Lindy Walton
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Nate, I didn't mean to leave your question unanswered. I still stand by my original suggestion, using UEB to show the diacritics and Nemeth only for the math symbols (equals sign in this case).
The examples from earlier posts that you found are good to compare the decision-making process regarding which code to use.
1. In the math word problem example from May 2019, (18 kazoos ...), a Spanish eñe occurs in the word piñata. A dot 4 was suggested here, which is a remnant of EBAE but surely works well in this new context and I see no reason not to fall back on this technique. A transcriber's note would explain this use of the dot 4 since Nemeth Code does not define this dot as an accent.
2. In the second example you pulled from July 2021 (geocentric), the use of math symbols in these pronunciations does not in itself make this a "math statement". However, we do not use UEB math symbols in a Nemeth transcription. Since the pronunciation method in this book example uses italics to show stress, transcribing them in Nemeth Code is not a problem to transcribe or to read. Since (46) is more commonly used in math as the Greek-letter indicator, and since (6, 3) is more commonly used as the single-word switch indicator, it might be helpful to mention in a transcriber's note that, within the pronunciations, (46) indicates an italicized word and (6, 3) terminates the italic typeform within an unspaced word.
3. The second example (March 30, 2021) is a nice clear example of using words in a math problem, using Nemeth throughout.
4. Regarding your project, the pronunciation markings provide important information concerning the topic at hand, which is how to pronounce a word. As with example 2, above, the use of math symbols in these pronunciations does not in itself make this a "math statement". However, Nemeth does not have symbols for diacritics. Transcribing diacritics and stress marks is covered thoroughly in UEB, Section 4 and in Braille Formats, Section 20.
I hope this clarifies the decisions made in these four distinctly different scenarios.
Lindy
Rule V of the 1972 Nemeth Code does not have a braille symbol assigned to this "double struck" font. You may use one of the font attributes not used elsewhere in your document, and explain the substitution in a transcriber's note. Usually the script font is the one that transcribers choose to use. So, yes, go ahead and use that indicator (dot 4) before the English-letter indicator and capital indicator for each of these letters. Your transcriber's note can say something like "Double-struck letters are denoted with a dot 4 before the letter indicator."
Lindy
Hi Carmen. Yes, you absolutely *can make a numerator two lines in a spatial fraction. Follow the guidelines for dividing any long math expression to decide where to divide the numerator. Send an image if you would like some help with that.
Lindy
Hi Fred. Thank you for your questions, and for sending us to the Provisional Guidance document for answers.
Yes, "freestanding" includes numbers or letters with punctuation. The example on page 2 of the Guidance shows a UEB number 3 and a UEB letter n with a following period. It is not really necessary to include this information in a transcriber's note, unless your agency or a teacher has asked for it.
I like your solution for rendering the numbered boxes. The numbers are not showing up in your scan, but I get the idea. Regarding the answer choices, I find the terminology "blank section" confusing, but I see that is what it says in the print copy. I'm guessing this test is printed from an online or digital format, which often makes less sense on paper. (The online test-taker probably clicks on their answer choice and it probably will pop into the box in the sentence, I'm guessing.) Regardless, your task is to provide the information clearly to the student. This is really a question for the Braille Formats folks, but I would suggest moving the answer choices to follow each blank in the question, similar to Example 10-19 in Braille Formats. The answer choices are put in parentheses, and you will need to separate the choices somehow. I suggest a spaced slash. This change absolutely requires a transcriber's note. See the attached BRF file for my solution.
I see you are using a square (box) symbol for the scoring numbers. (I assume there is a little box to the left of each slash? It is not showing up in the scan image.) I suggest using UEB there as well, transcribing an underscore instead of a box.
Lindy
Your formatting looks fine. The switch indicators are in a good place. I would suggest numbering the braille pages (in the lower right-hand corner).
I see one little error: You need to correct the numeral 4 in #21.
Thank you for your question.
Lindy
Unfortunately we are not able to open DXB files in this forum. Please save it as a BRF file and I will be able to see it. Thanks.
In a Nemeth transcription, omissions in a math problem are to be shown. If an omission is printed as a "write-on line", the Nemeth long dash is transcribed. For example, in 12 + 7 = __ is transcribed like this:
_% #12+7 .K ---- _:
Does this answer your question? If not, could you attach an example of the worksheet?
Lindy
Hi Carmen.
The pdf file is not opening for me. From your description, it might be the "barred brackets" depicted on page 123 of the Nemeth Code. I have attached that image. If this does not look like your brackets, can you try attaching your document again?
Lindy
Hi Dani.
Thank you for your question. We suggest that the Nemeth Code terminator be placed in cell 1, following the blank line that is required after the list.
Lindy
Nate, we have been discussing this and have decided that the kindest way to transcribe this is simply to transcribe only the equals symbol in Nemeth. Since it is a Nemeth transcription, the UEB equals sign is not an option. By using the Nemeth symbol, you remain true to the print.
Defaulting to EBAE is not something we should be considering. Use the established UEB symbols and Braille Formats guidelines (Section 20) to transcribe the pronunciation and stress marks.
It wouldn't hurt to explain what you are doing in a transcriber's note, or on the Transcriber's Notes page.
Lindy (and the committee)
( :What an interesting example. Without seeing the rest of the excerpt, I am guessing that this is not being used in "mathematical context". I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that only the equals sign be done in Nemeth. I welcome a conversation about this.
If you could attach the page so we can see this in context, that would be helpful.
Lindy
Hi Veeah.
The use of boldface in this example is for visual connection between math items. To use boldface indicators in the transcription is messy. I would not use them here. The student can be informed in a TN, formatted as commentary. See the attached brf file for suggested treatment.
Lindy
Example E qualifies as linked expressions using special margins. The last line on the page you sent is a new entry, not as part of the special linked format. The attached BRF file shows how I would transcribe this one. (I assume there is more on the next page, since the verification has not been shown at that point.) Let me know what you think!
LindyAt first glance, this looks like it might require "special margins" according to NC Sec.189.b because the equals signs are vertically aligned in print. But point iii in that section says this: "No sign of comparison, except possibly the first one, may be preceded by any expression on its left." So I took a closer look.
There is something strange about this example. It is actually showing that each step equals cos<theta>, but cos<theta> is not printed after the middle two steps. Your transcription will just fine if you simply insert a general omission symbol after each of those equals signs. Like this:
?COS .?/SIN .?#*?SIN .?/1# .K = _:
and
?COS .?/SIN .?#*?SIN .?/1# .K = _:
I wonder if there are some things missing from the image. Surely the second step ("Simplify by canceling common sine factors.") should have cancellation slashes through each sin<theta>. Could it be printed in a different color that is missing from your source? This would lead me to think that two missing cos<theta>s were also printed in a different color. Of course, you cannot add those items if they don't appear in your copy, but if you find other oddities in this assignment, you might want to investigate the source.
Lindy
