From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Dec 04 05:01:55 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 04 Dec 2006 05:01:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GrDRQ-0005Hs-M8 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2006 05:01:07 -0800 Received: from imo-m24.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.5]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GrDRE-0005HF-Vw for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2006 05:01:01 -0800 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-m24.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.6.) id d.c1c.a733693 (43932) for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 08:00:48 -0500 (EST) From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 08:00:45 EST Subject: [lojban] writing a sign language To: lojban-list@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c1c.a733693.32a575fd_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 for Windows XP sub 11501 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-archive-position: 13309 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --part1_c1c.a733693.32a575fd_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/2006 4:25:38 AM Central Standard Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes: > In fact, you wouldn't use any sign writing system for that. Many have > tried to come up with one, but none have gotten any traction. It may be fun to > think about the challenges of representing a 3D, temporally simultaneous > language in a 2D linear medium, but as a practical matter, it's all moot. Deaf > people simply have no need or want for sign writing. Especially with current > technology allowing video conversation. > > -arika > This has been my experience too. Signers don't believe that their sign language can be reduced to writing, and don't want it if even if it could be. All of this just amazes me. I'd expect to find an interest in preserving the language and performances in it, but I don't see any such interest among those who use it. stevo --part1_c1c.a733693.32a575fd_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 12/4/2006 4:25:38 AM Cent= ral Standard Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


In fact, you wouldn't use a= ny sign writing system for that.  Many have tried to come up with one,=20= but none have gotten any traction.  It may be fun to think about the ch= allenges of representing a 3D, temporally simultaneous language in a 2D line= ar medium, but as a practical matter, it's all moot.  Deaf people simpl= y have no need or want for sign writing.  Especially with current techn= ology allowing video conversation.

-arika



This has been my experience too.  Signers don't believe that their=20= sign language can be reduced to writing, and don't want it if even if it cou= ld be.  All of this just amazes me.  I'd expect to find an interes= t in preserving the language and performances in it, but I don't see any suc= h interest among those who use it.

stevo --part1_c1c.a733693.32a575fd_boundary-- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.