Author Topic: 300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?  (Read 8675 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Proword

  • Posts: 225
  • Location: Perth, Western Australia
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #30 on: Sun, 18 September 2011, 21:32:21 »
Quote from: graywolf;418141

Everybody, if you think learning the shorthand stuff is daunting, you probably are using it quite often already. I noticed in my comment to Proword, I used the acronym "AFAIK". What do you think an acronym is? Yep, it is shorthand, in that case for "as far as I know". It seems that on a Steno machine, you would be able to type AFAIK with one keystroke (chord). Bingo, you have just written 17 characters (counting spaces) with one hit on the keyboard. Boy, I seem to be talking myself into learning this, don't I?


This is something which I find both interesting and irritating is that we now live in an age when people THINK in abbreviations, yet when I've approached various educational institutes to TEACH young kids how to type in shorthand, I'm met with a wall of blank indifference, or even occasional hostility, especially when I explain that it only works properly on WordPerfect.  One would think that Microsoft owns the education system.

Joe
Maltron 3D Dual Hand (x4)
Maltron 3D Single Hand (x2 - L & R)

Many people think their lifestyle comes at a cost - but they are quite cool with that as long as somebody ELSE pays it.

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #31 on: Sun, 18 September 2011, 23:09:59 »
Heh, I don't know if Microsoft owns the education system. I would certainly say Qwerty owns a significant part of the system, and once kids learn Qwerty, nobody seems to need or want to learn anything else and that's just human nature. And of course, kids begin typing at home before learning to type in schools. Qwerty's in our homes and in our heads and it hasn't the right..

I remember discovering stenography and shorthand so long ago and realizing just how much of an undiscovered gem it seemed to be (and remains). So few people really know about this stuff and it's sad because all of this is amazing to me and it just makes sense.

Wish we could go back in time and help gain these methods more popularity.
« Last Edit: Sun, 18 September 2011, 23:13:00 by Playtrumpet »
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #32 on: Mon, 19 September 2011, 11:41:29 »
Quote from: graywolf;418264
Well, it did not take long to find out two things.

1. Nope, can not type in single letters, at least without more knowledge than I have. I would imagine I would have to go into the dictionary and replace all the single letter entries with the single letters.

2. Nope, can't use my Model M keyboard. -FPLT which is supposed to be space comes out "-FRPBLGTS". Of course Ms Knight may have that tied to an acronym in Plover, but it looks more like an error to me. Of course that is the first 4-key entry I tried deliberately. Hum.... I just tried entering that with only a max of two letters at a time, and still got the gobbly-gook, so maybe I don't know what is going on.


Had a reply to an email I sent to the Plover originator Mirabai Knight. She actually looked at our thread here and provided some answers.

1. According to her, to type individual letter, to spell out a word, you type them on the left hand side of the keyboard, and add a * to the cord. For upper case you also a a P on the right hand side.

2. She actually does have -FPLT set to "-FRPBLGTS", she says -FPLT is fairly standard as a period, and goes on to explain how to change that in the dictionary.

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #33 on: Mon, 19 September 2011, 12:57:58 »
A few general comments.

Proword's shorthand system is an Abbreviation form (breifs). That has become more common since computer aided shorthand systems became available. The other type of system is the Phonetic form, which the original Steongraph system was, as well as the handwritten Gregg system.

An advantage of the phonetic system is you do not actually have to know the word to enter it, just enter what you hear. The disadvantage is that you have to learn a fairly arcane notation before it makes much sense.

The advantage of a breif system is that you can add breifs at will, and to start out it is easier to understand. The disadvantages of the breif system is that you have to actually memorize a lot of abbreviations, and individual breifs can be nonsensical to others; Ms Knight's FRPBLGTS being a good example.

Most modern systems seem to be a combination of both. For a beginner that would seem to be the worst of both worlds. Especially, in Plover which, for now, seems to have Ms Knight's own personal, highly modified, dictionary; when what we beginners need is a standard basic dictionary that will match whatever text books we can come up with. A hierarchal dictionary system that scans the basic dictionary, then the personal dictionary, then the legal one, then the medical one, and so on, and so forth. All but the basic dictionary, which would be what a student would need, being addable, replaceable, and removable as needed.

Keyboarding, the original Stenograph machine printed one word per line in the order they appeared on the keyboard. The transcriber was supposed to be able to read those and type them out in English on her typewriter as a transcript of the proceedings. The stenographer and transcriber may or may not have been the same person. In a modern real time system a computer does the transcribing. The point of this is that Proword said that when he hit a lot of letters on his keyboard at the same time he could not be sure they would come out in the order his system could transcribe to the word he wanted; in a real steno system that is not a problem, each word, or phrase is a combination of one set of letters, the order is not used to transcribe it.
« Last Edit: Mon, 19 September 2011, 13:05:40 by graywolf »

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #34 on: Mon, 19 September 2011, 13:18:49 »
Quote from: Proword;418376
This is something which I find both interesting and irritating is that we now live in an age when people THINK in abbreviations, yet when I've approached various educational institutes to TEACH young kids how to type in shorthand, I'm met with a wall of blank indifference, or even occasional hostility, especially when I explain that it only works properly on WordPerfect.  One would think that Microsoft owns the education system.

Joe

Joe, I think the fact that you are trying to teach your own personal system is the biggest problem. The second problem is that most highschools taught shorthand at one time, but fewer and fewer kids enrolled in the secretarial program until it was eliminated. Correspondence you get from major corporations these days world never have been produced by any self respecting secretary. I recently took a class in Professional Writing (Business writing actually) at the university. How they taught would be executives to write a letter was about like most of the email you receive these days. As I said, no self respecting secretary would have sent out something that looked like that, but that was what the university was teaching, supposedly, to make your writing look professional. It seems like in today's society, if you want to get ahead, you need to look and act like a slob.
« Last Edit: Mon, 19 September 2011, 13:21:05 by graywolf »

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #35 on: Mon, 19 September 2011, 14:16:49 »
Typing with plover right now. So hard.

That was a fun attempt. Some things I remember.. With a regular keyboard there are a lot of difficult positions for your fingers. There are plenty of glitches and confusing author-made changes to the basic language, as graywolf mentioned. It's still a fun challenge. ^_^
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
usb steno keyboard idea
« Reply #36 on: Mon, 19 September 2011, 18:41:06 »
I wonder what these guys use to draw keyboards. This is done cut and past. Unfortunately, I could not find an image of a spacebar that I could fit, so imagine a spacebar across the top.

[ Attachment Invalid Or Does Not Exist ] 26937[/ATTACH]

Guess I am going to have to load a CAD program and see if I can remember, of figure out, how to use it. It has been years and years since I last did. Anyway, I thought this would give and idea of what such a keyboard would be like.

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #37 on: Wed, 21 September 2011, 10:54:45 »
Quote from: Playtrumpet;418708
Typing with plover right now. So hard.

That was a fun attempt. Some things I remember.. With a regular keyboard there are a lot of difficult positions for your fingers. There are plenty of glitches and confusing author-made changes to the basic language, as graywolf mentioned. It's still a fun challenge. ^_^


Well, you are farther along than I am. I have been spending my time trying to figure out how to build a dedicated keyboard. I asked on the main keyboard forum here how people were drawing the keyboard drawings they posted here on geekhack showthread.

Really need to take some time play around with Plover more. However, there does not seem to be much interest. There are you and I here, and about ten people over on the Plover Google Group. That is not a lot. It would be easier to use a standard keyboard if the letters were not offset, they are offset because on a mechanical typewriter the levers had to clear each other, strange we still have to accommodate that when such typewriters have not been made in decades.

Offline xwhatsit

  • Posts: 273
  • Location: NZ
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #38 on: Fri, 23 September 2011, 23:02:41 »
Thanks for the heads up about Plover. Trying to make it work now (problem is I think it's Python 2? Archlinux uses Python 3 so trying to figure that out now).

Graywolf -- just twigged! -- you're the Graywolf from Rangefinderforum! Funny how these sorts of interests often seem to coincide.
Beam spring IBM 5251 (7361073/7362149) & IBM 3727 (5641316) | Model F IBM 122-key terminal & IBM PC-AT 84-key | Model M Unicomp 122-key terminal | Cherry MX Blue Leopold Tenkeyless

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #39 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 01:34:20 »
Quote from: xwhatsit;420656
Thanks for the heads up about Plover. Trying to make it work now (problem is I think it's Python 2? Archlinux uses Python 3 so trying to figure that out now).

Graywolf -- just twigged! -- you're the Graywolf from Rangefinderforum! Funny how these sorts of interests often seem to coincide.

Yep, that is me. I use graywolf, on any forum that will let me. Sometimes I think the reason I can not use it is because I had signed up on that forum years ago and forgot the password. I have more interests than I have time money or energy for.

I don't know, I have had no problem getting Plover to work. Just had to load aptitude, which was not loaded by default, to get it to load in Ubuntu. I used Ubuntu because that is what the programmer says he used to develop it. However, I do not see why it would not work on about any version of Linux, or BSD for that matter, as long as the required libraries were there. But, Plover seems to still be a work in progress. I is not really ready for prime time yet despite being labeled version 2.1.1. Although it seem good enough to get an idea if Steno is useful to you.

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #40 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 09:22:25 »
Yeah. My biggest concern besides the shape of a normal keyboard to do certain chords is the fact that the dictionary is not an unedited dictionary. I know I've read on a steno forum this same concern for beginners. If we could get a bare Plover dictionary with an untouched StenEd or Phoenix or even Magnum Steno theory, that would be ideal.

The libraries for python are the reason I can't get it to run natively on mac. I'm not a programmer, but I'm sure there's a way around it.
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #41 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 14:17:02 »
Yes, a basic student dictionary would be nice. But, I think the thing to do is when you find something you do not want is to go in and change it. Looks like it is usr/local/lib/pyhon2.7/dist-packages/plover/assets/dict.json

Also, I think it is based on the eclipse dictionary. Her briefs may all be at the beginning of the file, as it is pretty random, then turns alphabetical. I guess that makes sense as you would want the system to use your personal brief rather than the standard one, so it gets placed at the top of the list.

