Re: Some thoughts on mutli-modal (signing / speech) languages and communication.
| From: | Sai Emrys <saizai@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 3:22 |
|---|
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Parker Glynn-Adey
<parkerglynnadey@...> wrote:
> This makes sense. If your language is forced to be used in both modes
> simultaneously, you're double screwed in these cases. The rant I posted was
> in favour of a mixed-mode language, but it seems as though this is
> practically impracticable (unless anyone wants to convince me otherwise).
*raises hand*
It could be parallel yet have either part be droppable (lossily would
be easier, but a lossless variant that expands temporally could be
devised too).
That way, yes, either hand or voice being out would degrade the
speech, but at least it's more robust in case *just* one is out (and
one can continue uninterrupted).
And such parallelism would at the least allow 2x throughput;
potentially much more (given that one would have cross-modal
permutations, rather than them being mutually independent).
I don't know whether this could work, but at least hypothetically it
could be done.
- Sai
Replies