[stylist] To ponder- taken to another level

[Anita Ogletree]

Donna,
And to think I want to try it again at this age.  I am only 49 so 
I haven't reached senility, yet.
It disd just be so much easier if I don't have to worry about 
transportation in addition to keeping up with my school work.  
That is why I am looking into distance learning.  But I am having 
trouble finding out whether the schools are accredited.  The one 
that was suggested to me for music states on the site that they 
received accreditation from some place in New England.  If anyone 
can enlighten me on this I will be very grateful.
Anita

> ----- Original Message -----
>From: "Donna Hill" <penatwork at epix.net
>To: "'Writer's Division Mailing List'" <stylist at nfbnet.org
>Date sent: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 13:43:37 -0500
>Subject: Re: [stylist] To ponder- taken to another level

>Anita,
>Glad it wasn't just me.  Even if the reader was good, an idea 
would capture
>my attention, and then there I was at the end of the tape with no 
idea how I
>got there.  *grin*
>Donna

>-----Original Message-----
>From: stylist [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
Anita
>Ogletree
>Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 7:40 PM
>To: Writer's Division Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [stylist] To ponder- taken to another level

>Donna,

>I found that to be my problem as well.  Thank you for reminding 
me of that.
>I could not follow through with what was being read to save 
Christmas.
>And pbbease don't let it be a readw with a monotone voice! It 
didn't matter
>how much caffeine I tried pouring into my system, I fell asleep 
waking to
>find that the cassette had stopped playing.
>That was really disastrous innce I finally got the recorder I 
didn't have at
>the start of the term.

>Anita

>> ----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Donna Hill" <penatwork at epix.net
>>To: "'Writer's Division Mailing List'" <stylist at nfbnet.org Date 
sent:
>>Sat, 9 Feb 2013 13:04:03 -0500
>>Subject: Re: [stylist] To ponder- taken to another level

>>Bridgit,
>>You reminded me that I went from print to audio in my freshman
>year of
>>college.  Of course, in those days, we didn't have computers and
>the old NLS
>>books were on 16 rpm vinyl and the "RFB" books were on reel to
>reel tape.  I
>>had a hard time adjusting to listening though.  I couldn't pay
>attention.
>>Either my mind went off on a tangent and I didn't realize it
>until several
>>pages had gone by unnoticed, or I would simply fall asleep.  As
>much as I
>>rely on audio for pleasure reading and everything on the
>computer, I still
>>have the same issue.  I tend to read line by line when I'm
>editing and by
>>paragraph when I'm listening or content editing.  But, when I'm
>listening to
>>audio books -- well,  I not infrequently wake up having the
>memory that I
>>had stopped the book, which was merely a dream.  I wonder why I
>have that
>>dream? Sometimes, I think it's to absolve myself of the guilt of
>not having
>>made a deliberate decision to stop.
>>Donna

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: stylist [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>Bridgit
>>Pollpeter
>>Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 4:03 AM
>>To: stylist at nfbnet.org
>>Subject: [stylist] To ponder- taken to another level

>>Aine,

>>I agree that using Braille is the best way in which to gather
>information
>>when reading, but it's possible to use a screenreader in order to
>read and
>>edit.

>>First, at least with JAWS, there are settings you can turn on so
>all
>>punctuation is read out loud, and newer versions of MS Word have
>a feature
>>that can be turned on indicating when a spelling or grammar
>mistake has
>>occurred.  If sighted, this feature would be underlined in red,
>but with
>>screenreaders, it states that an error has occurred.

>>Second, you can slow the voice down to better hear the nuances of
>sentences.
>>The drone of the electronic voice can be frustrating at first,
>but trust me,
>>after a time, you adjust and it's not so distracting.  I think it
>was Lynda
>>who said she's a visual learner and not an audio learner, and I'm
>the same,
>>so when I went back to university and had to read primarily with
>audio
>>material, it was difficult.  It took me an entire semester to
>adjust and
>>learn to focus with audio alone.  And this was after extensive
>hours of
>>studying in this manner.  But I did it, and I've made the switch,
>though I
>>still have to focus more than I did when sighted.

>>Third, for those of us who learned print visually, we may have a
>slight
>>advantage when using just a screenreader and not Braille
>displays.  We have a
>>visual understanding and therefore may know what to look for upon
>an audio
>>reading without using Braille.  I'm not getting this thought out
>properly.
>>Perhaps someone else will understand and can better explain.
>>Don't mistake me for saying sight is better, it's just a
>different
>>understanding perhaps.  Someone help me out here?

>>I majored in creative writing, minored in PR writing, and did an
>internship
>>with a PR firm where I was primarily a writer and copy editor.
>As stated in
>>other posts, because of neuropathy, it's difficult for me to use
>Braille on
>>an extensive level.  I managed to use JAWS alone in order to
>accomplish
>>writing and editing, and I'm not all that slow when doing it.
>With school, I
>>graduated with honors, so I did something right, grin.

