 |
 |
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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >