Print

Print


Just another idea:

what about simply mirroring the video to be transcribed? That could be 
easily done! And then, the transcription is easily done in expressive form.

Oscar.

Am 02.10.2012 14:56, schrieb Charles Butler:
> Thanks Ingvild,
>
> I am steadily going through the DEIT LIBRAS dictionary and putting it on
> line (with permission). It gives me a chance to read the description,
> look at both the illustration and the signwriting and transcribe it
> again. It's more than 8000 signs, so by the time we get it all in, it
> should rival the ASL dictionary in scope. I'm hoping to get permission
> to work with INES (the sign language school in Rio de Janeiro) to add
> the signs they have which are not currently in DEIT Libras.
> Charles Butler
> [log in to unmask]
> 240-764-5748
> Clear writing moves business forward.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Ingvild Roald <[log in to unmask]>
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 7:02 AM
> *Subject:* Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point
>
> Hi Charles,
>
> I was answering to the 'translate in your head' problem - which I see as
> easier if it is done manually, not just cognitively. I do understand the
> differnce between machine translation and manual/ personal translation,
> and I do see your point. I hope that someday w will have an automatic
> translation from video, but that will be at least as hard as
> voice-recognition systems. For natural langugaes, that is most often a
> huge task, because of the many personal and dialectical differences. - I
> think that making an avatar signing from what is written in expressive,
> to be viewed in receptive mode, is an easier and therefore more
> available sort of program. To acheive this, the automatic transformation
> between expressive and receptive writing would be a step. But this needs
> time, and funding. In teh meantime, we have to struggle along doing this
> tranformation by body and mind, and making the dictionary puddles as
> well as the litterature puddles and others seadily bigger and better.
>
> Ingvild
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 03:36:31 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Ingvild, I understand, what I am talking about is machine translation,
> and the machine has to be taught to read a video, as is, receptive, and
> translate that into expressive. The point of machine translation is just
> that, having a sufficiently large recognition program to translate a
> third-party into expressive. Humans can internalize and write, a machine
> has to be taught to do so.
>
> Sometimes watching a video I may get a hand wrong, or a twist in the
> wrong direction, and if I write down what I see, I can then correct it
> to the opposite. That's my bias, and my early history with SignWriting,
> writing whatever I see, whether on my hands or someone else's.
> Charles Butler
> [log in to unmask]
> 240-764-5748
> Clear writing moves business forward.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Ingvild Roald <[log in to unmask]>
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2012 6:09 AM
> *Subject:* Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point
>
> As I see it, the easier way to convert from receptive to expressive for
> writing, is to view the video and copy the sign you see by doing it
> yourself. Then you write what you do, the sign as you are making it from
> viewing the video. That is, do the translation /transistion manually
> rather than 'in your head'.
>
> All the best,
>
> Ingvild
>
>  > Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:02:50 +0200
>  > From: [log in to unmask]
>  > Subject: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point
>  > To: [log in to unmask]
>  >
>  > Hi Charles,
>  >
>  > thanks for your answer.
>  >
>  > > Oscar, as you have an assistant annotating video tapes, trying to
>  > > translate in your head to an expressive point of view may be driving
>  > > you crazy.
>  >
>  > Yes, I have been thinking about that too. And it would be preferable to
>  > do annotation from the receptive view point. However, I need the
>  > transcriptions in an expressive view point in order to match all the
>  > other entries in SignPuddle (as I use them to initialise my system). The
>  > manual annotations are intended to serve as evaluation of the
>  > initialized system, thus they need to match.
>  >
>  > If there was an automatic (mathematical) way of converting receptive
>  > into expressive view points, then we could do the "easier" annotation.
>  > But I learnt from Steve Slevinski, that this has not been implemented
>  > and to me it doesn't seem trivial to implement it.
>  >
>  > Or does anybody think differently?
>  >
>  > Regards, Oscar.
>  >
>  >
>  > Am 28.09.2012 13:51, schrieb Charles Butler:
>  > > Oscar, as you have an assistant annotating video tapes, trying to
>  > > translate in your head to an expressive point of view may be
> driving you
>  > > crazy. One project in Belo Horizonte is using receptive SignWriting
>  > > specifically when annotating video tapes so that you see parallel
>  > > movements, not mirror movements when you look at them side by side. You
>  > > write what you see on the videotape, not reverse it to your own hands.
>  > >
>  > > What this means is that the videotaped person's left hand is on your
>  > > right, and the videotaped person's right hand is on your left. You have
>  > > to remember that you are writing another person's hands, not your own,
>  > > so when you look in a dictionary like Delegs or any of the current
>  > > SignPuddles, you will not find what you see on a videotape, but its
>  > > expressive equivalent.
>  > > Charles Butler
>  > > [log in to unmask]
>  > > 240-764-5748
>  > > Clear writing moves business forward.
>  > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > > *From:* Charles Butler <[log in to unmask]>
>  > > *To:* [log in to unmask]
>  > > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 7:29 AM
>  > > *Subject:* Re: help with signwriting
>  > >
>  > > Oscar,
>  > >
>  > > Reply, in the first sign, you are using a "both hands" arrow when the
>  > > hands are moving separately. If you are bringing the hands back toward
>  > > yourself, you need two arrows toward yourself, put them next to each
>  > > hand rather than in the middle. This is a common mistake as I'd be able
>  > > to read it, but the hands are not moving in a common path. This is a
>  > > common mistake, a single arrow is only used when both hands are
> actually
>  > > together.
>  > >
>  > > In the second sign, your left hand is pointed downward, but you are
>  > > using a right hand arrow moving twice. Use a left hand arrow or a right
>  > > hand, not a mix. You could move your right hand in this fashion, but
>  > > your hand would be twisted outward rather awkwardly, unlikely that this
>  > > is what you mean.
>  > > Charles Butler
>  > > [log in to unmask]
>  > > 240-764-5748
>  > > Clear writing moves business forward.
>  > >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > > *From:* Oscar Koller <[log in to unmask]>
>  > > *To:* [log in to unmask]
>  > > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 6:06 AM
>  > > *Subject:* help with signwriting
>  > >
>  > > Hello everybody,
>  > >
>  > > I added following appended 4 entries to the German Sign Puddle. The
>  > > editors noted in each case that the writing is not correct. Could
>  > > anybody explain to me, what should be changed?
>  > >
>  > > Thanks
>  > > Oscar.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >
>  >
>
>
>
>