Re: Discrete vs. continuous

From: spk2wrt@phoenix.edc.org
Date: Thu Mar 23 2000 - 00:00:00 EST

  • Next message: spk2wrt@phoenix.edc.org: "Re: Disgraphia Info"

    In Bob Follansbee's "Update on continuous speech", which he states will
    be updated in the coming weeks, he argues that discrete speech is easier
    for many people than continuous speech, a point with which I strongly
    disagree. 4. Learning to write: Dr. Follansbee says
    "Since mature users are generally already familiar with the distinctions
    in voice and style between speaking and writing, they can adjust their
    speech-like dictation to reflect their intention to create a written
    document. This would be much more difficult for the inexperienced young or
    learning
    disabled user."

    I am not sure what Dr. Follansbee is addressing here. I think he is
    saying that written language is different from spoken language. Aside
    from the obvious neurological differences, I think the intention of this
    statement is concerned with style.

    I think this style works. I think it works great! (Of course, I almost
    always use speech recognition to write). Having your words transposed
    onto paper creates easily understood sentences. A tendency toward
    jargon diminishes. The twisted syntax that often results from a "one
    word at a time" approach diminishes. People with no real assumptions
    about how to construct a written sentence find that they already are
    constructing sentences orally, and they can adapt this method to create
    written documents.

    Frankly, I have reservations about most people's writing and style,
    including Dr. Follansbee. Most people have difficulty finding the
    perfect words to fit the medium. In general, much technical written
    language is obtuse and difficult to understand. Dr. Follansbee's
    sentences are often run-ons, and his use of hyphens might signal the
    revival of a underused key,. (Look at the success of the "@".) Hey,
    somebody gave him a doctorate and a good job. Who am I to complain!
    What I intend to demonstrate here is that successful writing styles are
    quite varied. (and easy to criticize) Learning to write and edit are
    processes that can successfully go in a variety of directions.
    The area where many special educators become involved with the student
    is when they do not develop writing skills at a normal rate. These are
    the students on I.E.P.'s., with written language discrepancies
    highlighted. These are the students who are unable to write a sentence
    independently. Many of these students end up dictating their sentences
    to a teacher or associate, who then writes down the words the student is
    saying. It is important that these students are able to produce
    something by themselves in order to develop their skills. The most
    important aspect of writing (or speaking, we all know people who suffer
    from diarrhea of the mouth) is the editing process. Because speech
    recognition allows students to get more information into text without
    anybody assisting them, they need to spend additional time editing their
    work. This is often a skill that is poorly developed.

    Let these students get something on paper quickly, and independently,
    so they can learn how to edit their written words. Allow the teachers
    to work with already constructed sentences, not spend all their time
    trying to coax something on to paper, then not have enough time to teach
    the editing process.

    I think editing is really the most important aspect of speech
    recognition and writing. I would like to address this in future
    articles

    David Garbose, MA CCC SLP
    Newspeak Communications
    Charlotte Vermont
    dave@newspeakcom.com

    spk2wrt@phoenix.edc.org wrote:
    >
    > To the listserv,
    >
    > I welcome David's perspective and will let it speak for itself. There is
    > one
    > item he states in the first paragraph that I would like to clarify. He
    says
    >
    > that an "article" was removed from the spk2wrt website. He is referring
    to
    > the "Update on continuous speech" which is not actually removed
    altogether,
    >
    > but is itself being updated. It was overlooked in our most recent review
    of
    >
    > the website in Nov., 1999, and will be posted again within a few weeks.
    It
    > will recognize the advances and new possibilities of the most recent
    > continuous speech products, but will continue to caution about the
    > developmental and speech processing issues in continuous speech
    technology.
    >
    > As you can see, David takes issue with even this modified position, as do
    > several others who are active in implementation of speech recognition for
    > school-age children. I welcome this discussion of the relative merits of
    > discrete vs. continuous, and I hope that anyone with experience in both
    > technologies will weigh in on this discussion. I hope we can all learn
    from
    >
    > the discussion.
    >
    > Bob Follansbee
    > Co-Director, Speaking to Write Project
    >
    > In a message dated 3/16/00 4:34:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
    > spk2wrt@phoenix.edc.org writes:
    >
    > > Last month I was forwarded an article comparing continuous speech
    > > recognition with discrete speech. In the statement Dr. Bob Follansbee
    > > suggests that discrete speech recognition is often better than
    > > continuous speech as an assistive technology method for people with
    > > learning disabilities. I continue to hear this opinion from a variety
    > > of respected sources, and strongly disagree with this argument. The
    > > article was recently removed from the spk2wrt website following a
    series
    > > of communications between myself and Bob. I have written a complete
    > > rebuttal to this article, but it is too long for placement on this
    > > forum. I believe it is important to discuss the reasons why continuous
    > > speech recognition is better at all levels than discrete speech.
    >
    > ____________________________________________________________
    > To post a message to the spk2wrt list, send your message to:
    > spk2wrt@mail.edc.org. To reply to a message, simply use the reply button
    in
    > your email program (do not change the subject line in any way). To
    access the
    > spk2wrt archive containing a full list of all discussion threads to date,
    point
    > your Web browser to: http://www.edc.org/spk2wrt/hypermail/. For
    questions about
    > this list, please send a message to: spk2wrt@edc.org. For more
    information
    > about the Speaking to Write project, please visit our Web site at:
    > http://www.edc.org/spk2wrt

    --
    ~~~~         ~~~~         ~~~~        ~~~~         ~~~~
    ~~~~
    Newspeak Communications                         Speech Recognition
    Technology
    dave@newspeakcom.com                        Speech Therapy
    http://www.newspeakcom.com                       (802) 425-4250
    ~~~~         ~~~~         ~~~~         ~~~~         ~~~~         ~~~~
    

    ____________________________________________________________ To post a message to the spk2wrt list, send your message to: spk2wrt@mail.edc.org. To reply to a message, simply use the reply button in your email program (do not change the subject line in any way). To access the spk2wrt archive containing a full list of all discussion threads to date, point your Web browser to: http://www.edc.org/spk2wrt/hypermail/. For questions about this list, please send a message to: spk2wrt@edc.org. For more information about the Speaking to Write project, please visit our Web site at: http://www.edc.org/spk2wrt



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 12:25:08 EST