[bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes
- From: "Julia Cosgrove (Mrs.)" <j.cosgrove@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:53:32 +0000
Well, Jaws is supposed to be able to get words right but it does not especially
with:
lives and lives!
Julia.
>I have a sincere question for you. How could one tell a pronunciation
>dictionary how to differentiate between drive and doctor since, the
>abbreviations are the same.
>It seems to me In some of the more advanced synthesizers, there is a thing
>called sentence parsing (and I know I'm not spelling that right) which meant
>that the synthesizer would base certain pronunciation decisions on the parts
>of sentences.
>The example used was, "Dr. Jones lives on St. John St.".
>If a synthesizer cannot make such complex decisions, a pronunciation
>dictionary will not solve the drive doctor problem. I'm all in favor of a
>pronunciation dictionary, I'm only pointing out that some things are just
>about impossible to correct in that way. Here's another one. "In Iowa, we
>produce lots of produce."
>How about read and read?
>----- Original Message ----- From: "David Bennett" <david382@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 12:16 PM
>Subject: [bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes
>
>
>>So true. As many irregularities as the English language contains, the
>>individual user should be free to do the final tweaking.
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Toews" <DogRiver@xxxxxxxx>
>>To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 10:42 AM
>>Subject: [bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes
>>
>>
>>>My preference would be for synthesizers to get out of the
>>>abbreviation-expansion business altogether. Some on this list may dispute my
>>>claim, but I think I'm more able to intelligently interpret these things
>>>than a computer is.
>>>
>>>Bruce
>>>
>>>--
>>>Bruce Toews
>>>E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx
>>>Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net
>>>Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com
>>>
>>>On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Shannon A. Reece wrote:
>>>
>>>>Absolutely Sarah. I can understand Crystal's irritation with hearing DR
>>>>referred to as drive when it's obvious that DR. in the case of her book was
>>>>doctor. But with any abbreviation there is more than one meaning and even a
>>>>sighted person reading DR translates it to the appropriate meaning in her
>>>>mind. Hearing a wrong translation by the tripple talk for abbreviations
>>>>doesn't bother me at all because I do what any sighted person would do and
>>>>translate them right even if the synthesizer speaks them wrong, but
>>>>beside(s), and for the have only one meaning and should be fixed if
>>>>possible.
>>>>Shannon
>>>>From: "Sarah Cranston" <cranston.sarah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Subject: [bookport] Re: braille translation mistakes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The problem with DR is that sometimes it's Doctor, and sometimes it's Drive.
>>>>That's the main problem with Braille back-translation. That is why beside,
>>>>besides, and "for the" will be easy to fix, they don't pull double duty.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, and don't forget to add Dr. to the list. I just finished reading a
>>>>book where the main character was a Dr., and, of course, was constantly read
>>>>as Drive.
>>>>Crystal
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/161 - Release Date: 03/11/05
Other related posts:
