FYP Proposal 1.2

Bachelor of I.T. - CSCI324.
Final Year
Project
© LeSign Inc. 2011.
CSCI321 FYP
Bachelor of I.T. - CSCI324. Final Year
Project
Document Control
Prepared by: IT11/1G - LeSign Inc.

Prepared date: 11th February 2011
Document
Project Proposal
Type:
Document Title: CSCI321 – Final Year Project
Document Revision History

No Revision Section Change Revised
Change Log
. Date Affected Owner Version
11th Feb
1. Document Created All Jon v1.0
2011
15th Feb
2. Proposal Details revised All Jon V1.1
2011
27th Feb Proposal Literature/Scope Scope/Literature
3. Jon V1.2
2011 Revised Review
CSCI321 FYP
Project
Table of Contents
Document Control..................................................................................................1
1. Introduction.......................................................................................................3
1.1 Project Background...................................................................................3
1.2 Objectives.................................................................................................4
1.3 Scope........................................................................................................5
1.4 Key Features.............................................................................................6
2.0 Literature Review.........................................................................................8
3.0 Project Management..................................................................................13
3.1 Project Model..........................................................................................13
3.2 Team Structure.......................................................................................15
3.3 Role Matrix..............................................................................................16
4.0 Software Project Plan.................................................................................17
4.1 Risk Analysis and Management...............................................................17
4.2 Resource Planning...................................................................................18
4.3 Gantt Chart.............................................................................................20
5.0 Bibliography / References..........................................................................21
5.1 Internet...................................................................................................21
5.1 Internet
CSCI321 FYP
Project
1. Introduction
1.1 Project Background
World Bank, World Development Indicators

www.google.com/publicdata
World population: 6.7 Billion

World deaf population: 70 Million
That is about 1% of the world’s population who are deaf. In percentage, that may
seem like a number of no importance and concern. But in actual fact, we are
talking about 14 times the entire population of Singapore, being deaf. The most
common form of communication for this special group of people? Sign language,
in its various forms and different languages.
Signing does not just apply to the deaf – we are also talking about the mute and
those who are physically and mentally challenged who require the special
language to communicate their needs everyday. As the world population
increases along with the deaf community, how can we ensure the sustainability
of the sign language? Do those who are born healthy (and those who remain
healthy) see ourselves being able to accept those who are not as complete as
us? Are we able to accept those who are physically challenged in the society,
and perhaps one day, give them more important roles to play in the world on top
of their equal human rights?
How are we able to promote the use of the language? In relation to the deaf
community here in Singapore, we understand that currently there are no
electronic tools that can help/assist the learning process. Learning the language
can be tough, as such in this proposal, we explore ways how we can simplify the
process, making the language fun and easy to grasp.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
1.2 Objectives
The purpose of this project is to develop a translator tool which accepts English
language words and sentences, and subsequently output the text as sign
language to the user. The tool must also allow expandability through an easy
and interactive mean.
Sub-objectives will also include how the tool can become an easy and effective
channel of learning and promoting sign language to the mass, through
interactive and easy to use interfaces.
It is agreed that within the given specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and
time constraint, we need to achieve the intended objectives that is meant for
any teenagers to adults for learning the language.
The end product will be a Supplementary Tool to Learning Sign Language.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
1.3 Scope
In considering the given task ahead, the team agreed that the tool must
maintain the achievability of being specific and relevant, given the time
constraint.
The team is looking into the development of a desktop-based product, which

aims to supplement the learning of sign language
Hence, the team will be looking at the project with the following highlights:
1. Development & Product Environment

The product will be developed in a Microsoft Windows environment, meant
for running in the same environment as well. Developmental language
used for the development will be C# in Microsoft’s Visual Studio.
2. Database Environment
Initial number of English language words/pictures available for translation
use will cap at 500; with the option to expand by user with specially
designed GUI. Database architecture will be XML structured.
3. Processing/Application Concept
In processing users’ queries and interaction, the team will propose the
research and development of Natural Language Processing, otherwise
known as NLP. NLP is a fine balance between a static text processing
method and computer intelligence in processing the English Language as
English teachers would teach. This will be the core framework of the
functionalities of the product, in identifying English language sentences
meant to be translated.
4. Educational Concept
To achieve all-roundedness, the product would include basic language and
pictorial quiz and tutorial modules for target users to practice on. The
purpose of the quiz and tutorials is to supplement the teachings in class,
not to act as a replacement.
The scope of the project will not cover the following highlights:
1. End product will not aim to support multi-platforms, yet.

