Advertisement

ISOcat Data Categories for Signed Language Resources

  • Onno Crasborn
  • Menzo Windhouwer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7206)

Abstract

As the creation of signed language resources is gaining speed world-wide, the need for standards in this field becomes more acute. This paper discusses the state of the field of signed language resources, their metadata descriptions, and annotations that are typically made. It then describes the role that ISOcat may play in this process and how it can stimulate standardisation without imposing standards. Finally, it makes some initial proposals for the thematic domain ‘sign language’ that was introduced in 2011.

Keywords

signed language resources metadata data categories standardization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sutton, V.: SignWriting: On the occasion of its 25th anniversary November 1999. Sign Language & Linguistics 2(2), 271–282 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cooper, H., Holt, B., Bowden, R.: Sign Language Recognition. In: Looking at People: Automatic Visual Analysis of Humans, Part D, pp. 539–562. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dreuw, P., Forster, J., Ney, H.: Tracking Benchmark Databases for Video-Based Sign Language Recognition. In: Proceedings of ECCV International Workshop on Sign, Gesture, and Activity (SGA), Crete, Greece (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schembri, A., Crasborn, O.: Issues in creating annotation standards for sign language description. In: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Corpora and Sign Language Technologies. ELDA, Paris (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crasborn, O., Hanke, T.: Metadata for sign language corpora. In: Background Document for an ECHO Workshop, May 8-9. Radboud University, Nijmegen (2003), http://www.let.ru.nl/sign-lang/echo/docs/SignMetadata_May2003.pdf Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crasborn, O.: The Sign Linguistics Corpora Network: towards standards for signed language resources. In: Calzolari, N., Choukri, K., Maegaard, B., Mariani, J., Odijk, J., Piperidis, S., Rosner, M., Tapias, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the Seventh conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010), pp. 457–460. ELRA, Paris (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crasborn, O., Mesch, J., Waters, D., Nonhebel, A., van der Kooij, E., Bergman, B., Woll, B.: Sharing sign language data online. Experiences from the ECHO corpus. Int. J. Corpus Linguistics 12(4), 535–562 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnston, T.: From archive to corpus: transcription and annotation in the creation of signed language corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(1), 104–129 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    International Organization for Standardization: Terminology and other language and content resources — Specification of data categories and management of a Data Category Registry for language resources. ISO 12620 (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kemps-Snijders, M., Windhouwer, M.A., Wittenburg, P., Wright, S.E.: ISOcat: Corralling Data Categories in the Wild. In: European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (ed.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008), Marrakech, Morocco (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    International Organization for Standardization: Language resource management — Lexical markup framework (LMF). ISO 24613 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kemps-Snijders, M., Windhouwer, M.A., Wittenburg, P., Wright, S.E.: A Revised Data Model for the ISO Data Category Registry. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Terminology and Knowledge Engineering (TKE 2008), Copenhagen, Denmark (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tervoort, B.T.M.: Structurele analyse van visueel taalgebruik binnen een groep dove kinderen. Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, Amsterdam (1953)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stokoe, W.C., Casterline, D.C., Croneberg, C.G.: A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles, 2nd edn. Linstok Press, Silver Spring (1965, 1976)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Broeder, D., Declerck, T., Romary, L., Uneson, M., Strömqvist, S., Wittenburg, P.: A Large Metadata Domain of Language Resources. In: Lino, M., Xavier, M., Ferreira, F., Costa, R., Silva, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), pp. 369–372. European Language Resources Association, Paris (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmidt, T., Duncan, S., Ehmer, O., Hoyt, J., Kipp, M., Loehr, D., Magnusson, M., Rose, T., Sloetjes, H.: An Exchange Format for Multimodal Annotations. In: Kipp, M., Martin, J.-C., Paggio, P., Heylen, D. (eds.) Multimodal Corpora. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5509, pp. 207–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bird, S., Liberman, M.: A formal framework for linguistic annotation. Speech Communication 33, 23–60 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nonhebel, A., Crasborn, O., van der Kooij, E.: Sign language transcription conventions for the ECHO project (2004), Online manuscript http://www.let.ru.nl/sign-lang/echo/docs/transcr_conv.pdf
  19. 19.
    Johnston, T.: Auslan Corpus annotation guidelines. Online ms., Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia (2011), http://www.auslan.org.au/media/auslan-video/upload/attachments/AuslanCorpusAnnotationGuidelines19June2011.pdf
  20. 20.
    Brien, D. (ed.): Dictionary of British Sign Language/English. Faber & Faber, London (1992)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    NSDSK. Nederlandse Gebarentaal op CD-ROM. Communiceren met dove kinderen thuis en op school. Deel 1 (Version 1.00). Nederlandse Stichting voor het Dove en Slechthorende Kind, Amsterdam (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Konrad, R., Schwarz, A., Prillwitz, S.: Fachgebardenlexica. In: Leuninger, H., Wempe, K. (eds.) Gebardensprachlinguistik, pp. 193–216. Signum, Hamburg (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crasborn, O., Hanke, T.: Additions to the IMDI metadata set for sign language corpora (2003), http://www.let.ru.nl/sign-lang/echo/docs/SignMetadata_May2003.pdf
  24. 24.
    Johnston, T.: Transcription and glossing of sign language texts: examples from Auslan (Australian Sign Language). International Journal of Sign Linguistics 2, 3–28 (1991)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ormel, E., Crasborn, O., van der Kooij, E., van Dijken, L., Nauta, E., Forster, J., Stein, D.: Glossing a multi-purpose sign language corpus. In: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Corpora and Sign Language Technologies, pp. 186–191. ELDA, Paris (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cuxac, C.: La Langue des Signes Française (LSF) - Les Voies de l’Iconicité. Faits de Langues 15/16. Ophrys, Paris (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Onno Crasborn
    • 1
  • Menzo Windhouwer
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Language StudiesRadboud University NijmegenNetherlands
  2. 2.Max Planck Institute for PsycholinguisticsNijmegenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations