Print

Print


Hi Adam,
Nice to hear from you!
Your comment about the wood works reminds me that I should say: members who
might want to participate in this conversation but not be a part of the
book project should feel free. Just let me know!
When I get to the point of writing a book chapter based on this project
I'll be making sure that everyone is OK with being represented in it, that
everyone thinks they are being represented properly, and so forth.
In fact, I think I will work up IRB documents for this project (the
documents by which universities evaluate their members' research to make
sure it's above board ethically) and then distribute them to you all.
That's sometimes not required when doing work in a semi-public forum of
this sort, but it's still a good idea. :)
E

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Adam Frost <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I guess I should come out of the wood works for a short while to put in my
> two cents. :-)
>
> Cherie Wren, I agree that we can't honestly say that someone is wrong in
> their writing without some investigation of whether it be regional
> variation, individual variation, or even writing style. I have seen a lot
> of sign variations partly because that is my field of study as well as it
> being my native language that I live, breath, read, write, sign, analyze,
> and teach everyday. I will be the first to admit, however, that even I
> haven't seen every variation out there because new ones pop up all the
> time. Having said that, let's have a continuation of discussing. :-)
>
> Kelly Jo, I personally don't see anything with the arrows in the writing
> that Charles chose, which was written by Natasha. I am not sure if I
> understand what you are trying to say, though. You say that the arrows
> should be going to the left rather than the right? Would this writing be
> what you suggest?
>
> [image:
> http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle2.0/glyphogram.php?size=1&ksw=M23x36S15711n6xn36S18508n23xn23S21300n7xn11S26a02n4x9]
>
> Or are you meaning this writing?
>
> [image:
> http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle2.0/glyphogram.php?size=1&ksw=M23x43S15711n6xn42S18508n23xn29S21300n7xn17S27106n4x3]
>
> And, Cherie, you mentioned another way of signing it. Is this close to
> what you meant?
>
> [image:
> http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle2.0/glyphogram.php?size=1&ksw=M17x40S15712n15x0S18536n17x15S21300n7xn21S26a00n10xn39]
>
> Now, if I were writing this sign myself, I would have chosen a different
> palm orientation for the non-dominate hand. In fact, that is the only
> difference that I would personally make to Natasha's writing in SignPuddle.
> (Ok, maybe I would change the placing of some of the symbols, but it is
> basically the same. GRIN)
>
> [image:
> http://www.signbank.org/signpuddle2.0/glyphogram.php?size=1&ksw=M45x15S15711n28xn14S18518n45xn1S213004xn7S26a0631xn12]
>
> Maybe 2 has gone up because of inflation? ;-)
>
> Adam
>



-- 
Erika Hoffmann-Dilloway
Assistant Professor of Anthropology
Oberlin College