2. End product will not require “live” connection for functionality.
3. Any other methods/forms of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems will not be
explored for the product. (NLP being the only core “AI”, if it is indeed
classified as an “AI” system)
4. End product will not include animations that involve modelling
display/interactions.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
1.4 Key Features
The team looks at the following functionalities we aim to achieve for the end
product:
1. Voice <-> Sign <-> Text Translation

2. “Mousing Around” – Mouse Over Tool
3. SEE Personalized Dictionary – Database Expansion
4. Lesson & Tutorial
5. Interactive Quiz
1. Sign Translator
This feature allows user to query the database of signs; with an option of input
by text or by voice. As the software aims to allow users to master with ease,
the team is currently experimenting with the current technology – how the ease
of voice input can encourage the use of the software. However, the technology
may not be matured enough and accuracy of voice recognition software is still
questionable. Intensive testing of the voice input capabilities will be explored
during developmental stages. The concept of NLP will also be applied here.
2. “Mousing Around” – Mouse Over Tool
This is an interesting tool which allow user to simply highlight the words they
would like to search and query the database simply by right-clicking and
selecting “Translate this”. With that, a small box will pop out from the bottom
right corner and show the sign language that’s found.
There are tool that work the same way and we are confident that we would be
able to develop the same functionality for our own signing tool. Even though
none of us have ever developed or have experience in this kind of functionality,
we believe with much research we would make it available. This would achieve
the ease of learning while surfing, making usability with convenience.
The purpose of the Signing Translator is to provide a tool for user to search the
corresponding sign language of a single word or a sentence. It has more than
500 sign languages available in the database to start off the tool. This tool also
allows users to populate the dictionary of sign languages if certain word is not
available. The tool also provides various ways to search the database for a
specific sign language. Besides the regular way of entering the word with the
keyboard, the tool allows user to speak into the microphone to query for a sign
language. Above all, the tool allows user to query for a sign language just by
highlighting the word or sentence on the desktop with perfect and seamless
convenience.
3. SEE Personalized Dictionary – Database Expansion
CSCI321 FYP
Project
There are various forms of databases available in the market namely, Microsoft
SQL, Oracle DB, MySQL and etc. However, we would develop our database using
XML files instead as it allows easy deployment and it easy management without
the hassle of installing databases.
These are known risk as XML serializing hasn’t been much look into by either of
us and we would require to research on it further before any development.
The tool would allow user to add a new sign just by providing an image which
comply to a format size and its corresponding word which represent the sign. To
take this to another level, user can simply export the words created by ourselves
and share with other user. Others can in term, import the provided signs into
their own database.
The system will zip up all the files and allow user to share the zip copy of the
database. With a little knowledge of zipping the file, we would need a little more
time into developing this portion of the system.
4. Lessons & Tutorial
As a supplementary tool to actual classroom learning, the team will also

incorporate tutorial lessons in the product. Basic communication skills and often
used words/sentences will be introduced in various environments, such as
workplaces & schools. While the product DOES NOT aim to substitute the actual
classroom learning environment, the lessons included in the product will aim to
provide tuition to learners of the language, through interactive environments,
depicting the actual physical environments.
5. Interactive Quiz
Finally, to prepare users/learners for their classroom examinations/tests, the

team has decided to incorporate a quiz environment in the product. The quiz will
allow users to go on trial questions, in forms such as video sign questions &
drag-&-drop sign pictorial questions. This promotes interactivity and allows user
to be adequately prepare themselves confidently for the actual examination.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
2.0 Literature Review
1. Sign Language – History:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_language
2. Singapore Association for the Deaf
http://www.sadeaf.org.sg
3. A Critical Literature Review on e-Learning
http://www.ucsi.edu.my/cervie/ijasa/volume2/pdf/08H.pdf
4. University of London (UOL) – Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
http://itdl.org/Journal/Jun_04/article02.htm
http://londonexternal.wordpress.com/tag/vle/
5. NLP – Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing
“Signing It!”
Sign language dates back to as early as the 5th Century B.C., where the deaf and
mute would have already tried to communicate with one another using hand
signs and gestures. It was from the 15th Century onwards that publications were
released, documenting the teaching of the language.
Schools such as Abbe de l’Epee in France and the American School for the Deaf
was subsequently set up, further promoting the learning and use of the
language.
Signing has come a long way, from the traditional gesturing of intentions, to the
documentation of official representations of the spoken languages/words. In
today’s context, the world continues to look at how signing can be promoted to
the general masses, not just limiting to the community for the deaf and mute.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
Action speaking louder than words…

