Digging into signs: Developing standard annotation practices for cross-linguistic, quantitative analysis of sign language data. Final Report.

For sign languages used by deaf communities, linguistic corpora have until recently been unavailable, due to the lack of a writing system and a written culture in these communities, and the very recent advent of digital video. Recent improvements in video and computer technology have now made larger sign language datasets possible; however, large sign language datasets that are fully machine-readable are still elusive. This is due to two challenges. 1. Inconsistencies that arise when signs are annotated by means of spoken/written language. 2. The fact that many parts of signed interaction are not necessarily fully composed of lexical signs (equivalent of words), instead consisting of constructions that are less conventionalised. As sign language corpus building progresses, the potential for some standards in annotation is beginning to emerge. But before this project, there were no attempts to standardise these practices across corpora, which is required to be able to compare data crosslinguistically. This project thus had the following aims: 1. To develop annotation standards for glosses (lexical/word level) 2. To test their reliability and validity 3. To improve current software tools that facilitate a reliable workflow Overall the project aimed not only to set a standard for the whole field of sign language studies throughout the world but also to make significant advances toward two of the world’s largest machine-readable datasets for sign languages – specifically the BSL Corpus (British Sign Language, http://bslcorpusproject.org) and the Corpus NGT (Sign Language of the Netherlands, http://www.ru.nl/corpusngt).

Research Software Sustainability: Report on Knowledge Exchange Workshop

The report introduces software sustainability, provides definitions, clearly demonstrates that software is not the same as data and illustrates aspects of sustainability in the software lifecycle. The recommendations state that improving software sustainability requires a number of changes: some technical and others societal, some small and others significant. We must start by raising awareness of researchers’ reliance on software. This goal will become easier if we recognise the valuable contribution that software makes to research – and reward those people who invest their time into developing reliable and reproducible software. The adoption of software has led to significant advances in research. But if we do not change our research practices, the continued rise in software use will be accompanied by a rise in retractions. Ultimately, anyone who is concerned about the reliability and reproducibility of research should be concerned about software sustainability. Beside highlighting the benefits of software sustainability and addressing the societal and technical barriers to software sustainability, the report provides access to expertise in software sustainability and outlines the role of funders. The report concludes with a short landscape of national activities in Europe and outside Europe. As a result of the workshop steps will be explored to establish European coordination and cooperation of national initiatives.