Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤 in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤 you have here. The definition of the word Talk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤 will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:𝣷𝪜𝤫𝪤, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
@SemperBlotto: All sign languages use the same "script" (body movement), so it makes sense that we use the same system to enter them into Wiktionary. And because this is the English Wiktionary, we use a system in English. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds17:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Still, there are separate alphabets. "A" is the same gesture in American Sign Language, French Sign Language, and German Sign Language, but a completely different gesture in British Sign Language. So our notation isn't universal to all sign languages. But yes, we use English words in entry names to describe signs, regardless of which sign language they occur in. —Mahāgaja · talk18:34, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
The entry name is like a pronunciation, but gestural instead of vocal. Lacking an International Gesture Description Language, we have to do with a clumsy English-based code. I could also imagine a more graphemic representation of the gestural elements, such that graphemes can be composed to form a description of a complex gesture. --Lambiam06:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
SignWriting is available in Unicode, but somewhat clumsily since two dimensions are relevant in SignWriting instead of just one in conventional writing. In principle, we could use that, but I don't know whether our Sign Language editors would want to. —Mahāgaja · talk07:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
It would be cool to have Signing sections where for other words we have Pronunciation, with, inasmuch as possible, both a rendering in the International Sign Writing Alphabet (whose existence I was unaware of) and as a video. I don’t think ISWA is practical in this 2D form for the entry name. The foremost concern is usability as a search term (for which the current approach does not score well IMO); otherwise it might be just any random code from a catalogue of signs. Perhaps a linearized encoding of the ISWA representation using image composition operators (above, besides)? --Lambiam16:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