There are different types of sign languages by different countries; this would
require the instructors to define the specific language that he/she is using in the
system. The instructor must have a significant knowledge about sign languages.
According to Sign It Services, there are a few types of needs that are required:
- Understanding the Interpretation Process

The process of interpretation requires the setting, speed or type of terminology
being used to be as accurate as possible to prevent message from being
conveyed wrongly.
- Types of Interpretation
Different types of interpretation employ intercultural and nonverbal interpreters.
- Code of Ethics
Eg. Interpreters/translators shall keep all assignment-related information strictly
confidential.
Interpreters/translators shall render the message faithfully, always conveying the
content and spirit of the speaker using language most readily understood by the
person(s) whom they serve.
- Deaf Culture
Patterns, traits, products, attitudes, and intellectual/artistic activity associated
with a population is said to have their own unique culture of the deaf community.
- Interpretation Techniques
Hand Position
Hand Orientation
Hand Movement
Facial Expression
CSCI321 FYP
Project
America”No”?
In an attempt to understand the preferred sign language to work on, the project
team had approached the Singapore Associate for the Deaf (also known as
SADeaf) to understand what signing is all about.
The Association’s Deputy Director, Ms. Sandra Cheong had explained that just
like there are many different spoken languages in the world, there are also many
different languages in the signing community. The team had also found out that
the commonly use language in Singapore is known as the “Speak Exact English”
sign language, also known as SEE.
SEE aims to represent literal English, as it is spoken. It is derived from the

popular American Sign Language (ASL) in the 1970s. Since the end product is
intended for non-deaf users, SEE is highly recommended as users are able to
better relate to it, as they are already using the spoken English.
The team had also found out that SADeaf conduct lessons through a classroom
setting, with a deaf instructor. Basic SEE Language classes are broken down into
different modules, and each module require 3 months of classroom learning.
When asked if there are currently any software that automates the learning
process (such as e-learning portals), SADeaf’s Ms. Sandra Cheong informed that
there is no such system in place, yet.
SADeaf’s Deaf Access Officer, Mr. Jimmy Wong did mentioned that they are
planning to work on a simple system to upload pictures and instructions onto a
website for e-learning. The plan however is still just an idea yet to be explored.
Mr. Wong informed the team that if such a system would be implemented,
SADeaf would charge its users for it, just like how the association is currently
charging fees for its sign language courses.
Since the idea of sign language e-learning is still new, the team would like to
explore what can be introduced, with the aim of drastically cutting down time
spent in a classroom for hours. With more than 3 million users of the internet
here in Singapore (including the deaf) and the rapid expansion of the World Wide
Web, the team wants to tap and ride on this vast market, especially for those
who desire ease and convenience while learning a new skill. (in this case picking
sign language)
CSCI321 FYP
Project
Learning… Electronically?
Students learning in classroom via interaction with the tutor are the basis of
much of the learning activity in any type of education requirements. These
include writing essays, tests or projects. The approach that they use to set and
manage the learning environment has remained relatively unchanged until
recent years with the use of e-learning tools to supplement the learning process
of students. The focus of this literature review is to analyze the current e-
learning systems have already been implemented in place of most education
institute (Eg. Universities).
The aim of this literature review is to provide a thorough understanding of the

current e-learning systems available in the education line. We will identify the e-
learning techniques, tools and approaches to further analyze the students’
learning effectiveness via usage of the e-learning program.
E-learning is gaining popularity in the recent years through education, Schank

