Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of sign language
Charles Butler
chazzer3332000 at YAHOO.COM
Thu Dec 12 16:43:27 UTC 2013
In reference to your "research" parameters. There is a source line already in the dictionary, I don't know if it can be sorted by that parameter yet. I used that specifically in compiling a dictionary to ensure that my sources were from vetted sources for LIBRAS not "experiments" by new students.
The future research I have no problem with, add all the columns and entries one wants, but if it gets to the point of requiring a bunch of grammar parameters from every entry, it's a challenge. I use the spoken language GLOSS function all the time when trying to translate quickly from English to ASL, but in every case I have to be careful how I gloss the word if I'm just doing a rough draft. English grammar is not the same, past tense is not shown the same, I have to write in sort of a cross between Pidgin Signed English and GLOSS to find the term I want in using the "translate" function.
One cannot gloss "A frog crawling out of a container, squinting in both directions" in any kind of realistic ASL, as it is a mime-referent utterance that a gloss does not lend itself to. In that case, I write what I produce and can give a rough translation into English, but that is not a "sign for GLOSS" translation. I would not know how to reduce portions of a multi-sign utterance showing one frog arm after another crawling out of a jar that could be used later by other sign users. One could look it up by "Frog" to find the whole entry, but that does not easily graph an utterance into a spoken phrase.
Charles Butler
chazzer3332000 at yahoo.com
240-764-5748
Clear writing moves business forward.
________________________________
From: maria galea <signwriting.maria at GMAIL.COM>
To: SW-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: Design for SignPuddle 3: parts-of-speech and morphology of sign language
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,
>and4) 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.
>
>________________________________________________
>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
________________________________________________
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/b6f4e299/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/b6f4e299/attachment.jpg>
More information about the Sw-l
mailing list