Task 3: Voice to Text
TASK 3.4 – Voice to Text Task
Being back in Kindergarten vs. Grade 5
Okay so I’m going to talk about being back in kindergarten versus being in grade five so I was in kindergarten when I first started my career and a team teach position and then I was in kindergarten for 2 years and then I went to create 5 for 3 years so I actually went ended grade 5 during my practicum I talk size 6 and so when I first got a job at my B Ed program it was a kindergarten position and I took it cuz you know why not and then actually after 3 years the there’s last witch in going around at the school and so my boss asked me if I wanted to go back to kindergarten and actually at the time a lot was going on and I do this is only last year so I was it was it was a covid year and there was a lot going on and then you know just all the craziness and the hardships of covid and having to make sure that kids kept on their masks and distance from each other on top of that my class is very difficult they were in the not the nicest words a little bit entitled and they definitely had strong personalities and they were difficult to deal with just because they had been together in in school since kindergarten all the way through grade 5 at that point no one had left and no one else has come so just so tired with each other and then so much stuff would be brought up and they knew how to push each others buttons so I was dealing with just lots and lots of problems every day that I like why am I doing I barely even have time to teach because of all of the covid rules of not being in the same hallway at the same time or having the same recess and soft start and all of them all of that other stuff and then on top of that I had to deal with a lot of like issues with each other and then they were growing so there was a lot of kids who were coming out to me telling me a lot of their personal stuff which is fantastic and as a teacher you really do want to hear that I’m and hear that a kid is very trusting of you and wanting to tell you something and they feel safe enough to tell you about something deeply personal which is fantastic do you want kids to trust adults and all of that but it was it was difficult and took a lot out of me and it was during the week that I gave them something nice and they didn’t appreciate it when my boss came to me to ask about moving back to kindergarten and if I thought about it for a day or two and then I decided to go back and so far it’s been great I am in at each position with my former teaching Partners teaching partner so basically this girl took my job when I left to go to Grey 5 and we actually know each other we’ve known each other since kindergarten and we went through elementary school together not high school but we’ve always known each other and so now it’s kind of cool to be teaching Partners together in this kind of circle of life kind of way we’re very different cuts of it’s been good so far and I’ve already felt very uplifted being in kindergarten again like I really wanted to feel love again after crazy Eric and the kids in kindergarten and even if they’re so ridiculous like I have this one little girl who’s just put of a space cadet and she is walking around peeing like Ladi Dadi da wandering okay what is everyone else doing and I’m like look around hun or packing your bags and she’s like oh but just cuz she’s really lovely and she just walks around and sings and wants to tell me about how she’s really excited for HalloweenBut so far so good it’s been really great to be back and it’s also helping out a lot being back in a very comfortable and familiar environment especially when I’m currently doing the master’s program and everything so it is very helpful for my brain a little less stressed out about work and can put a little bit more effort into my schooling my own zwilling add some more to come it’s only been two and a bit weeks so we’ll see how it goes
How does the text deviate from conventions of written English?
I noticed from the beginning of the text the lack of punctuation. It reads as one long, run-on sentence. I think due to the nature of oral language; in particular, the cadence, tone and speed at which one tells a story, it affects how it would be written. I think because this has been an anecdote I have told a few times now; I can tell it fairly quickly and without many filler words. Therefore, when a voice-to-text app receives and transmits the words, it can look similar to one long sentence. The text also reads much more colloquial and informal, than written English. As Gnanadesikan stated, “[although] writing is secondary to language, it often enjoys higher prestige. Writing is generally done more [deliberate] than speaking, so finished written pieces are much more carefully crafted than a typical spoken sentence” (2011). With this text, while it is deliberate, it is not as carefully crafted and formal as other written forms. If I were to provide this story in written form first, I would place importance on the grammar, the sentence structure, the punctuation and other aspects of written English.
Even as a type this reflection out, I think of how it is not likely to be read out loud to a group of people, but read in a viewer’s head. As I was speaking, I was aware that I was meant to talk as if to a friend rather than a group of friends, or even a group of strangers. How I engage with those different groups varies how I speak; using more asides and spontaneous language. Seeing my oral language in written from validates the informality of casual speak versus written text.
Reading this text also reminds me of the voice-to-text feature with Apple CarPlay. I use it to “respond” to messages while driving and have had some prior experience with providing a voice-to-text text. While using it in the car, I would often verbally add punctuation, for example “How was it question mark” – and have checked afterwards that it received and transmitted it properly. However, I did not think to use it with this voice-to-text, which was through a Google extension Read&Write.
What is “wrong” in the text? What is “right”?
As mentioned, the lack of punctuation is what is noticeably “wrong” in the text. Furthermore, the spelling is also an intriguing aspect of the “wrongness” of the text. It is interesting to see which words were spelled incorrectly when transmitted from voice to text. I wonder if these were words that I spoke quickly or unclearly; which contributed to the spelling errors. However, I think if a fluent English speaker and reader were to read this text, they would be able to understand most of the text and the basic premise of the anecdote.
