Print

Print


Practically, I would think a lookup table would be needed - where every 
expressive sign has a receptive sign assigned to it and perhaps a 
mapping adjustment. Then the symbol coordinates would need to be 
mirrored and the adjustments and substitutions made.

Bill

On 10/2/2012 11:47 AM, Ingvild Roald wrote:
> Hi Oscar,
>
> I'm sorry, but I do not think that mirroring the video is a solution. 
> It would be like viewing a left-handed signer, and you would have to 
> remember the other conversions.
> Mathematically, the receptive/expressive signing spaces are 
> symmetrically placed/ mirrored according to a vertical line halfway 
> between the signer and the viewer.
> If all symbols were following the same rule when swirched between 
> left/right and forward/backward, this could be managed mathematically.
> In SignWriting, some symbols change filling (hand symbols), as well as 
> orientation; whereas other symbols just change direction 
> (forward/backward) and others stay just the same.
> It is possible to work through the whole set of symbols and make sets/ 
> groups of symbols that behave in the same way, and write the rules for 
> them. But it is a big job.
>
> I still wish you good luck with your work, and I'm sure that one day 
> we will get this program, when someone gets the funding,
>
> Ingvild
>
> > Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 17:17:37 +0200
> > From: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: annotation in receptive rather than expressive view point
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > 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.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >