si5s to write ASL

Arthaey

Arthaey

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2012
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Disclaimer: I'm hearing, interested in languages of all kinds, but still very naive about ASL and Deaf culture.

What do you guys think of this (relatively) new writing system for ASL, called "si5s"? Of the various systems I've seen, it looks the most usable (except for it not having a font yet, but they say they're working on one). It includes non-manual information, which some writing systems don't (how could they possibly make such an important oversight??). Its symbols seem simple enough that you could actually be bothered to write them (as opposed to, say, SignWriting). It looks as though it includes all the necessary information that's encoded in signing...

But, as I said above, I'm completely new to ASL. Has si5s not gained much interest only because it's new, or is it irredeemably deficient in some way I'm ignorant of?

Here are some links:
 
I understand the "legal necessity" for a written form of ASL [many States won't recognize a language without a written form ETC]

Yet I think taking a visual language and transforming it into a written visual language is very different than taking a spoken/auditory language and transforming it to written visual language.

Spoken/auditory to written required a coding of sounds into symbols. If ASL is to be Coded into a written form, visual to visual, I would expect that code to be VERY intuative to native signers. Personally, I don't see that here About Us | si5s .

Then again I barely have a laymans understanding of Linguistics so waht do I know :dizzy::dizzy:
 
I hadn't hear that some states don't recognize unwritten languages. I can't say that I'm surprised, unfortunately. Governments aren't known for consulting linguists on linguistic matters. :( I want to make it very clear that I know ASL (and other sign languages) are complete languages, capable of expressing anything that any oral language can. Writing is not at all a requirement for full-fledged "languagehood," linguistically speaking; writing is merely a tool for recording language. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

Like signed languages, oral languages can also be recorded and the video replayed... but sometimes written forms of communication are more convenient or useful. For example, I'd much rather study for a class by re-reading my notes or the textbook than have to re-watch a video of the lecture. (It's faster to read than listen to someone speak; I would expect someone literate in written sign language could read faster than someone could sign). Sometimes I feel like watching a movie, but other times I'd rather curl up with a book — they're different experiences and I'm glad I have both available. Or sometimes your electronic devices run out of batteries so you can't watch videos, or you're not allowed to use them (airplanes, why??). Or you want to leave a note for someone.

Basically, why should signers have to translate into a second language to enjoy the benefits of reading & writing?

I do agree with you that transcribing a 3D language into 2D space is more challenging. But I think it's "merely" challenging, not impossible. :)

However, I disagree with your comment about writing needing to be "intuitive." Keep in mind that writing systems for oral languages have to be learned; students have to train for quite a while to use them effectively. I would expect writers of a sign language writing system to need training too. The writing system for a signed language could probably be more intuitive/iconic than for an oral language, but it would never be 100%, nor does it need to be.

What I'm wondering about is whether this particular proposed writing system, si5s, encodes enough information about each sign, sentence, etc to let a trained reader decode the complete message later. So many other attempts at writing sign language leave out critical information (like facial expressions). So my question is, does si5s leave out anything critical to reconstructing a full ASL sentence? I'm too inexperienced at ASL to be able to judge for myself. Perhaps people could give an example sentence (or sign) that they doubt si5s can encode?
 
ASL is not a written language. Never has been, never will be. It can be broken down in writing for linguistics purposes, but for communications purposes? No.
 
Video recording is the "written" version of ASL, and as it gets easier and easier for everyone to use this technology, particularly in mobile and ad-hoc capacities, I really don't see a need for an ASL orthography.
 
Video recordings of sign language are equivalent to audio recordings of oral language. Both are real-time and capture 100% of the communication. In contrast to video or audio recordings, writing can be read faster (or slower) than real-time, at the expense of complete fidelity (among other trade-offs).

In the same way that hearing people don't only use audio recordings, I don't understand why Deaf people wouldn't want to have a written option in their own language too. I'm not at all advocating that a written form should supplant video recordings; I'm only suggesting to add an extra method of "recording."
 
Hearing people do use audio recordings. There's audio books, voice mail, just to start with. Those capture the equivalent of sound.

Video captures the equivalent of sight. Watching a language. It is not written. We sign among ourselves. Why would we need to write it as well? That's just like us having to write to the hearies. It doesn't need an extra method.
 
With all due respect Arthaey -you're incorrect regarding ASL video being our "audio version" of our language.

Video IS the "written" equivalent of ASL (and all other sign languages).

Unlike languages like English where the spoken word has an exact written form used for documentation and archives etc, ASL's "archival form" is and will always be video.

There is simply too much information in signed languages to make a written form feasible (or WE the Deaf would have already created one and be universally using it!!).
To accurately capture a single "complete sign" (including the finger,hand,arms, body, face,eye,lip etc movements) using writing would be time and space prohibitive. Correctly documenting the nuances (critical for understanding) of ASL/BSL etc would take sentences worth of space, per sign.

It would also take significantly longer to read (decode) a 'written ASL coding' than it would to simply view the video of the signer, not to mention the written form being prone to a high 'misinterpretation rate'.

Video allows ALL aspects of Signed Language to be captured and viewed without degradation or interpretation.
It's simply impossible to capture accurately and completely a Visual AND spacial language in written form ... Which is why very few Hoh/Deaf or interpreters know (to any usable extent) or are taught a "written form".

If you speak with a number of linguists knowledgeable in spoken, written and signed language they will all say the same thing.

While 'coding' is useful for noting the basics of signs in some situations, the nuances of the language itself are lost on paper (even if the written form includes 'facial grammar coding').

A good book to read might be "Talking Hands", which details how linguistics researchers travel to various places specifically to document remote/isolated village sign languages - their medium for documenting these languages is video, not any kind of 'coding' (sign writing etc). It's been a while since I read the book, but I think they might actually briefly discuss WHY they don't bother with a written coding and why a video archive is so very very important.

The more one learns and knows about signed language, the more they understand that a "loss-less" (like FLAC vs MP3) written language format simply isn't possible.



P.S. The "written language" of Hoh/d/Deaf people, is the written form of the spoken language used in the area we live.
For example, I don't need a "written form of ASL" because I have a written form of English. If I want to archive my thoughts specifically in ASL, I use video because that is the natural and complete way to preserve the nuances of that language.


I hope this makes sense :)

EDITED TO ADD: OK, I went and looked at this "Si5s" coding ... I'm actaully a bit offended by it to be honest. It's offensively simplistic, looks like some sort of "cartoon sign doodling" - it's junk like this that makes people look down on ASL and ASLers as "simple". (Not to mention there's no good reason in the entire world that fingerspelling should be "coded" instead of just writing the roman letter out ... good grief. At least the "signwriting" gave the impression of some class ... this looks like Hoh and Deaf are "too stupid to write English, so we'll invent hen-scratch and call it language"
 
Last edited:
Arthaey said:
What do you guys think of this (relatively) new writing system for ASL, called "si5s"?
Click to expand...

here's what I think -

lol.

perhaps it would be a better use of your time to learn Egyptian/Mayan hieroglyphics. God knows we could use all the help in the world to decode the secret language to learn more about the fate of our humanity. I mean we've got 10 months left!
 
Arthaey said:
In the same way that hearing people don't only use audio recordings, I don't understand why Deaf people wouldn't want to have a written option in their own language too. I'm not at all advocating that a written form should supplant video recordings; I'm only suggesting to add an extra method of "recording."
Click to expand...

Let me guess - you're hearing?

WE LOVE IT when hearing people tell us how OUR language "should work" ... NOT!! :shock: :roll: :eek3:
 
Si5s has not "caught on" in the sense that there is no self-perpetuating cycle of Si5s writers and readers creating works in Si5s. This is not surprising because ASL is not needed to do business for 99.9% of US residents. Business necessitates a written language. Linguistic Art eventually takes that base to a new level.

Si5s is starting with the art and hoping that the businesses will follow. How long did it take you to learn to read and write English after you were proficient in speech? 1st through 5th grade? Now how many Deaf people would like to spend ANOTHER five years learning how to write after learning English? Even if they started down that road, what would they like to read that isn't already written in English?

Second languages like Spanish and ASL cannot be given "equal billing" in the daily life of business; and books, movies, etc. are made by businesses. English is the international language of business, and Schools will teach English to Deaf and Bi-Lingual children because knowing English is what will get them paid (so the government can get more tax money to pay for schools, of course.)

The end result is that no form of sign language writing can catch on until there is a reason for a lot of hearing people to put effort into learning ASL - OR - we suddenly get a LOT more Deaf people.
 
Wirelessly posted (Blackberry Bold )

PositiveSigner said:
Si5s has not "caught on" in the sense that there is no self-perpetuating cycle of Si5s writers and readers creating works in Si5s. This is not surprising because ASL is not needed to do business for 99.9% of US residents. Business necessitates a written language. Linguistic Art eventually takes that base to a new level.

Si5s is starting with the art and hoping that the businesses will follow. How long did it take you to learn to read and write English after you were proficient in speech? 1st through 5th grade? Now how many Deaf people would like to spend ANOTHER five years learning how to write after learning English? Even if they started down that road, what would they like to read that isn't already written in English?

Second languages like Spanish and ASL cannot be given "equal billing" in the daily life of business; and books, movies, etc. are made by businesses. English is the international language of business, and Schools will teach English to Deaf and Bi-Lingual children because knowing English is what will get them paid (so the government can get more tax money to pay for schools, of course.)

The end result is that no form of sign language writing can catch on until there is a reason for a lot of hearing people to put effort into learning ASL - OR - we suddenly get a LOT more Deaf people.
Click to expand...

Not to mention 99% of ASLers are bi-linguagal and can read and write in the common spoken and written language(s) of their location.

There's no need to create a written form for a language which can be captured fully on video (for information preservaton,cultural,historical and legal reasons) AND where it's users are already fluent in and able to translate ASL into a currently used, widespread written language if needed.
 
I've started my ASL class now and actually tried using si5s. I must say, I was pretty disappointed that it seems to not encode z-axis of movement (only x vs y axis) and does not even seem to encode palm orientation!

So while si5s's symbols seem the closest to a writing system that could actually be handwritten at a reasonable speed, even I (who knows like 5 signs right now ;)) can tell that it's deficient to the task. And others have told me that the creators of si5s have not been very receptive to feedback, so I'm not holding out any hope that they will improve the system.

I still don't quite understand the strong negative reactions to the suggestion of writing directly in ASL. But as I said in my disclaimer in my original post, I know I don't know much about Deaf culture. I'm willing to accept that my personal love of reading and writing (and its normalcy in the hearing world) gave me incorrect assumptions about Deaf people's attitudes toward having a writing system "of your own".

I apologize for my assumptions. I think my passion for & knowledge about languages and linguistics got in the way.

I still would like a way of taking notes in my ASL class and making flashcards that take up less space on my phone than video flashcards, but I see now that this would be a note-taking system for personal use. You guys have universally said you'd prefer video recordings to a written form of ASL, and I believe you. :)
 
I hope I am not offending anyone by saying this, but I have never heard of anything so ridiculous. Like AlleyCat said, ASL is not a written language. Since most ASLers can read and write in their local spoken languages, why do we need to bastardize ASL by turning it into something it is not?
 
It strikes me as entirely unnecessary. IMHO (in my hearing opinion) ASL and English and everything else is about being able to communicate with each other. Everyone on this forum can do that! Putting si5s in the way is not going to help us communicate with each other.

Is it bad of me to read this part of the si5s Wikipedia entry:
Arnold suggests that many people, including Deaf people, see no need for a written language – as there already is one, English, but instead he takes a culturally Deaf stance and proposes that the majority of the Deaf have been taught by a colonizing pedagogy, and does not include the view of Deaf individuals.
Click to expand...

... and think, "ah, that explains it..."
 
As someone who started learning ASL in a classroom, having a way to take notes easily about what signs look like WOULD be helpful.

I'd love to say that as I can see, that is THE one valid use for a way to write ASL. (Probably not a valid reason to develop a writing system, really.)

But I think that it's a good point someone said above. If there had ever been a real need to write ASL, by now the Deaf community would have come up with one. I am a linguist (of sorts) and language develops organically to facilitate communication. People who have no need for a written language don't develop one. Later, scientists try to codify the language but really, those codes are not used by the speakers. Only recently has Navajo been written, and that writing system has been taught in schools, but nobody really WRITES Navajo on a daily basis (unless that has changed very recently, I could be wrong and my info is a bit out of date). Why? Nobody needs to! THe same thing, if Deaf people can write in the written form of the local spoken language, why do they need to write in ASL?
 
So I'm giving up on si5s; between the community reaction here and its inherent deficiencies I mentioned above, it just doesn't seem like a usable, useful system for anyone.

Apparently some communities have adopted SignWriting (eg, Brazilian Sign Language) as a method of writing they actually use. (Or so the internet tells me — it's never wrong, right? ;)) I wish SignWriting didn't look so clunky and slow and non-compact... I may still use it or something like it just for my own flashcards, though. (Video flashcards would take up a lot more space on my phone!)

(By the way, hi kellycat! It's always nice to stumble across another sort-of-linguistic. :))
 
Back
Top