@inproceedings{hanke:12028:sign-lang:lrec,
  author    = {Hanke, Thomas and Matthes, Silke and Regen, Anja and Worseck, Satu},
  title     = {Where Does a Sign Start and End? Segmentation of Continuous Signing},
  pages     = {69--74},
  editor    = {Crasborn, Onno and Efthimiou, Eleni and Fotinea, Stavroula-Evita and Hanke, Thomas and Kristoffersen, Jette and Mesch, Johanna},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the {LREC2012} 5th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Interactions between Corpus and Lexicon},
  maintitle = {8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC} 2012)},
  publisher = {{European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}},
  address   = {Istanbul, Turkey},
  day       = {27},
  month     = may,
  year      = {2012},
  language  = {english},
  url       = {https://www.sign-lang.uni-hamburg.de/lrec/pub/12028.html},
  abstract  = {There are two basic approaches how to segment continuous signing into individual signs:\begin{itemize}\item A sign starts where the preceding one ends (i.e. fluent signing means there are no gaps between signs)\item Transitional movements between signs do not count as part of either sign. Therefore, usually there are gaps between two signs during which the articulators move from the end of one sign to the beginning of the next.\end{itemize}Both approaches have their pros and cons. However, in the context of the DGS Corpus and the Dicta-Sign project the second approach offers advantages for the subsequent processing. Here we investigate how sensitive this approach is with respect to higher video frame rates.}
}

@inproceedings{konrad:12023:sign-lang:lrec,
  author    = {Konrad, Reiner and Hanke, Thomas and K{\"o}nig, Susanne and Langer, Gabriele and Matthes, Silke and Nishio, Rie and Regen, Anja},
  title     = {From form to function. A database approach to handle lexicon building and spotting token forms in sign languages},
  pages     = {87--94},
  editor    = {Crasborn, Onno and Efthimiou, Eleni and Fotinea, Stavroula-Evita and Hanke, Thomas and Kristoffersen, Jette and Mesch, Johanna},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the {LREC2012} 5th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Interactions between Corpus and Lexicon},
  maintitle = {8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC} 2012)},
  publisher = {{European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}},
  address   = {Istanbul, Turkey},
  day       = {27},
  month     = may,
  year      = {2012},
  language  = {english},
  url       = {https://www.sign-lang.uni-hamburg.de/lrec/pub/12023.html},
  abstract  = {Using a database with type entries that are linked to token tags in transcripts has the advantage that consistency in lemmatising is not depending on ID-glosses. In iLex types are organised in different levels. The type hierarchy allows for analysing form, iconic value, and conventionalised meanings of a sign (sub-types). Tokens can be linked either to types or sub-types.
\par
We expanded this structure for modelling sign inflection and modification as well as phonological variation. Differences between token and type form are grouped by features, called qualifiers, and specified by feature values (vocabularies). Built-in qualifiers allow for spotting the form difference when lemmatising. This facilitates lemma revision and helps to get a clear picture of how inflection, modification, or phonological variation is distributed among lexical signs. This is also a strong indicator for further POS tagging. In the long term this approach will extend the lexical database from citation-form closer to  full-form.
\par
The paper will explain the type hierarchy and introduce the qualifiers used up-to-date. Further on the handling and how the data are displayed will be illustrated. As we report work in progress in the context of the DGS corpus project, the modelling is far from complete.}
}

@inproceedings{matthes:12016:sign-lang:lrec,
  author    = {Matthes, Silke and Hanke, Thomas and Regen, Anja and Storz, Jakob and Worseck, Satu and Efthimiou, Eleni and Dimou, Athanasia-Lida and Braffort, Annelies and Glauert, John and Safar, Eva},
  title     = {{Dicta-Sign} -- Building a Multilingual Sign Language Corpus},
  pages     = {117--122},
  editor    = {Crasborn, Onno and Efthimiou, Eleni and Fotinea, Stavroula-Evita and Hanke, Thomas and Kristoffersen, Jette and Mesch, Johanna},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the {LREC2012} 5th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Interactions between Corpus and Lexicon},
  maintitle = {8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC} 2012)},
  publisher = {{European Language Resources Association (ELRA)}},
  address   = {Istanbul, Turkey},
  day       = {27},
  month     = may,
  year      = {2012},
  language  = {english},
  url       = {https://www.sign-lang.uni-hamburg.de/lrec/pub/12016.html},
  abstract  = {This paper presents the multilingual corpus of four European sign languages compiled in the framework of the Dicta-Sign project. Dicta-Sign researched ways to enable communication between Deaf individuals through the development of human-computer interfaces (HCI) for Deaf users, by means of sign language. Sign language resources were compiled to inform progress in the other research areas within the project, especially video recognition of signs, sign-to-sign translation, linguistic modelling, and sign generation. The aim for the corpus data collection was to achieve as high a level of naturalness as possible with semi-spontaneous utterances under lab conditions. At the same time the elicited data were supposed to be semantically close enough to be comparable both across individual informants and for all four sign languages. The sign language data were annotated using iLex and are now made available via a web portal that allows for different access options to the data.}
}