(2002), Roffe (2002), Sambrook (2003) and Tsai & Machado (2002) refer to e-
learning as “communication and learning activities through computers and
networks (or via electronic means)”. An example of e-learning by University of
London (UOL), through its Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) it allows students
to access all the course materials, take part in seminar discussions, view videos
online and engage with students on the relevant subjects. Marianne Coleman
(2004) It incorporates an area for each module, which is timetabled for
structured learning activities. Students are divided into groups of about ten, and
each group tutored by an e-moderator. Bleimann (2004) stated that e-learning is
a self-directed learning that is based on technology, especially web-based
technology. He also stressed that e-learning is collaborative learning.
The notion of blended learning, which uses some combination of classroom and
e-learning. This is seen to have distinct benefits over ‘desk’ e-learning as it
utilizes the benefits and possibilities of e-learning tools (good programmes, self
paced etc.), whilst allowing for the benefits of class room learning (the use of a
facilitator, social interaction, discussion and questioning) (Zenger and Uehlein,
2001; see also Voci and Young, 2001).
Another example of e-learning, that is closer to Singapore, is when someone

learns how to drive. As per the team members’ past experience in learning
driving, driving centres offer computerized mock quiz environments to its
students for their theoretical part of the learning process. Students would need
to pay for these mock quiz, and the quiz can only be taken at the driving centre.
The mock quiz will have a time limit of 30mins for the students to go through,
and the students would be logged out of the system immediately after that.
Students will also NOT BE given result slips after the mock test, hence they will
not be able to learn from their mistakes. The aim of the system is evident; only
to allow students to experience the test environment, and not meant for
learning. This form of paid presentation to students should be questioned; as it
CSCI321 FYP
Project
does not allow students to learn from the questions and it is purely for students
to get used to the environment – even for getting used to the environment,
30minutes is definitely not enough.
In this review, e-learning has been defined as an essential part of learning

environment. The importance of e-learning lies in the challenges of students to
formulate their own thoughts linking to higher level learning outcomes. It has
highlighted that e-learning tools can help students to learn at their own pace,
without stressing to complete on time.
Natural Language Processing (NLP)

The goal of team also includes engaging the emerging capabilities of NLP. It is a
concept – used for understanding the language of interest, in this case, English.
As we develop this software, it is important that the linguistic requirements are
accurate and correct, especially so when we are developing the tool for learning
SEE (Sign Exact English). The end product should understand sentences and
differentiating them from different grammars in the English language and
translating them accurately to the user/learner. It is a method engaged to
investigate and evaluate the desire of a particular human language by the
machine. The technique is still relatively new and in research currently. The team
is looking into developing this concept into the product.
This technique would greatly enhance the end product’s capability in language
processing to provide accurate and dynamic translation.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
3.0 Project Management

3.1 Project Model
Project development will be implemented using the V-model software

development process cycle. The V-Model, which can be associated as an
extension of the waterfall model, allows process to roll back should there be any
changes to the requirements at any stage of the life cycle.
Requirement
Ti Architecture
Integration
Software
System
Module
Software
Project Unit
U.A.
Project
End
me Testing
Design
Build
Start
Analysis
Development
Dur
ati
on
CSCI321 FYP
Project
The V-Model Software Process Cycle consist of a few phases mainly the
Verification Phase and the Validation Phase. It moves from left to right top down
and back up. At any point of time should there be any requirement changes or
system bug identified, the process will follow the red dashed arrow [<--] back to
the previous interrelated phase.
For example if a system requirement change has been requested at the

Integration Test Phase, the process will go back to the Architecture Design Phase
before moving to the Module Design Phase, then to Build to change the codes,
then Unit Test Phase to test the unit itself and then going back to the Integration
Test Phase again. Along the way all documents are updated accordingly.
The diagram also shows the duration allocated to each phase. Phases at the top
of the diagram will have more time allocated to it simply because they are the
more important phases of the process cycle.
For example Requirement Analysis Phase will be allocated more time than the
Module Design Phase. This is to ensure that all requirements are documented
and analyzed correctly as the Module Design Phase will refer to the documents of
the Requirement Analysis Phase.
System Test Phase will be allocated more time than Unit Test Phase as the
testing and verification of the whole system will be more complex than that of
testing and verifying the single unit itself.
Verification Phase
Verification phase are on the left hand side of the V. At this phase requirements
are gathered and analyzed, system will then be designed based on the data
analyzed. Once the Verification Phase is completed it will than move to the Build
Phase.
Build Phase
Software Engineers will be able to code the system according to the documents
documented. Since the requirements are translated to functional design
documents and configuration notes which the engineers are well versed at, it will
be easy for them to turn the functional requirements into system modules.
Validation Phase
Validation Phase is on the right side of the V. At this phase the beta build of the
system are completed. The Validation Phase focuses on testing the built system
to detect any system bugs and to verify that the functional system matches with
the requirements documented.
CSCI321 FYP
Project
3.2 Team Structure
CSCI321 FYP
Project
Cristal Ngo
3.3 Role Matrix Project Supervisor
Role Jonath Jenny Jacky Yan