Ong described the oral art form as “simply texts, except for the fact that they were not written down” (Ong, 2002). This contributes to the sense of “wrongness” of this text. We have inherently placed written form above other forms of language and text, that we have created rules for them; ie. grammar and punctuation. However, oral language does not seem to have as rigid rules; that even if it does deviate from any accepted “rules”, there is no fundamental “wrongness” to them – just creative licence. I think if one were to read this, with no prior knowledge of how it was “written down”, they would perceive it as poorly “written”; due to the, seemingly, inability to follow prescriptive grammar rules.
What are the most common “mistakes” in the text and why do you consider them “mistakes”?
I think the most common “mistakes” in the text is the spelling of different words. The voice-to-text app, as advanced as it is, simply cannot catch every word uttered and translate it accurately. With oral language continuously evolving and progressing, combined with my regional colloquialisms, it would be difficult for a universal voice-to-text app to transmit it to a written form; one precise to the telling of the story. Even if the settings were changed to Canadian English, the way I speak can sound different from someone else in Canada; and therefore, it can be “heard” differently by the app and evidently spelled “incorrectly”.
I consider these mistakes because of the previously mentioned prescribed grammar rules we follow in written English. We are bound to these rules when providing a written text, and see them as incorrect when they deviate. The voice-to-text app is also bound to these rules, as it is artificial intelligence that is unable to have flexible adaptable thought.
What if you had “scripted” the story? What difference might that have made?
To some extent, this story was scripted; verbally anyway. I have told this story a few times to friends and family who I have seen recently, who all know I am a teacher, and therefore have asked how my September is going. People love to ask about the start of school; which inadvertently creates this “conversation script” that I have in my head. I do not necessarily mean to have it stored in my memory, however, I have recalled the same anecdotes to help communicate my answer for “How has it been being back?”.
However, as previously mentioned, because the text was meant to be as if we were telling a friend, there is a storytelling element to it, which I think pays to the “scripted” nature of it. After telling the story a few times, the emphasis on certain parts of the story have developed, based on “audience feedback”. There were particular points that I knew would garner more of a “reaction”; that I subconsciously started to change the way I told it, ensuring to pause a little longer or repeat it for emphasis.
In what ways does oral storytelling differ from written storytelling?
Gnanadesikan describes written language as “[seeming] more real to us than spoken language. Nevertheless, writing is only a means of expressing language; it is not language itself” (2011). He goes on further to explain that writing is not necessary to language and that “writing was invented to solve a particular problem: information only existed if someone could remember it” (Gnanadesikan, 2011). This distinction he states illustrates the difference between oral and written storytelling. Oral storytelling does not need written storytelling, however, without it, it is at risk at not surviving the test of time. Ong stated, and as seen through history and artefacts, “hundreds of languages in active use are never written at all: [and] no one has worked out an effective way to write them. The basic orality of language is permanent” (Ong, 2002). Written language was conceived to complement the continual of oral speech. Although, the transmission between the two is a more complex process. While both have their own notable nuances, it is difficult to have a verbatim written text from an oral speech and vice versa; complete with the correct intonation and rhythm, for one to completely feel as if they were “present” at the time the story was told or written; for oral storytelling is “[not a transformer of verbalization]” (Saussure, 1959 and Ong, 2002).
“Oral expression can exist and mostly has existed without any writing at all, writing never without orality” (Ong, 2002). This echoes and speaks to the many cultures with languages based and/or dependent on orality. Just as Hadley’s CBC article describes a new Indigenous language app for 21st century learners (2019). Many, if not most, First Nations cultures have existed without “traditional” written form. With the rise and perceived prestige of written form, the languages have died out with their Elders and ancestors, reaffirmed in Ong’s description of when an “oral story is not actually being told, all that exists of it is the potential in certain human beings to tell it” (2002). Hadley explains that this app bridges this existing gap between elders and young members of the community; helping prevent the extinction of the language and providing space for it to thrive. Oral language can be maintained as long as there are people to speak and retain it, unless it is written down for others to experience and carry it on for generations.
References
Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2011).“The First IT Revolution.” In The writing revolution: Cuneiform to theinternet (Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons (pp. 1-10).
Hadley, A. (2019, January 11). Indigenous language app targets new generation of learners | CBC News. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/indigenous-language-app-1.4970376
Ong, Walter, J. Taylor & Francis eBooks – CRKN, & CRKN MiL Collection. (2002). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York; London: Routledge.
Schmandt-Besserat, D. (2009). “Origins and Forms of Writing.” In Bazerman, C. (Ed.). Handbook of research on writing: History, society, school, individual, text.New York, NY: Routledge.