{"id":29,"date":"2025-09-28T17:03:37","date_gmt":"2025-09-29T00:03:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/?page_id=29"},"modified":"2025-09-28T17:03:37","modified_gmt":"2025-09-29T00:03:37","slug":"task-3-voice-to-text-task","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/task-3-voice-to-text-task\/","title":{"rendered":"Task 3: Voice to Text Task"},"content":{"rendered":"

For task 3, I am asked to speak\u00a0an\u00a0unscripted<\/em>, 5 minute long story into a voice-to-text app. Hence, I will first print my unscripted story here as reference.<\/p>\n

My unscripted, 5-min story: Okay, so let me think where to start oh yeah last week I had this kind of funny kind of annoying experience on my way to school so normally I drive but that day my car just wouldn\u2019t start the completely dead and of course it was the one morning I was already running late, so I thought fine. I\u2019ll just take the bus. It\u2019s been ages since I Lasted that and you know how when you\u2019re in a rush every little thing feels bigger the bus took fewer forever to come I swear like 20 minutes and when finally that it was completely packed, I\u2019m standing there holding onto the pole half asleep and there\u2019s this little kid just staring at me the whole right like full of staring at first it was killed you know kids are curious, but then it was like 10 minutes in and he\u2019s still looking at me and I\u2019m like do I have something on my face anyway? so the bus was crawling along then I was watching the time and I realise I was going to be super late so I texted my colleague to cover my first few minutes and then right when I was typing the bus slammed on the bricks my phone went flying out of my hand like literally slid three seats forward everyone looked at me and a kid left so I shuffled forward grabbed my phone both sorry to the people glaring at me and then I noticed I\u2019ve accidentally send my colleague half a text like it just sets I will be and then nothing so she called me and of course it\u2019s super loud on the bus and I was yelling into my phone. I\u2019m on the bus and I\u2019ll be late everyone still looking at me at that point. I was just like great let\u2019s make this the most awkward ride ever so finally I got off walk the rest of the way and when I arrived at school, my students were ready sitting there waiting and the first thing one of them said was teacher you look tired and I just saw yeah things you have no idea but honestly looking back it\u2019s kind of funny now because it\u2019s been so long since I wrote the bus and I kind of forgot that Whole fight of being stuck with strangers the small embarrassing moments and also just weird little stories that come from it so yeah, maybe my car breaking down wasn\u2019t that bad it gave me something to love about later.<\/p>\n

After analysing the written script I got, here are my comments:<\/p>\n

\n

1. How does the text deviate from conventions of written English?<\/b><\/b><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The written text deviates from the conventions of written English in several ways. Most noticeably, it contains very long run-on sentences without clear punctuation or paragraph breaks (which I have already foreseen). Spoken pauses such as \u201coh yeah,\u201d \u201canyway,\u201d or \u201cso\u201d appear, but because they are not punctuated in the transcript, the story reads as one breathless stretch of text. Moreover, there are many oral fillers. These oral fillers like \u201ckind of,\u201d \u201cyou know,\u201d and \u201cso\u201d are common in speech but look redundant in a formal written work. There are also inconsistencies in tense and grammar, such as \u201cthe completely dead\u201d instead of \u201ccompletely dead,\u201d or \u201cIt\u2019s been ages since I Lasted that,\u201d which does not make sense in written English. As Ong (2002) notes, oral language operates with rhythms and repetitions that do not translate neatly into writing, so the transcript reveals how orality and literacy function very differently<\/p>\n

\n

2. What is \u201cwrong\u201d in the text? What is \u201cright\u201d?<\/b><\/b><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

To me, “wrong” in the text refers to the mistakes found in a “written text,” while “right” in the text refers to “the authenticity of an oral speech.”<\/p>\n

What seems \u201cwrong\u201d in the text are these issues of grammar<\/strong>, transcription<\/strong>, and structure<\/strong>. First off, the lack of punctuation<\/strong> makes the text hard to follow. Also, the transcription errors<\/strong> such as \u201cbricks<\/strong>\u201d instead of \u201cbrakes<\/strong>\u201d or \u201ca kid left<\/strong>\u201d instead of \u201ca kid laughed<\/strong>\u201d distort the original meaning when it was said orally. At the same time, much of the story is \u201cright\u201d in terms of oral speech.\u00a0 The conversational tone, the use of fillers, and those personal comments create authenticity and show the speaker\u2019s tone and voice. There are many emotional words such as \u201cfunny,\u201d \u201cannoying,\u201d and \u201cawkward\u201d which give the story colour and a hint of personal touch. This tension reflects Ong\u2019s idea that oral expression is situational and human-centered, whereas writing demands abstract detachment and precision.<\/p>\n

\n

3. What are the most common \u201cmistakes\u201d in the text and why are they \u201cmistakes\u201d?<\/b><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The most common mistakes in the written text are those run-on sentences<\/strong>, speech-to-text mishearings<\/strong>, redundant fillers<\/strong>, and inconsistent grammar<\/strong>. These are considered mistakes from the perspective of written English because readers expect to see punctuation, accurate grammar, and precise word choice in written text. However, when we speak, we do not read out those punctuations, and those AI-tools might also mistakenly transcribe the original spoken words as some other words (due to noise of the surroundings and mispronunciation). These mistakes show the difference between how speech is produced spontaneously and how writing is carefully constructed.<\/p>\n

\n

4. What if you had \u201cscripted\u201d the story? What difference might that have made?<\/b><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

If the story had been scripted, the result would have been very different, as a scripted version would include proper punctuation<\/strong>, well-formed sentences<\/strong>, and corrected grammar<\/strong>. Mis-transcriptions like \u201cbricks\u201d would not appear. The story would be smoother<\/strong> and easier to read<\/strong>, but it would also lose the authentic rhythm of natural conversation. The hesitations, fillers, and small mistakes that make it sound spontaneous would disappear, meaning that the whole text would be more polished but less genuine. This shows how scripting aligns with the literate mode of communication described by Ong, which privileges order, permanence, and polish over the spontaneity and fluidity of orality.<\/p>\n

\n

5. In what ways does oral storytelling differ from written storytelling?<\/b><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

After doing this task, I think oral storytelling and written storytelling differ in several ways. Oral storytelling allows for spontaneity, digressions, fillers, and on-the-spot corrections. It relies on tone, pauses, and body language to give meaning. On the other hand, a written one requires structure, coherence, and conciseness. It is because readers cannot rely on non-verbal cues (like body language). Errors that pass unnoticed in speech become highly visible<\/strong> in writing. Oral stories flow in unbroken chains of thought<\/strong>, while written stories must be broken into paragraphs<\/strong> and sentences, with punctuations <\/strong>to guide readers. Ong (2002) reminds us that oral storytelling is rooted in performance and memory, while writing externalizes thought into structured, enduring forms that reshape how we process knowledge.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

Haas, C. (2013). The technology question<\/i>. In Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy<\/i> (pp. 3\u201323). Routledge.<\/p>\n

Ong, W.J. (2002).\u00a0Chapter 1: The orality of language.Links to an external site.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0In\u00a0Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word\u00a0<\/em>(pp. 5-16). Routledge. (Original work published 1982).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For task 3, I am asked to speak\u00a0an\u00a0unscripted, 5 minute long story into a voice-to-text app. Hence, I will first print my unscripted story here as reference. My unscripted, 5-min story: Okay, so let me think where to start oh yeah last week I had this kind of funny kind of annoying experience on my […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":106107,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"templates\/template-cover.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-29","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/29","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/106107"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/29\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/29\/revisions\/30"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/iceetec540\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}