>>I use JAWS alone to edit Slate & Style, the Writers' division
>magazine, and
>>I do pretty well.  It can take me anywhere from 1 to 2 hours to
>edit a single
>>piece, and this is fairly common with any editor.

>>My point is not to discourage Braille but that it is possible to
>>successfully read, write and edit without it if one must.  If you
>can use
>>Braille then I strongly encourage one to do so, but if like me,
>it's not
>>impossible to do.

>>Now homophones are the one tricky thing.  As you state,
>screenreaders will
>>not pick up if the wrong homophone is used such as there and
>their.
>>If I'm familiar with another person's writing, I will know if I
>need to be
>>cognizant of checking or not.  I don't typically make this
>mistake as I'm
>>pretty anal about my writing and edit everything more than once
>including
>>casual emails, but this is probably attributed to my OCD
>tendencies, smile.

>>Sincerely,
>>Bridgit Kuenning-Pollpeter, editor, Slate & Style Read my blog
>at:
>>http://blogs.livewellnebraska.com/author/bpollpeter/

>>"If we discover a desire within us that nothing in this world can
>satisfy,
>>we should begin to wonder if perhaps we were created for another
>world."
>>C.  S.  Lewis

>>Message: 7
>>Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 23:03:55 +0100
>>From: Aine Kelly-Costello <ainekc at gmail.com
>>To: stylist at nfbnet.org
>>Subject: Re: [stylist] Quote to ponder - taken to another level
>>Message-ID: <5115767b.6f0db50a.0f14.ffffa30e at mx.google.com
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed

>>Here are some perhaps rather jumbled thoughts ...

>>I learned braille as a very young child.  I think I started
>pre-braille
>>activities at 3, and I have a few vague memories of reading a
>progressive
>>series of books at four (I lived in Ireland then, where starting
>school at
>>four is the norm).  These books were progressive in the sense
>that after I'd
>>mastered grade 1 (letters, punctuation and numbers only), each
>new one
>>introduced me to one or two new contractions.  I'd say I had a
>reasonably
>>good grasp of braille by the time I was six, and would have
>finished
>>learning all the contractions around then (for the non-braille
>readers,
>>Braille contractions are plentiful ...
>>there's probably two hundred or so in English).  The risk you run
>by learning
>>contractions "too soon" is one of not actually being able to
>spell the darn
>>words you know contractions for in the first place.  For example,
>once you
>>know that "receive" is written rcv, it's very easy to forget
>whether it's
>>spelled "receive" or "recieve", seeing as practically everything
>you read in
>>Braille will contain the contraction.  When I was little, I
>remember there
>>being questions raised about which contractions were and were not
>legit in
>>spelling tests.  In my opinion, set letter combinations like ar,
>in, en, ing,
>>com, con etc are okay, but writing rcv for "receive" or dot 5 q
>for
>>"question" are obviously not.  My point here is that even if you
>read
>>Braille, spelling may still be tricky.

>>Regarding whether a blind person can learn visually ...  That
>depends how you
>>define "visual", if you ask me.  I've always been a reasonably
>accurate
>>speller (the one exception to that being homophones which I'll
>talk about
>>below).  The few times I've had to memorize spelling lists, I
>listen to the
>>word and then an "image" pops up in my head which "looks" like me
>feeling
>>the Braille.  Therefore I think I remember the word by
>remembering how it
>>looks in grade 2 (contracted) Braille, not letter by letter.
>>On a side note, I think a knowledge of grade 2 makes it easier
>for me to see
>>words in their morphemes or syllables because of the way
>contractions go.
>>When I'm doing crosswords with my family, I am always the
>quickest to work
>>out how many letters there are in a long-ish word.

>>Moving on to screenreaders, here are some thoughts (in no
>particular order:

>>1.  There are many different synthesizers out there.  Of course
>they all have
>>their good points, their differences and their idiosyncrasies.
>For example,
>>one might say "tear" as "teer" while another would say "tare".
>One calls an
>>acquaintance whose last name is Mishoe "Misho" while another says
>"mis-hoe".
>>This trend is a bit of a pain and doesn't exactly facilitate
>recognition of
>>words which are in fact spelled the same but pronounced
>differently.  It's
>>especially a pain when the screenreader in question thinks it's
>reading one
>>language while it's actually reading another.  I'm very used to
>my
>>BrailleNote's English Spanish but JAW's is totally different; I
>find it much
>>trickier to decipher and have to pay very close attention.


>>2.  A lot of screenreader users, from my experience anyway (and
>I'm sure I've
>>done it before), tend to occasionally infer spelling of words new
>to them
>>solely from listening, and without checking on them.  I've had
>various
>>screenreader users e-mail me with my name, "Aine", spelled "Ain"
>or "Ane"
>>because according to JAWS, these three spellings are identical
>>(incidentally, the BrailleNote's keynote gold synthesizer
>pronounces "Ain"
>>as "Ann").

>>3.  Homophones.  I have a problem here ...  Admit it, we've
>probably all
>>written the wrong "there/their/they're" at some point.  But I've
>taken this
>>case to the extreme: I have in the past mixed up "role" and
>"roll", "route"
>>and "root", "jell" and "gel", "sight"
>>and "site" ...  Now of course I know exactly what all these words
>mean and
>>which is which (now, at least ...) but I strongly suspect that my
>accidental
>>lack of respect for their spelling has rather a lot to do with
>reliance on
>>speech for reading.  The other problem, evidently, is when you're
>>proofreading, if you rely solely on the speech and don't use a
>braille
>>display (which I admit I often do with long texts as it's about
>thrae times
>>faster) you have no way to "catch" homophones, leaving them to go
>unnoticed
>>and for whoever you might be sending your writing to to see.

>>4.  Human accents.  If you live in Australia or New Zealand, or
>even some
>>parts of England, you will know that the words "flaw"/"floor" and
>>"saw"/"sore" can often sound remarkably alike in every day
>speech.  So alike,
>>in fact, that people don't always realize how to spell them.  I
>have seen two
>>e-mails, written in reasonably formal situations by two different
>sighted
>>adults, informing me that such and such was a "very highly sort
>after"
>>teacher.  This is taken to another level among blind people,
>>though: I've seen people talk about "Lattern" (Latin) dancing and
>>"precortions" (precautions) among others.  I spent three and a
>half years in
>>Canada and have parents with mid-Atlantic accents so I am happily
>free from
>>this problem.  I do remember my brother arriving home from his
>first day of
>>school in New Zealand though (he was five, and we'd just recently
>moved
>>there), claiming they were being taught the letter w with a song
>that went
>>"wheat and windy, wih, wih, wih".  And so, he was introduced to
>the strong
>>"ehh" sound in the New Zealand accent ...

>>Now on to the advantages of braille.  Screenreaders, as some have
>mentioned
>>already, are a pain when it comes to understanding form and
>recognizing
>>pudctuation.  Sure they can read you the punctuation, but being
>told there's
>>a comma and actually reading that comma for yourself are in my
>opinion too
>>different things).
>>This is especially true of poetry.  The first few times I read
>any poem, it
>>is ALWAYS by hand.  I have a BrailleNote with a braille display,
>and this is
>>one of its many uses.  To be honest, though, if a blind person
>really wants
>>to see form clearly, you can't beat hard-copy  Braille in my
>opinion.  For
>>example, I remember having to multiply matrices in my year 11
>Maths exam.
>>This was quite literally done with one hand on one matrix reading
>>horizontally and the other hand on the other one reading
>vertically.  If I
>>had tried to do that with a screen reader I think my brain might
>have
>>overloaded ...

>>Beyond seeing form and punctuation, there are obviously more
>advantages of
>>being able to read Braille.  Braille Music, for instance.  I'd
>never have been
>>able to join orchestras and be where I am at the moment
>music-wise without
>>it.  What about learning a new language? I like to be able to
>read books in
>>Spanish by hand because, it not being nearly as strong as my
>English, I
>>still miss detail when using speech.  It's also great for giving
>speeches and
>>debates.  I would not be at all amused if I had to speak in an
>impromptu
>>debate without being able to read my notes in Braille.  Being
>able to
>>participate in class when people are reading out, say, lines from
>different
>>characters in a play, is definitely nice.  Moreover, I know I'd
>really have
>>struggled to do well in Maths without Braille, and I'm not just
>talking
>>about the matrices.  I don't know how you could proofread long,
>complicated
>>calculus with a screenreader in an exam, it'd surely be slow at
>best.


>>Anyway, there are my musings on the topic ...


>>Aine


>>_______________________________________________
>>Writers Division web site
>>http://www.writers-division.net/
>>stylist mailing list
>>stylist at nfbnet.org
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>for
>>stylist:
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/penatwork%40
>epix.net


>>_______________________________________________
>>Writers Division web site
>>http://www.writers-division.net/
>>stylist mailing list
>>stylist at nfbnet.org
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>for stylist:
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/yrstrli%40gm
>ail.com

>_______________________________________________
>Writers Division web site
>http://www.writers-division.net/
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for
>stylist:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/penatwork%40
epix.net


>_______________________________________________
>Writers Division web site
>http://www.writers-division.net/
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
for stylist:
>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/yrstrli%40gm
ail.com