an Ling
Project Manager 
Project Budgeting  Jonathan Lou
User Interface   Project 
Team Lead
Design
Software Design  
System Analyst  
Database Design 
Programmer 
Analyst
Programmer 
Tester  
Tester Design
Jenny Goh Jacky Lim  Low Yan Ling
Deployment
Project Design Lead Software Lead
Project Project System Lead
Manager
Team Lead – Jonathan Lou

1. Oversee every aspect of project development and status
2. Manage and delegate tasks within the team
3. Ensures objectives and tasks are aligned and on track
Design Lead – Jenny Goh

1. Responsible for full spectrum of project documentations, including version
controls, meeting minutes.
2. Project Finance Controller
3. GUI Lead – Responsible for full spectrum of interface design & test phases
Software Lead – Jacky Lim

1. Chief Software Engineer, responsible for software development (& lifecycle)
2. Lead Software Architect
System Lead – Low Yan Ling

1. Testing Lead – manages full spectrum of formulating and generating test
cases.
2. Database Architect, in sync with Software Lead’s project development
3. Research Lead
CSCI321 FYP
Project
4.0 Software Project Plan

4.1 Risk Analysis and Management
This section describes and identify the risk involve in the project. Risk
management is the process of identifying factors that may lead to a failure,
integrity or availability of an information system. We need to identify the risks,
analyze each and every risk factor, plan (or calculate) risks involved and finally
monitor the risk progress.
Risk Subject Risk Risk Risk Mitigation Risk

Description Impact Plan Owner
1. Project Project deadline Severe Project scheduling Team Lead
Schedule overrun and monitoring.
2. Human Limited Manageab Conduct team Team Lead
Resource experience/talent le induction,
pool with expertise
different management
backgrounds of
expertise
3. Developmental Enterprise & Severe Conduct market Team
Tools developmental research for Lead/
tools license fees free/student Software
may be costly developmental Lead
tools
4. Project Miscommunicatio Manageab Ensure channels of Team Lead
Communication n and breakdown le communications
between team are open with
members weekly
meetings/conferen
ce calls for updates
5. Correctness of End product may Severe Ensure that at Software
Project deviate from every stage of the Lead/
initial stated project, a check is Design
requirements & conducted to deter Lead
functionalities deviation
6. Usability End product may Severe Ensure UAT is Design
not be accepted conducted with Lead/
by user’s strict adherence to System
behavior users’ Lead
psychological
behavior in mind
7. Robustness End product may Manageab Test cases should Software
not be able to le involve potential Lead/
handle error input for System
unexpected exception Lead
errors handlings
8. Hardware Unexpected Severe Implement system System
failures equipment or backups, copy Lead
disk backups
crash/failures
9. Maintainability Current Manageab Put in place All
developmental le development
scope limiting (coding) and
system documentation
CSCI321 FYP
Project
expandability standards for

future references
10 Interoperability Running the Manageab Standardization of All
. software on a le interfaces
different platform
which product
was developed
on
CSCI321 FYP
Project
4.2 Resource Planning
S/ Role Number of working

