Lindy Walton
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Veeah.
This is an interesting question! I do not consider "logs" to be the same as the abbreviated function name "log". "logs" would not be found in a mathematical expression. It's conversational shorthand, I suppose, in this sentence.
You can confidently transcribe "logs" in UEB. "log x", on the other hand, should be in Nemeth (as well as y = log x). Now, what about "log button"? Here, I would lean toward putting "log" inside Nemeth code switches.
Thank you for giving me something to think about.
Lindy
Hi.
Referring to the new lesson manual for UEB with Nemeth, 6.4.1 illustrates what I call the "typewriter" method of printing a fraction, where the numbers in the numerator and the denominator are printed on the baseline of writing. The numbers are the same size as the surrounding text. The Nemeth Code says to interpret this as numbers with a slash between them, not using fraction indicators. I believe this rule is to prevent misinterpretation of two numbers with a slash between them -- not always a fraction. It's just a straightforward transcription of number-slash-number.
Sometimes you will encounter a mixed number printed in this fashion, where the whole number is followed by a space and then a "typewriter fraction". It looks like this unusual printing method was overlooked in the lesson book. Check out Section 64 of the Nemeth Code. Example (2) shows a "mixed number" printed this way. As long as you are certain this is a mixed number, go ahead and transcribe it using the "fractional part of a mixed number" indicators and the diagonal fraction line.
Lindy
The current (1972) Nemeth Code gives us no guidance regarding this layout, which is why the new lesson manual (your reference) does not suggest a format. I would transcribe your example by placing the anchor on the same line as the identifier, then beginning each link on a new line starting in cell 3 (assuming the identifier begins in cell 1). Your example would not have any runovers, but if the anchor or any link requires a runover, I would indent two cells further (cell 5, in this case).
Lindy
Hi Veeah.
In UEB with Nemeth, we define "x = the weight of the lightest policeman" as the math expression, all in Nemeth Code. The first place to divide an equation is before the equals sign. So, yes, you will have to divide this expression twice. Your second transcription shows this division preference.
It is recommended that the grouping signs be transcribed in the same code. So I would terminate Nemeth right after the word "policeman", then have the period and the closing parenthesis be in UEB. Even if more math follows right away, it will be clearer to read the closing parenthesis in UEB, rather than wondering if you missed an opening Nemeth grouping symbol. I demonstrate this in the attached file.
Thank you for your question!
Lindy
Hi Margaret.
This is an interesting, and common, dilemma.The rules to follow are:
--Only the math should be done in Nemeth code.
the symbols > and < (in the first instructions)
the circle used as a sign of omission (in the first set)--If only one non-math word occurs between math symbols use the single-word switch indicator for that word.
the word "or" (in the first instructions)Which code?
--Because each numbered practice item contains a symbol which must use Nemeth,
the omission symbol in 5-7
the equals sign in 8-13
each inequality or equation should be entirely in Nemeth. The words in these math statements are part of the math problem and so are uncontracted.(Even though, within narrative, the unmodified numbers could be transcribed in UEB, because they are within an inequality or an equation that uses a Nemeth symbol, the numbers and words are transcribed in Nemeth.)
Attached is my transcription of this worksheet. The right portion of number 7 is off the screen, so I put in a general omission indicator just to show that Nemeth Code is terminated before continuing.
Ah, yes.
First of all, we will be changing the statement in 14.15.1 of the UEB with Nemeth lesson manual soon. It is a misinterpretation and misunderstanding that was not the intention of "division between lines" outlined in the Nemeth Code. It makes sense to begin a new line with every sign of comparison when a link will not fit on one line, but beyond that there is no logic to the statement. That being said, you may have an easier time of this now.
Your first transcription is clear and well done. The ASCII that you pasted into the message box is unformatted, so I have attached a BRF copy of the recommended format. Note that, although technically this math is not displayed, I am still applying the "special margins" rule. Especially when there are author's comments, the extra indentation pattern applied to the runovers makes this easier to deconstruct when reading.
I am using the "run-in" style of placing the author's note on the same line as the math, if it fits. If it doesn't fit, I am using the same runover cell as the math. It looks to me like you might be using the alternate style of beginning the author's comment on a new line. If that is the case, each comment needs to be indented four more cells. I show that option as a second choice in the attached file.
