I agree on rereading messages Charlse, however as an interesting point, when
you gave the example of 2, to, or too, Realspeak Daniel actually did
distinguish between the various formulations quite nicely so that I knew
instantly what you have meant.
Indeed, I've noticed that the over all spelling feedback of Daniel is better
than Orphius was for a lot of words.
Of course, I suspect a degree of this, at least as far as reading
preferences go, is to do with personal sensory perception.
I am synaesthesic, and preimarily work through a translation of sound into
colour and sensation. My mum first taught me to read braille through use of
phonics, indeed I still have a great love and admiration for the sound of
language rather than it's other qualities, ---- I hate for example authors
who write characters with unpronounceable names, or arythmic sentence
structure.
I also have been learning music by ear for years, and am at the point now
where I can quite successfully learn an Aria more quickly than a sighted
person with written music, indeed when singing on stage in operatic scenes
or even in the strictor forms of concerts it's actually a major advantage
since everyone else has to put their music down and cope without it.
Several times you have talked about doing things by "The fingers" which
likely implies that this is your primary mode of sensory input. You make a
distinction between "Being read to by a machine or a person" and "reading
yourself in braille" a distinction which to me seems meaningless and
nonsensical since to me reading is apprehention of the voice and language,
the letters are inconsequencial, indeed even when I do read braille myself I
am more hearing the words than reading the letters (as well as seeing
colours and feeling different sensations but lets not get into synaesthesia
now).
This sensory distinction occurs with sighted people as well. Some people
look at printed letters, others work by the entire page, others work by
feelings and sensations, just as some people can skim read a page of printed
text rapidly and apprehend it's meaning, others prefer to look carefully
through single words.
It strikes me that while speech will appeal to people who ignore letters and
have a natural propensity to audio, so braille will appeal to people who are
more spacially or tactilly inclined. This is of course where having the
ability to display and read braille as conveniently as speech would be an
advantage since it would allow the choice of preferd methods of reading at
different times, ---- as I have said myself, I'd much prefer to read novels
in braille (if a human audio wasn't available), for all I'd rather have
speech most of the time.
The problem however is people don't get the choice of using braille if they
wish, since the practical and economic are just too major, and it is those
ultimately which will doom braille, not any inherent inferiority in braille
method itself.
BEware the Grue!
Dark.
---
Gamers mailing list __ Gamers@audyssey.org
If you want to leave the list, send E-mail to gamers-unsubscr...@audyssey.org.
You can make changes or update your subscription via the web, at
http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org.
All messages are archived and can be searched and read at
http://www.mail-archive.com/gamers@audyssey.org.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the management of the list,
please send E-mail to gamers-ow...@audyssey.org.
