When learning in school, a student starts with grade 1 (I contracted) braille,
and is incrementally introduced to grade 2 (contracted) rules.
This is really no different from the way reading, writing, spelling, etc. is
taught in any context.
_don
On Jun 15, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Angel238 (Redacted sender "angel238" for DMARC)
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
How, then, can a child using a Braille slate, and stylus be certain what he
writes is correct? How is he to interpret all this. To assure himself what
he writes is going to be correctly written?
----- Original Message -----
From: Donald Winiecki
To: duxuser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 10:54 AM
Subject: [duxuser] Re: ccdWhen Contractions Profoundly Alter Word
Pronunciation
While syllable divisions are not as specifically important in UEB as was the
case in EBAE, syllable divisions are not disregarded in UEB The bridging
rules (10.11) provide examples of this.
However, it is certainly appropriate to say that while many of the bridging
rules just so happen to prohibit use of contractions or groupsigns across
syllable divisions, the rules as stated do not orient to syllable divisions
themselves. This means that we cannot just pay attention to syllable
divisions when forming words in UEB. Instead, we also have to pay attention
to the breaks between prefixes and roots, roots and suffixes, compound words,
diphthongs, and other things.
We know that one of the goals of UEB was to make it more possible for
computers to accurately translate print to braille and back. While I do not
have any inside information on how decisions were made as specific rules of
UEB were being created, I would guess that an apparent 'de-emphasizing' of
syllable divisions in the rules of UEB is also a concession to
computer-translation of print to braille and back. This is because, while it
is possible to write software that orients to syllable divisions, it is more
straightforward to write software to pay attention to prefixes, suffixes,
root words, compound words, and the like. In fact, if I were to guess, I
would say that the existing crop of braille translation software was
originally written to pay attention to the latter things anyway.
_don
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 8:01 AM <jyandt.martin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I find interesting is the “disregard” for syllabication. Perhaps this
is a wrong term for it, but, probably, UEB has taken an extremely different
twist from what I learned from EBAE braille. Just thinking out loud.
From: Donald Winiecki
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 7:13 AM
To: duxuser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [duxuser] Re: ccdWhen Contractions Profoundly Alter Word
Pronunciation
While it is accurate to say that in UEB the initial-letter contraction for
"mother" (5,134) is not used in "chemotherapy," this is not because the
contraction bridges syllables.
Regarding initial-letter contractions, UEB 10.7.1 reads:
"Use the initial-letter contraction as a wordsign and wherever the
letters it represents occur; except for the specific provisions given
below; and unless other rules limit its use."
The first sentence of this rule indicates that we should not use
syllable-bridging as a reason to not use initial-letter contractions (if
syllable-bridging were disallowed, it would be applicable for all
initial-letter contractions and would be indicated in the rule).
The second sentence of the rule refers to a list of words in which one does
not use an initial-letter contraction. "Chemotherapy" is on that list.
The third sentence uses the mysterious and oblique phrase that we find
throughout the UEB rulebook: "...unless other rules limit its use." While I
would be near the front of the line of people asking that the rulebook were
more specific than "..unless other rules limit its use" in this case we
should apply one of the UEB Preference rules in 10.10, and in particular
10.10.9:
"Do not use a groupsign if its use would seriously distort the
pronunciation or hinder the recognition of the word."
This rule applies because in the list of examples provided immediately after
10.10.9, the word "chemotherapy" is shown. This means that the rules of UEB
explicitly disallows the initial-letter contraction "mother" in
"chemotherapy" because doing so would seriously distort the actual
pronunciation and recognition of the word.
If you have gotten this far, I think I should apologize for 'geeking-out' on
the Rules of UEB. Perhaps we should just say it is my own not-so-private
obsession...
_don
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:36 AM Angel238 <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I would think not. As the contraction straddles the division between
syllables.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catherine Thomas" <braille@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <duxuser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2018 9:12 PM
Subject: [duxuser] ccdWhen Contractions Profoundly Alter Word Pronunciation
Is the contraction fo"mother" (dot 5, m) actually supposed to be used in
the word chemotherapy? dIf so, how can that possibly be justified? The
other question is, if a transcriber encounters a contraction-laden word
that they themselves cannot read or recognize easily, is it okay to
change
it> Please advise.
Catherine
------------------------------------------------------
-Catherine Thomas
braille@xxxxxxxxx /
---------------------------------------------------------------------
* * *
* This message is via list duxuser at freelists.org.
* To unsubscribe, send a blank message with
* unsubscribe
* as the subject to duxuser-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx . You may also
* subscribe, unsubscribe, and set vacation mode and other subscription
* options by visiting www.freelists.org . The list archive
* is also located there.
* Duxbury Systems' web site is www.duxburysystems.com
* * *
* * *
* This message is via list duxuser at freelists.org.
* To unsubscribe, send a blank message with
* unsubscribe
* as the subject to duxuser-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx . You may also
* subscribe, unsubscribe, and set vacation mode and other subscription
* options by visiting www.freelists.org . The list archive
* is also located there.
* Duxbury Systems' web site is www.duxburysystems.com
* * *