![]() Which seemed kind of crazy, because, well, our little time-based backup agent- sdbackupbytime-only runs once a minute, and I'd reviewed the code so many times. In v3.2.4, we started getting occasional reports of scheduled copies running more than once. Other reported shortcomings of test adaptation are related to the question of how well psychometric measures transfer from one instrument to another.You'd think, given I've written everything here, I'd learn to pay attention to what I've said in the past. The problems reported in these adaptations were found to be grounded in linguistic and cultural differences, which need to be considered for future test adaptations. A brief description is given of each test as well as insights from ongoing adaptations of these tests for other sign languages. Two tests which have been adapted for several other sign languages are focused upon: the Test for American Sign Language and the British Sign Language Receptive Skills Test. This article discusses factors that may influence the adaptation of assessment tests from one natural sign language to another. Given the current lack of appropriate assessment tools for measuring deaf children’s sign language skills, many test developers have used existing tests of other sign languages as templates to measure the sign language used by deaf people in their country. Our work can be seen as an effort to bring a framework of usability to corpus work. The principles have offered benefits in CFINSL: we are able to evaluate our annotations more systematically and holistically than ever before. In this article, using these six principles, we evaluate the usability of the annotations in CFINSL and other corpus projects. Based on our experience of annotation in the corpus project of Finland’s Sign Languages (CFINSL), we have developed six principles for the evaluation of annotation. The purpose of the framework is not to give conventions for annotating but to offer tools for the evaluation of the usability of the annotation, in order to make annotations more usable and make it possible to justify and explain decisions about annotation conventions. This paper aims to develop a conceptual framework for the evaluation of the usability of annotations. When discussing corpora, it is necessary to develop a way of considering and evaluating holistically the features and problems of annotation. Several corpus projects for sign languages have tried to establish conventions and standards for the annotation of signed data. The argument will be made that – considering the current state of research for many sign languages – these acquisition studies from a variety of sign languages can serve as the basis for making informed decisions for test development and adaptation (for example, deciding which items should be represented in a sign language test), but only together with cross-linguistic and language specific studies. The main focus is on studies that covered the age range of 4 to 8 year-olds, the age group of the adapted DGS test. This paper presents this review of the most recent acquisition studies of the linguistic structures mentioned above and represented in the BSL test. Hence in lieu of DGS-studies, studies of other sign languages were reviewed that focused on the acquisition of linguistic structures represented in the original BSL test selected for the targeted age group (> 3 years old): agreement verbs, AB verb constructions, classifier constructions (spatial verbs with whole entity classifiers, size and shape specifiers, and handling classifiers), negation, and number and distribution. For a research project which adapted the British Sign Language Receptive Skills Test (Herman, Holmes, & Woll 1999) to German Sign Language (DGS: Deutsche Gebärdensprache Haug 2011a), there existed only one study on the acquisition of DGS, which focused on verb agreement (Hänel 2003, 2005). As the structures and acquisition of many sign languages are rather under-documented, developing or adapting a test for a specific sign language poses a great challenge for test developers, especially with respect to the test's reliability and validity. Developing or adapting tests of sign language development requires knowledge about the emergence and mastery of the linguistic structures that should be represented in a test. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |