A prototype Malayalam to Indian Sign Language (ISL) Automatic Translator

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Jul 26, 2022
https://doi.org/10.47164/ijngc.v13i2.336
Download
Requires Subscription PDF
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 13, Issue 2, July 2022

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Jestin Joy
Department of Computer Applications, St. George's College, Aruvithura
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0892-7874
Kannan Balakrishnan
Department of Computer Applications, CUSAT
Sreeraj M
Department of Computer Science, Sree Ayyappa College, Eramallikkara

Abstract

Sign Language is one of the major mediums of communication for deaf people. It uses gestures which makes use of hand, facial expression and other body parts to convey meaning. The use of parallel modification as opposed to the sequential nature of spoken language makes it difficult for efficient representation. This calls for the development of animation techniques for representing signs which can easily model human gestures. This paper presents a prototype Malayalam language text to Indian Sign Language (ISL) automatic translation system. The proposed system takes Malayalam text as input and generates corresponding Indian Sign Language (ISL) signs as output. Output animation is rendered using a computer-generated model. This system will help to disseminate information to deaf people in public utility places like railways, banks, hospitals etc. This will also act as an educational tool.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Joy, J., Balakrishnan, K., & M, S. (2022). A prototype Malayalam to Indian Sign Language (ISL) Automatic Translator. International Journal of Next-Generation Computing, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.47164/ijngc.v13i2.336
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Almasoud, A. M. and Al-Khalifa, H. S. 2011. A proposed semantic machine translation
  2. system for translating arabic text to arabic sign language. In Proceedings of the Second
  3. Kuwait Conference on e-Services and e-Systems. 1–6.
  4. ASLLRP. 2014. American sign language linguistic research project(asllrp). Accessed: 2014-10-
  5. Cox, S., Lincoln, M., Tryggvason, J., Nakisa, M., Wells, M., Tutt, M., and Abbott,
  6. S. 2002. Tessa, a system to aid communication with deaf people. In Proceedings of the Fifth
  7. International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies. Assets ’02. ACM, New York, NY,
  8. USA, 205–212.
  9. Dasgupta, T. and Basu, A. 2008. Prototype machine translation system from text-to-indian DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1378773.1378818
  10. sign language. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Intelligent user inter-
  11. faces. ACM, 313–316.
  12. De Araújo, T. M. U., Ferreira, F. L., Silva, D. A., Oliveira, L. D., Falcão, E. L.,
  13. Domingues, L. A., Martins, V. F., Portela, I. A., Nóbrega, Y. S., Lima, H. R.,
  14. et al. 2014. An approach to generate and embed sign language video tracks into multimedia
  15. contents. Information Sciences 281, 762–780.
  16. Hanke, T. 2004. Hamnosys-representing sign language data in language resources and language
  17. processing contexts. In LREC. Vol. 4.
  18. Hong, R., Wang, M., Xu, M., Yan, S., and Chua, T.-S. 2010. Dynamic captioning: Video DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1873951.1874013
  19. accessibility enhancement for hearing impairment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia. MM ’10. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 421–430.
  20. ISLRTC. 2017. Islrtc-prepared with a directory of isl interpreters in india.
  21. Kar, P., Reddy, M., Mukherjee, A., and Raina, A. M. 2007. Ingit: Limited domain
  22. formulaic translation from hindi strings to indian sign language. ICON .
  23. Knoors, H. and Hermans, D. 2010. Effective instruction for deaf and hard-of-hearing students: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195390032.013.0005
  24. Teaching strategies, school settings, and student characteristics. The Oxford handbook of
  25. deaf studies, language, and education 2, 57–71.
  26. Kouremenos†, D., Fotinea, S.-E., Efthimiou, E., and Ntalianis, K. 2010. A prototype
  27. greek text to greek sign language conversion system. Behaviour & Information Technol-
  28. ogy 29, 5, 467–481.
  29. Lombardo, V., Battaglino, C., Damiano, R., and Nunnari, F. 2011. An avatar-based
  30. interface for the italian sign language. In Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive
  31. Systems (CISIS), 2011 International Conference on. IEEE, 589–594.
  32. López-Ludeña, V., González-Morcillo, C., López, J., Ferreiro, E., Ferreiros, J.,
  33. and San-Segundo, R. 2014. Methodology for developing an advanced communications
  34. system for the deaf in a new domain. Knowledge-Based Systems 56, 240–252.
  35. Morrissey, S. and Way, A. 2013. Manual labour: tackling machine translation for sign DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-012-9133-1
  36. languages. Machine translation 27, 1, 25–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/para.2004.27.1.64
  37. Neidle, C. J. 2000. The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierar-
  38. chical structure. MIT Press.
  39. Price, B. 2017. Sign language costs ’too high’ for some families.
  40. Raghavan, R., Prasad, K., Muraleedharan, R., and Geetha, M. 2013. Animation
  41. system for indian sign language communication using lots notation. In Emerging Trends
  42. in Communication, Control, Signal Processing Computing Applications (C2SPCA), 2013
  43. International Conference on. 1–7.
  44. San Segundo, R., Barra-Chicote, R., Luis Fernando, D., Montero, J. M.,
  45. de Córdoba, R., and Ferreiros, J. 2006. A spanish speech to sign language trans-
  46. lation system for assisting deaf-mute people. In INTERSPEECH.
  47. San-Segundo, R., Montero, J., Córdoba, R., Sama, V., Fernández, F., D’Haro, L.,
  48. López-Ludeña, V., Sánchez, D., and Garcı́a, A. 2012. Design, development and
  49. field evaluation of a spanish into sign language translation system. Pattern Analysis and
  50. Applications 15, 2, 203–224.
  51. San-Segundo, R., Montero, J. M., Macı́as-Guarasa, J., Córdoba, R., Ferreiros, J.,
  52. and Pardo, J. M. 2008. Proposing a speech to gesture translation architecture for spanish
  53. deaf people. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing 19, 5, 523–538.
  54. Stokoe, W. C. 2005. Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eni001
  55. of the american deaf. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education 10, 1, 3–37.
  56. Veale, T., Conway, A., and Collins, B. 1998. The challenges of cross-modal translation:
  57. English-to-sign-language translation in the zardoz system. Machine Translation 13, 1, 81–
  58. Zeshan, U. 2000. Sign language in Indo-Pakistan: A description of a signed language. John DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.101
  59. Benjamins Publishing.
  60. Zeshan, U. 2003. Indo-pakistani sign language grammar: a typological outline. Sign Language DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.2003.0005
  61. Studies 3, 2, 157–212.