N hours
1 Project Manger 350
– Evaluation of project 50
– Managing of project 60
– Monitoring and controlling of project 45
– Managing changing requirements 50
– -Changing and delivering configuration 40
– -Deployment of project 35
– -Close-out project 35
– -Package product 35
2 Project Administrator 280
– Project budgeting 45
– Designing components 60
– Implementing components 65
– Managing manpower 30
– Ensure project is within the stated budget 30
– Resource management (Workstation, meeting 25
place) 25
– Authorization of users for project files
3 Consultant 300
– Gather requirements 55
– Analyse requirements 55
– Prepare functional design documents 45
– Review test packages 40
– Sign off test packages 25
– Making appointment with customer for UAT 40
– Raising and managing change request 40
4 Software Engineer 300
– Developing program based on functional 60
design document 60
– Developing software development plan 45
– Analyzing any software problem 45
– Managing of software changing requests 45
– Basic component test 45
5 Solution Architect 300
– Subject Matter Expertise 60
– Work Force Management, Supervision and 60
Mentoring 60
– Methodology and Quality Assurance 60
– Business Development 60
– Business Planning and General Management
6 Test Analyst 300
– Preparing of test package 60
– Conduct testing for project 60
– Improving test package 60
– Evaluating project while testing 60
– Achieving acceptable mission 60
CSCI321 FYP
Project
CSCI321 FYP
Project
CSCI321 FYP
Project
4.3 Gantt Chart
CSCI321 FYP
Project
CSCI321 FYP
Project
CSCI321 FYP
Project
5.0 Bibliography / References

5.1 Internet
[1] Sign It Services
http://www.signit.com.sg/index.php
[2] Sign Language Teaching Kit

http://www.nyp.edu.sg/SIT/images/citi/industryproj/sadeaf.jpg
[3] Unqualified Sign Language Interpreters

http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/translation/articles/sign-language-
agencies.html
[4] Types of Interpreters

http://www.ehow.com/list_5907488_types-interpretation-health-care-
field.html
[5] Deaf Culture

http://deafness.about.com/cs/deafculture/a/deafculture101.htm
[6] Techniques for Interpretation

http://www.suite101.com/content/elements-of-american-sign-language-
a108755
[7] Singapore Association for the Deaf

http://www.sadeaf.org.sg
1. Ms. Sandra Cheong
dyd@sadeaf.org.sg
2. Mr. Jimmy Wong

daso@sadeaf.org.sg
[8] World Federation of the Deaf

http://www.wfdeaf.org/
[9] World Bank, World Development Indicators

www.google.com/publicdata
[10] Sign Language – History

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_language

FYP Proposal 1.2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

FYP Proposal 1.2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Bachelor of I.T. - CSCI324.

Prepared by: IT11/1G - LeSign Inc.

Document Revision History

World Bank, World Development Indicators

World population: 6.7 Billion

The end product will be a Supplementary Tool to Learning Sign Language.

The team is looking into the development of a desktop-based product, which

1. Development & Product Environment

1. End product will not aim to support multi-platforms, yet.

1.4 Key Features

1. Voice <-> Sign <-> Text Translation

2. “Mousing Around” – Mouse Over Tool

3. SEE Personalized Dictionary – Database Expansion

4. Lessons & Tutorial

As a supplementary tool to actual classroom learning, the team will also

Finally, to prepare users/learners for their classroom examinations/tests, the

2.0 Literature Review

1. Sign Language – History:

Action speaking louder than words…

- Understanding the Interpretation Process

SEE aims to represent literal English, as it is spoken. It is derived from the

The aim of this literature review is to provide a thorough understanding of the

E-learning is gaining popularity in the recent years through education, Schank

Another example of e-learning, that is closer to Singapore, is when someone

In this review, e-learning has been defined as an essential part of learning

Natural Language Processing (NLP)

3.0 Project Management

Project development will be implemented using the V-model software

For example if a system requirement change has been requested at the

3.2 Team Structure

Role Jonath Jenny Jacky Yan

Team Lead – Jonathan Lou

Design Lead – Jenny Goh

Software Lead – Jacky Lim

System Lead – Low Yan Ling

4.0 Software Project Plan

Risk Subject Risk Risk Risk Mitigation Risk

expandability standards for

4.2 Resource Planning

S/ Role Number of working

4.3 Gantt Chart

5.0 Bibliography / References

[2] Sign Language Teaching Kit

[3] Unqualified Sign Language Interpreters

[4] Types of Interpreters

[5] Deaf Culture

[6] Techniques for Interpretation

[7] Singapore Association for the Deaf

2. Mr. Jimmy Wong

[8] World Federation of the Deaf

[9] World Bank, World Development Indicators

[10] Sign Language – History

Potrebbero piacerti anche