4 ms·
Considering that sign languages regularly invent signs, e.g. for names, I doubt that. The interpreter might find out that there is a name at that place, but not
by Argorak 13y ago
Considering that sign languages regularly invent signs, e.g. for names, I doubt that. The interpreter might find out that there is a name at that place, but not know what the written equivalent of that name is.
- seiji 13y agoNobody is arguing complete all-knowing recognition of human movement. It's just recognition of a sign for "table" being table and a sign for "hat" being hat, etc.
- ericd 13y agoAnd PGMs make it so you can use context to disambiguate things, so it can go beyond 1:1 sign-word recognition. Not sure if the researchers here are doing that yet, though.
- mabbo 13y agoExcept that is the very problem: drive 100 miles, and the signs for table and hat are different. Change the conversation, and the signs may be different. I can put an arm low and flat, and it means a general flat surface. It doesn't mean table until I mime setting a cup down on it, for example. Like I said, complex and nuanced. You have some incorrect assumptions in how signed languages work.
- seiji 13y agoEverything can be deciphered completely contextually based on location though. None of these are insurmountable problems. I wouldn't claim an ASL recognizer would suddenly identify BSL or anything wacky like that. Systems can even be trained (or generalized) down to a per-signer level. You could even have "Joe Pikachu's Generic Gesture Translator" too. Think solutions, not problems.
- Argorak 13y agoSign language also has other complexities. I don't know about american sign language, but german sign language (which I learned, I wouldn't say speak) is very depending on context and direction. For example, meanings can differ depending on what you are looking at. It is not "just recognition", it is "parsing the whole scene within context".