, but
> not the morphology solution yet.
>
> For parts-of-speech, there is a small list of values for the most common
> choices.  noun, verb, adjective, adverb, sentence, other.  This list can be
> translated into other languages.
>
> Additionally, each entry has a separate parts-of-speech text field, which
> can be used for a more accurate description or a value outside of the
> common list.
>
> I was considering a similar strategy for morphology.  First, a new table
> with a static list of the most common and universal choices.  Second, a
> freeform text field for each entry for alternate descriptions and complex
> analysis.
>
> Researching morphology, it appears there are several kinds of analysis,
> each with its own classifications and descriptions.  Is a single list too
> simplistic to be helpful?  I'd appreciate any discussion of the topic.
>
> Morphology list: monosyllable, compound, ... ?
>
> Thanks,
> -Steve
>
> PS - Here is part of the working diagram for the database.  I haven't
> added anything for morphology yet.
> [image: cid:image001.png at 01CEF683.43134C90]
>
> ________________________________________________
>
> SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION
>
> Valerie Sutton SignWriting List moderator sutton at signwriting.org
>
> Post Messages to the SignWriting List: sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu
>
> SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
> http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist
>
> Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
> http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1
>
> ________________________________________________
>
> SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION
>
> Valerie Sutton SignWriting List moderator sutton at signwriting.org
>
> Post Messages to the SignWriting List: sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu
>
> SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
> http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist
>
> Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
> http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1
>
>
>    ________________________________________________
>
>  SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION
>
> Valerie Sutton SignWriting List moderator sutton at signwriting.org
>
> Post Messages to the SignWriting List: sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu
>
> SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
> http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist
>
> Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
> http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1________________________________________________
>
>  SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION
>
> Valerie Sutton SignWriting List moderator sutton at signwriting.org
>
> Post Messages to the SignWriting List: sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu
>
> SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
> http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist
>
> Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
> http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1
>
>

________________________________________________

SIGNWRITING LIST INFORMATION

Valerie Sutton
SignWriting List moderator
sutton at signwriting.org

Post Messages to the SignWriting List:
sw-l at listserv.valenciacollege.edu

SignWriting List Archives & Home Page
http://www.signwriting.org/forums/swlist

Join, Leave or Change How You Receive SW List Messages
http://listserv.valenciacollege.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SW-L&A=1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20131212/7bcace45/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 74403 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/sw-l/attachments/20131212/7bcace45/attachment.jpg>