All author's comments in the transcription should follow the same layout -- either run-in or displayed. Explain the placement of author's notes in a transcriber's note.
Lindy
Hi. I see your png file, but no question. If you are wondering about where to place the commentary, I am guessing that the math will be displayed, starting each displayed line with a "d". Follow Nemeth rules for displayed margins--there is no need to align the equals signs in the braille transcription. Place each author's remark to the right, leaving one blank cell between the math and the comment.
Attached is a brf file showing what the longest line will look like. I'm starting in cell 3 and running over in cell 5, but depending on your layout you may be indenting further.
If I have not answered your question adequately, please let me know.
Lindy
Margaret, you really have me thinking on this one! I have tried a couple of different ideas for layout. The one I am going to suggest takes into account the priorities I perceive to be important at this grade level (4th grade).
The most important concept is reading the dots above the line plot. Reading the mixed number labels is not a top priority.
In my work in the schools in the lower grades, we felt it was important to keep the braille transcription looking as much like the print as possible. This helps the student follow the teacher, aide, or parent's explanations without adding another layer of interpretation. For this reason, I would not advocate rotating this line plot, even though rotating it certainly solves the issue of those long mixed numbers on the scale.
I tried staggering the labels, but this means three lines of labels and no room for lead lines. Not a good idea. I tried setting it up as a foldout, but because the mixed numbers take up so much horizontal space, this wasn't working either. (I would not use 'facing pages' because the gap for the binding will disturb the reading of the data.)
I think the best rendition is to show only the whole numbers on the first line of labels, and only the mixed numbers that will fit on the second line. Draw a tactual lead line from the tick mark to the first cell of the label on the second line. A short transcriber's note explains: "In the line plot below, each tick mark represents one-eighth of a pound. Not all tick marks are labeled." The attached brf file illustrates this plan. You will need to imagine the four lead lines.
I hope this helps! And I welcome any comments.
LindyHi Julie. Word on the street is that we are to say "... using UEB with Nemeth" now, but I have not seen an official announcement from BANA. Has anyone else?
Lindy
Hi. First, I would like to clarify the topic of use/nonuse of the numeric indicator for spatial fractions. When a fraction is transcribed spatially in order to show the numerator above the denominator, for example when cancellation occurs, a numeric indicator is used if the numeral is preceded by a space. Section 60 of the Nemeth Code shows examples. Sections 68-70 also show spatially-arranged fractions where numeric indicators are used.
However, as is the case here in your example, when a fraction is involved in a problem arranged for computation, numeric indicators are not used. I have attached a corrected transcription of your example. Notice how the plus sign is one cell to the left of the overall problem, and how the indicators and fraction lines are vertically aligned through the addends and the sum. These alignment rules may be found in Section 178.e and 178.f of the Nemeth Code.
Spatial problems are preceded and followed by a blank line, even when code switch indicators are present. A minimum of one cell comes between the separation lines of side-by-side spatially-arranged problems, which I have done in my example, but if your student prefers wider spacing you may do so. Section 185 discusses spacing.
Please let me know if you have further questions.
Lindy
The first image shows mathematical signs that all have rules stated in the Nemeth Code. Here are the sections where you can read about them.
simple fractions: Sec. 61
the factorial symbol: Sec. 169
a multiplication dot: Sec. 135
subscripts (Rule XIII), including:
a left subscript: Sec. 75
numeric subscripts to the right of a letter: Sec. 77
an ellipsis: Sec. 43Hopefully, the braille font will show in this window, but I also have attached a transcription of the two expressions. I may have misread the capitalization of some of the letters, so you will need to correct those if necessary.
?N&/,K1&*,K2&* ''' *,K;P"&#
;N",C;,K .K ?N&/(N-,K)&*,K&#
Let me know if you have further questions.
LindyHi Debbie.
It looks like your second file is too large to post. Can you trim it down a bit? I'll take a look at the first image (0645) in a minute...
Lindy
Since this system is embedded, not displayed, choice #2 follows the rules as I understand them. The system is a spatial arrangement, which is why the spacing must be adjusted so there is no braille symbol in the vertical "column" before and after the arrangement -- that is, cells 11 and 25 must be blank on the two lines. This eliminates choice #3. Choice #1 is tempting since it seems like it might be easier or clearer to read, but there is no rule that says we should start a new line for that reason.
Hope that helps.
Lindy