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #42 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 14:55:48 »
I was looking through that the other day actually and found that there are a bunch of sections throughout the file where her personal briefs seem to be located. Some are situated right in the middle of long strings of the standard dictionary so I don't think it'd be completely possible to find them all. I do wonder if Ms. Knight has a way of resurrecting the untouched software. =|
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline staniel

  • Posts: 1
    • http://stanographer.tumblr.com
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #43 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 23:26:41 »
Quote from: Playtrumpet;417975
Plover is readily available to me, but I'm just giving myself excuses not to seriously start teaching myself (ex. It's best taught from professionals, with proper texts and dedication, I don't know anyone in real life who knows steno (and few who even know OF it), it takes months to learn it and I'd be an amateur, all alone trying to teach myself a professional language, etc.). I've got plenty of excuses, but I PRETEND that accessibility and convenience are my actual excuses.

Soon, though.. I'll get up the courage to begin for real. Learning multiple disciplines is an intimidating prospect and it just stresses me out a bit is all..

But for anyone NOT being classically/intensely trained in a discipline (it should be relatively apparent that I am saying I'm a musician in the toughest year(s) of my training right now) I strongly encourage trying to learn steno. I'm certain that so FEW people actually learn the standard language on their own and it would be exciting to hear from the earliest self-taught, proficient stenographers as I hope there will be many more in the future.

Hey guys,

I heard about this thread over at the Plover forum and would like to introduce myself and maybe answer questions you may have. I'm Stan and I am a self-taught realtime stenographer who quite literally started on Plover as my first ever CAT software. I started about a year ago (Spring quarter of my junior year in college, I think) and my speed in steno is currently in the mid 200s (like 200-220 WPM). I'm planning to take the official NCRA realtime skills test this November.

I guess I would be exactly the type of rare person Playtrumpet was referring to as I actually never used any textbooks of any kind to learn steno until fairly late in the game (after I had already bought a professional machine, etc.). But I just wanted to assure you that it is entirely possible to achieve professional speeds in machine shorthand by yourself.

In my early stages, I basically used that exact online book you linked on here to learn the alphabet. Then I learned the chords by experimenting with Plover and basically learning the outlines word-by-word by searching through Mirabai's dictionary. Once I got a professional machine and software, I continued this study tactic by downloading a stock dictionary for my theory and both learning from it and editing the **** out of it (yes, a lot of work!).

I practiced all summer long before my senior year and went into my classes (with my steno machine!) with a solid 100 or so wpm under my belt. You can imagine how helpful it was for taking notes. After like 2.5 quarters of using my steno machine in all my classes, writing essays with it, chatting on Facebook with it, and basically just chucking QWERTY (and Dvorak!) out the window in favor of using steno for everything, in my last few classes of college I was basically captioning lectures word-for-word at blistering speeds, sometimes 200+ wpm. Couple kids bought notes off of me or bartered them off me via coffee or lunch. Some even bribed me to transcribe their classes for them (because they didn't wanna go themselves, lol).

In reading your discussion regarding the steno vs. keyboard shorthand debate, for someone who is not thinking about stenoing as their career, I think it would be more beneficial to learn steno over a keyboard-based abbreviation system depending on what goals you have in mind for its use. For instance, steno doesn't really help me write formal compositions like essays or articles because I can't think at 250+ wpm to write an essay. So even armed with my steno machine, I'll still be sitting there next to my friend on QWERTY writing her essay until the crack of dawn because I'm thinking about word selection, connotation, tone, grammar, fluidity, etc. and I'm constantly changing stuff and moving things around. In this case, the keyboard system would be the way to go since you wouldn't have to reach up from the steno machine to the keyboard and mouse for copying/pasting/deleting and you probably are going to be using a somewhat restricted lexicon since you're writing on a certain topic. I would imagine keyboard shortcuts working very well here since you will probably be typing certain cumbersome key words and phrases over and over again so the added efficiency would be a benefit. But in careful writing, simply being able to write all words faster may not be one.

However, on the other hand, I love writing steno when chatting on Facebook because you're thinking at conversational speeds and you can bang out a response to someone's message as quickly AND efficiently you could have spoken it. If I have a lot of emails to respond to, I use steno because again, I am writing as fast as if I were speaking and as an added bonus, software takes care of all the capitalization and spacing.

The only glaring drawback I see to the keyboard system is the amount of time it would require to build a usable dictionary (and remember it). In this sense, steno is obviously at an advantage because there are stock dictionaries which come prepackaged with thousands of entries, most of which can be predicted easily using the rules of the system. Don't get me wrong, I do end up spending a great deal of time editing my dictionary and perfecting it. But I'm a careerist writer who needs to do that constantly in order to achieve the ridiculously high performance levels expected of certified realtime stenographers. For most people though, forgetting the brief for 'interrogate' and just relying on the phonetic entry IN/TER/GAIT is still a total of three phonetic key strokes vs 11 and thus quicker than typing it (or with the keyboard shortcut method, unless you can come up with something that's only three strokes long for 'interrogate' and had already defined a short for it in advance).

Plus there's no getting over the fact that steno is written in chords and keyboards can only register one letter at a time. With the keyboard shortcut method, the only way to reduce the amount of time and effort it takes to type something is to shorten it in length. But, the more you shorten, the more arbitrary it becomes and the more you have to memorize. Steno is sometimes also just as arbitrary; I can have the entire word "guidelines" or "in order to be able to" up on the screen in one stroke by hitting chords that are probably just as arbitrary as 'fnu' or 'ftu' (they're GLAINZ and NORBLT, respectively). But either way, you vastly reduce the number of strokes even while adhering to phonetic principles simply by virtue of the fact that one can compress more data per unit of time in steno, period.

Ex:

Keyboard system (parens indicate number of strokes):

became: bca (3)
become bco (3)
because: Ctrl + B (1)

Steno:

became: PWAEUPL [baim] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KAEUPL (2)
become: PW-PL [b-m] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KOPL (2)
because: PWAUZ [bauz] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KAUZ (2)

So if you don't mind having to bring a steno keyboard with you everywhere, it would be worth it if you're someone who has to take notes, type up minutes, or send lots of emails. The key is that the time it takes to physically input text has to be the limiting factor for steno to be worthwhile. If you're just lazy and hate writing "the voiced labiodental fricative" a gazillion times on a paper, but don't necessarily feel frustrated that your fingers can't keep up with your thoughts, then just stick with a keyboard-based system.

Anyway, I just wanted to put myself out there since I already feel like an ambassador of steno for the younger/future generation and I love spreading the word. I just don't understand why so many people either don't know about it or consider it an old lady's profession, an arcane and/or outdated technology. I feel like if this style of data input were harnessed elsewhere like in mobile phones and tablets, for example, that HIDs would be ****in revolutionized. Steno-Swype?!?! But alas, people are lazy, un/misinformed, or all the above. I guess that's why we stenographers have jobs (and make bank!).

Again, feel free to ask any one of us over at Plover if you have any questions. :)

And for those who have not seen steno in action before, here is a screencast I recently posted of me transcribing a certification practice test at 180 WPM. It should hopefully illustrate how the machine shorthand code corresponds to the translated output. Behold the power: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey7VuAGmS8A.

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #44 on: Sat, 24 September 2011, 23:59:50 »
No way! I've seen your videos. You are a rare breed. ^_^ Ever get asked weird questions about bringing in your machine to a class?

Your input is so valuable to me and I share your opinions about abbreviation systems vs chording and their different applications and usefulnesses. Finally someone else who can justify my seemingly weird and off-beat obsession.
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline Proword

  • Posts: 225
  • Location: Perth, Western Australia
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #45 on: Sun, 25 September 2011, 03:45:08 »
Quote from: staniel;421003
Hey guys,
...



In reading your discussion regarding the steno vs. keyboard shorthand debate, for someone who is not thinking about stenoing as their career, I think it would be more beneficial to learn steno over a keyboard-based abbreviation system depending on what goals you have in mind for its use. For instance, steno doesn't really help me write formal compositions like essays or articles because I can't think at 250+ wpm to write an essay.

...

The only glaring drawback I see to the keyboard system is the amount of time it would require to build a usable dictionary (and remember it).

... But either way, you vastly reduce the number of strokes even while adhering to phonetic principles simply by virtue of the fact that one can compress more data per unit of time in steno, period.

Ex:

Keyboard system (parens indicate number of strokes):

became: bca (3)
become bco (3)
because: Ctrl + B (1)

Steno:

became: PWAEUPL [baim] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KAEUPL (2)
become: PW-PL [b-m] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KOPL (2)
because: PWAUZ [bauz] (1) / phonetically: PWE/KAUZ (2)

...

Anyway, I just wanted to put myself out there since I already feel like an ambassador of steno for the younger/future generation and I love spreading the word. I just don't understand why so many people either don't know about it or consider it an old lady's profession, an arcane and/or outdated technology. I feel like if this style of data input were harnessed elsewhere like in mobile phones and tablets, for example, that HIDs would be ****in revolutionized. Steno-Swype?!?! But alas, people are lazy, un/misinformed, or all the above. I guess that's why we stenographers have jobs (and make bank!).

I'm at a bit of a loss as to what you feel needs to be "remembered" with keyboard shorthand.  With about 7000 short forms,  if somebody randomly selected 100 of them and asked me what the short form would expand into, I would probably only know about 3-4 of them, simply because there's no need to know that.  It's not important.  What IS important is what the full form can be reduced to.  It's not a question of being "arbitrary".  It's simply a question of each person working with the tool that they know best - their own mind.  It only seems arbitrary to a second party.  To the user, there's an internal logic at work which doesn't need to be explained to anybody else.

Put simply, there's nothing to "learn", because you're "teaching" yourself.

Your example of "become/became/because" isn't quite correct, as your keystroke count failed to include the "execute" keystroke.  The difficulty I initially came across was that what seemed to be the simplest abbreviation was in fact not always useable, because with both MS Word and WordPerfect the expansion of the Autocorrect/Quickcorrect function was tied to the space bar and/or punctuation symbols.  A simple example of the difficulty is the abbreviations for days of the week and months of the year.  I initially considered a logical system (ie MY logic) would be the first two letters, but June and July put the mockers on that.  I could have created an exception, but a system with exceptions is neither logical nor systematic, so I went to the first three letters, but several of the abbreviations were "real" words; mar, may, Jan, sat, sun etc, hence the moment I hit the space bar, I had an unwanted expansion.  The choice was to try and "think" my way out of it by creating an abbreviation which was unlikely to come up in the normal course, or devise a system which worked around that problem.   So I simply worked out how to move the expansion function from the space bar to a key of my own choosing, so that I could create abbreviations without any constraints whatsoever, except the unlikely chance that the abbreviation was already attached to a different phrase.  I suppose in 20 years I can only recall about half a dozen instances where an abbreviation was already "taken", and in almost every case I discarded the initial phrase and replaced it with the later one.  It is MUCH more common (probably by a factor of 10 or 15) to have several abbreviations for the same final form, which is not a problem, because it increases the chance of a successful expansion, and as time progresses I become used to using just one abbreviation, which then frees up the remainder.

Your point about creating a "usable dictionary" doesn't seem to be a problem, simply because the typist is ALREADY able to type everything in full, so you are then sitting on a baseline speed which you work up from.  As soon as you add a single short form to create your dictionary, it's usable, and there is an immediate (if miniscule) increase in performance.  As you add more, your performance increases.  There's no question of "editing the **** out of" an existing dictionary created by someone else.  The only editing (other than spelling correction) I've ever had to do is occasionally (eg once a year or so) go through my word list and delete anything which is unlikely to be used again, probably because it was a "case specific" abbreviation.  Unlike MS Word, WordPerfect has no limit on the size of the word list (my current major list is about 330 KB), so this clearing out is not essential, but useful nevertheless.  

Your point about using steno for chatting on line etc is one which I use myself.  The only requirement is that the program I'm using must have access to the Windows copy-and-paste clipboard.  I'll use my word processor with all its functions to generate the text, then a single keystroke macro copies the entire text to the clipboard, I switch to my chat program and then paste the text.  When I return to my word processor the entire text is still selected, so as soon as I hit a keystroke, the old text is replaced by the new.  (But it remains in the clipboard until I replace it, which has proven useful on one or two occasions.)

I don't say that keystroke short forms are any better (or worse) than Stenotype work, but simply that they both work.  Like yourself, I make a heap of money (or made, since I'm now retired but still do a small number of jobs to keep my mind active) using this technique.  It was interesting that in the 2-3 years before I retired I was on the books of a few secretarial agencies, and my two main ones had me on their books as a "stenographer", and they were still getting requests for my services.  For these two agencies I was the ONLY stenographer they had.  

And yes, like yourself, I always took my own keyboard (and eventually computer) to the offices.

To me the "glaring drawback" of stenotype is the amount of study which required "a lot of work".    


On your point "you vastly reduce the number of strokes even while adhering to phonetic principles simply by virtue of the fact that one can compress more data per unit of time in steno", I haven't checked lately (probably 5 years) but I estimated then that my keystroke saving was in the vicinity of 40%.


Below is an example I've cut and pasted from my blog

http://proword-transcription.blogspot.com/


****************************

HIS WORSHIP: Yes, thank you?

MR MONITOR: May it please the court, my name is Monitor, I appear on behalf of the first and second plaintiffs.

MS FEATHERN: May it please you sir, Ms Feathern for the defendant.

HIS WORSHIP: Yes, thank you.

MR FRANKLE: May it please you your Worship, I appear for the third party.

HIS WORSHIP: Yes, thank you. Mr Monitor?

MR MONITOR: If your Worship pleases, this is a copyright case involving an action by the plaintiffs as against the defendant, Richard Keith Haute. The case arises as a consequence of the second plaintiff, Homestead Holdings Pty Ltd, otherwise trading as Anthem Homes, being a builder that designed a set of drawings for a house to be built for the defendant, a Mr Richard Keith Haute. The - - I'll call them - - instead of calling them the second plaintiff, I'll call the second plaintiff Anthem Homes, if that pleases the court, the third party, Beeswing Holdings Pty Ltd, that company trades as Machard Homes, so we have Anthem Homes and Beeswing Homes. Gregory Thomas Ching, he is the owner of the copyright, the original architectural design, of a particular design of house, and he licensed the use of that to Anthem Homes. For the purpose of these proceedings, your Worship should have an amended particulars of claim, particulars of amended defence, amended statement of claim against the third party, and a re-amended particulars of defence by the third party.

What I propose to do is take you through the particulars of claim to start with. The first plaintiff is a building designer. He will give evidence to tell the court of his background and experience. The second plaintiff is a company that is incorporated. On the amended defence there is a denial of the Anthem Homes or Homestead Holdings Pty Ltd being an incorporated company. That denial is now withdrawn.

MR FRANKLE: Can I just rise, and I do apologise to my learned friend for interrupting him, but there's a minor housekeeping matter that should be dealt with at this early stage.

HIS WORSHIP: Yes.

MR FRANKLE: And that is for the third party. I simply seek a direction, that we haven't had one the past, although the case has been run that way, and the direction I seek is the direction that the third party's liability to the defendant be determined at this trial.


****************************************


Above is the published transcript. Below is what I actually keyed in. It looks a bit of a mish-mash but I'll try and explain my "code". Where you see an asterisk "*" followed by a letter, this is a key stroke combination. Eg *t means I pressed Ctrl (Or Alt) T to get the text string "the". However where you see a text string followed by a hash "#", this is a QuickCorrect expansion. Eg Yh# means I've typed "yh" and hit my expansion key to get "Your Honour".

As you can see there is a considerable saving in keystroking, an even greater saving when you take into account the "invisible" savings created by reduction in typing errors. An example is my proclivity to key the word "the" by typing t-e-h- [backspace] [backspace] h-e. So using the keystroke Ctrl T actually saves me typing more than one extra keystroke.

If this text appears to "jammed up" this is because when there is a change in speaker, the new paragraph spacing is included in the keystroke combo, as described above.

##################################

*1Yes, t*k? *3Miplc#, my name is Monitor, I ape# obhfo# *t ft# and sec# ptf#s. *4Mipl# y* sir, Ms Feathern for *t dft#.*1Yes, t*k. *5Mipl# y* yw#, I ape4# *t 3pty#. *1Yes, t*k. Mr Monitor? *3If yw* pl*s, this is a copyright case ivog# an acn# by *t ptf#s as ais# *t dft#, Richard Keith Haute. *t case arises as a cnsq# of *t sec# ptf#, Homestead Holdings Pty Ltd, otw# trading as Anthem Homes, be*i a bldr# *h designed a set of draw*is for a house to be built for *t dft#, a Mr Richard Keith Haute. *t - - I'll call *tm - - instead of calling *tm *t sec# ptf#, I'll call *t sec# ptf# Anthem Homes, if *h pl#s *t crt#, *t 3pty#, Beeswing Holdings Pty Ltd, *h coy# trades as Machard Homes, so we hv# Anthem Homes and Beeswing Homes. Gregory Thomas Ching, he is *t owner of *t copyright, *t orgl# archtl# design, of a pt# design of house, and he lcs#d *t use of *h to Anthem Homes. For *t pu# of *tse pcdg#s, yw# sh*o hv# an amdd# pt#s of claim, pt#s of amdd# dfc#, amdd# stm# of cl# ais# *t 3pty#, and a re-amdd# pt#s of dfc# by the 3pty#. *W I pps# to do is ty# thr*g *t pt#s of cl# to start with. *t ft# ptf# is a bldg# designer. He will give ev# to tell *t crt# of his bakg# and xpc#. *t sec# ptf# is a coy# ie# inc#d. On the amd# dfc# th# is a denial of *t Anthem Homes or Homestead Holdings Pty Ltd be*i an inc#d coy#. *h denial is now wdwn#. *5Can I *j rise, and I do apols# to mlf# for interrupting him, but th#e's a minor hskpgm# *h sh*o be dtw# this early stage. *1Yes. *5And *h is for *t 3pty#. I simply seek a drn#, *h we hvn# had one *t past, alth*g *t case has been run *h way, and *t drn# I seek is *t drn# *h *t 3pty#'s lbly# to *t dft# be dtm#d at this trial.

***************************
This transcript is from about 6-7 years ago, and I've increased my dictionary by about a third since then I would imagine, so were I to do it again today it would be even more efficient.




Joe
« Last Edit: Sun, 25 September 2011, 04:45:23 by Proword »
Maltron 3D Dual Hand (x4)
Maltron 3D Single Hand (x2 - L & R)

Many people think their lifestyle comes at a cost - but they are quite cool with that as long as somebody ELSE pays it.

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #46 on: Sun, 25 September 2011, 12:40:41 »
Joe, one thing to think about, when you did your thing, the only way to do short hand was to buy a very expensive Stenographic Machine. Now there is a freeware Steno System that can be used on a normal keyboard (& if I have my way, in a few months, a USB steno keyboard will be available for it). You had little choice, people today have a choice.

Another point, with Plover, you can use it for all your keyboard input (only in Linux at that moment, unfortunately), not just with your word processor. My intention for the keyboard is that when it is plugged in Plover will automatically recognize it and take its input from the steno board, while the regular keyboard will continue to work normally because Plover will no longer be usurping it.

Also, real time steno systems all allow the input of your own abbreviations, so your type of system works perfectly well with steno. In browsing the dictionary in Plover I noticed at least one word where she had five different abbreviations for the same word.

The main advantage, and disadvantage of steno is the chorded keyboard. It is an advantage because you can type really fast with minimal hand movements. It is a disadvantage because you have to learn a new way of typing.

Real shorthand was devised as a phonetic language, and that remains the base of modern steno machines, but it looks like many people agree with you about the difficulty of using it, considering that most of today's steno's use an inordinate amount of briefs (abbreviations).

Offline Proword

  • Posts: 225
  • Location: Perth, Western Australia
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #47 on: Sun, 25 September 2011, 19:19:07 »
Quote from: graywolf;421195
Joe, one thing to think about, when you did your thing, the only way to do short hand was to buy a very expensive Stenographic Machine. Now there is a freeware Steno System that can be used on a normal keyboard (& if I have my way, in a few months, a USB steno keyboard will be available for it). You had little choice, people today have a choice.

Another point, with Plover, you can use it for all your keyboard input (only in Linux at that moment, unfortunately), not just with your word processor. My intention for the keyboard is that when it is plugged in Plover will automatically recognize it and take its input from the steno board, while the regular keyboard will continue to work normally because Plover will no longer be usurping it.

...

Real shorthand was devised as a phonetic language, and that remains the base of modern steno machines, but it looks like many people agree with you about the difficulty of using it, considering that most of today's steno's use an inordinate amount of briefs (abbreviations).


In 1979, I started learning pen shorthand (Pitman's), with the intention of eventually moving to machine shorthand, but during my first year I bought my first computer (Apple II) and once I'd become acquainted with the concept of word processing software, I was acutely aware of how clumsy the whole idea of having to hand-write something, then re-type it, was, when I could see that by using the word processor I could enter text directly in shorthand of some sort, and have it translated immediately.  (At this time, the translation of the machine shorthand into English was performed by other people called "scopists".)

http://www.scopists.com/library/pro/scintro.html

Whilst my first software package, Zardax, was capable of doing a form of abbreviated typing, it was extremely limited, and it wasn't until 1990 when I first started using WordPerfect for DOS that the software became capable of achieving what I wanted.

I'd been using the Maltron keyboard for about 5 years at that time, so I was already capable of quite high "manual" speed with a great deal of ease and very little hand or arm movement so the two things, Maltron and short hand, complemented each other very well.  My keyboard short hand will work with QWERTY, Dvorak, Colemak or Maltron layout, but only Maltron has what I consider to be a high degree of ergonomic design and comfort.  Having become familiar with the Maltron's ergonomic qualities, I was further put off using Stenotype keyboard because of the extremely uncomfortable hand position.

I've linked to my video in a previous posting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYJtF1I3PRs

but it shows the relaxed position of the hands and fingers.

You and I are approaching the same problem from diametrically opposite directions.  We both want a single keyboard to do two totally dissimilar tasks.  Normal computer usage and short hand.  The only difference in our approach is that I have a couple of decades of practical experience.  You are still building yours.  That doesn't mean that one system is better (or worse) than the other.  I'm sure there are other people taking yet more different approaches.  I wish them good luck.

Joe
Maltron 3D Dual Hand (x4)
Maltron 3D Single Hand (x2 - L & R)

Many people think their lifestyle comes at a cost - but they are quite cool with that as long as somebody ELSE pays it.

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #48 on: Sun, 25 September 2011, 20:02:41 »
An update for me. School's getting extra busy and I just can't dedicate time to trying to learn steno via Plover. So instead, I've decided to try an abbreviation system/program. Going well so far, but all I'm really doing now is creating and building my abbreviation dictionary. It's nice and I plan to always use it for my regular typing, but I haven't given up altogether on steno - just wanted to see what it's like on this frontier.

My thoughts: would be soo much better with either a Maltron or Kinesis keyboard where there are all those function keys right at your thumbs. The program I'm using is TypeIt4Me which works well enough, with maybe the occasional glitch but it works universally (in any application and you can set specific abbreviations for different programs if you want). I've of course found there are a LOT of words that start with the same letters, or are homophones or are in some way too similar, which is why I believe function keys would really help.

TypeIt4Me allows many different characters to expand the abbreviation (I have it set to pretty much any punctuation and it makes typing much easier).

Still getting used to the abbreviations I've created. I do try to make them so I won't have to think about it when I'm typing and I've come up with a system for suffixes. (ex. adding 'g' to the end of an abbreviation will add 'ing', 'd' or 'ed' will add 'ed' or 'ly' or 'y' and so on - the program has the option to just add 's' to the end of an abbreviation and it will pluralize the word and I use that as well.

So far I've created 830 of my own "clippings/abbreviations" and almost all of them are for common 4+ letter words. Here's a link if you wanna see my current dictionary (I add probably over a hundred abbreviations everyday). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhDltXWEPRyKdERPUHRUSldpX3c2LV9wMXVRNEpUZ1E&hl=en_US

From that I've removed any personal abbreviations like my name, address, emails and such. It's obviously not a perfect system, but it does make sense to me, though I'm constantly editing it. Some abbreviations with apostrophes may not show the apostrophe. The first one isn't just "c" but rather "'c" for example. Anyway, I just wanted to try this so I had some basic knowledge and experience. Personally, I do think chording and stenotyping with a comfortable and proper keyboard would suit me better and once I'm willing to buy a machine of my own, I'll be learning the language non-stop.

e. Also, I've been trying a bit to tailor my abbreviations to avoid any awkward Dvorak strokes.
« Last Edit: Mon, 26 September 2011, 14:17:47 by Playtrumpet »
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #49 on: Mon, 26 September 2011, 20:08:29 »
Well, I at one time used an abbreviation system myself. Also as I said in my first post on this thread, I would have to have a very good reason to learn RT steno. One of my hobbies is designing things, I have taken on the project of designing a steno keyboard for the fun of it. That gives me some motivation to learn to use plover.

Unfortunately, I am finding out that building the prototype keyboards out of new parts is rather more than I can afford, gainfully employed people would not have my problem with that. I have gotten some interesting quotes, to have custom key caps made, molds would cost $2000 ea. There are four different ones. Of course I had no intention of using purpose designed key caps in the prototypes, but still I am looking at about $500 to build 5 keyboards & probably $400 to build just one. I guess, now, I need to look into finding some old keyboards I can cannibalize for parts.

Back to Joe, you have a system that works for you, no reason in the world for you to change it. But, you seem to think people should adopt it because it works for you. Actually, the main reason they should not adopt it is because it is not a standard system. I even have a problem about the extensive use of personal briefs in RT steno for that same reason. There are ergonometric steno keyboards, I noticed when I was called in for jury duty that the stenographer had a vertical keyboard that she typed on from either side about like we do sitting in our armchair twiddling our fingers. I certainly looked to me like a real comfortable keyboard to use.

Offline Proword

  • Posts: 225
  • Location: Perth, Western Australia
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #50 on: Mon, 26 September 2011, 20:32:04 »
Quote from: graywolf;421794

Back to Joe, you have a system that works for you, no reason in the world for you to change it. But, you seem to think people should adopt it because it works for you. Actually, the main reason they should not adopt it is because it is not a standard system.

Sorry, Tom, I don't think I've said other people should adopt it.  I've merely said this is what I've done, it's not theoretical, it's not "under development", it's been working for over 20 years, and, by linking to my blog, explain in great detail, how to do it.  That, to me, seems to be what a forum such as this one should be about.  But if that's how it "seems" to you, then that's how it seems to you.

And why should it be important that it be a "standard" system?  QWERTY is standard. ;-)  Unlike your proposal to build your own keyboard (which I have no qualms with), there's nothing which I use which is NOT standard, all I've done is take an existing set of products, make one very tiny (software) modification, which was to move the expansion function to a nominated key (which anybody familiar with the software could work out with a minute's thought) and use it the way I choose.  What I've done is simply shift the paradigm from working the way the software "requires" (ie the "standard" way), to altering the software to suit my own work practices.  HOW I use the software is of absolutely no concern to anybody else.  If somebody looks at my system, and is inspired to create something different again, that's cool with me.  It won't affect me in any way.  I've got no patent on the system, I don't try and get money for other people to use it.*  If it works for one person, and not someone else, then that's all that can be said about it.

Joe

On edit:  *But as I pointed out elsewhere, this system is making ME money because the people whose opinion REALLY matter$, ie my clients, choose to come to me to have their work done, rather than go elsewhere.  ;-)

J
« Last Edit: Mon, 26 September 2011, 20:42:36 by Proword »
Maltron 3D Dual Hand (x4)
Maltron 3D Single Hand (x2 - L & R)

Many people think their lifestyle comes at a cost - but they are quite cool with that as long as somebody ELSE pays it.

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #51 on: Wed, 28 September 2011, 13:38:55 »
Quote from: graywolf;418176
The keycaps would be the most difficult problem. On a one off, I guess you could grind some standard keycaps down and glue something to the top; but in small quantities custom molded keycaps would be very expensive. The one nice thing is that except for the number lock keybar that I think you could use a spacebar for, there are only 3 sizes of keycaps needed, and they have no markings on them.

Ah yes, quoting myself. I have looked into custom keycaps. The mold for each would cost $2000. Set up for each type key looks to be about $30. The keys themselfs are pretty cheap, came out to about $8/set. Ordering keycaps they already have the molds for it would cost about $120 setip plus about $8 set. Rather expensive until you get to about 10 sets.

Kind of thinking of buying a couple of used keyboards off ebay and cannibalizing them for parts. Remember that grind the top of the keycaps flat and glue a piece of plastic to them.

A psychological factor that has not been mentioned, it is a lot easier to switch between two entirely different keyboard than trying to use the same one differently. Especially when you have been using that type of keyboard for more than 60 years like I have.

A way to visualize what I have in mind is to look at the right most column on the Number pad, think of the minus key as the shift bar at the top of the keyboard, the plus key as the top consonant key (there would be a row of 10 of them), and the enter key as the bottom consonant key (row of 10), then imagine a row of 4 single vowel keys centered below those where your thumbs would fall naturally on them (ideally the vowel keys would be about a half-inch lower than the consonant keys. The keyboard would be about the size of a half sheet of letterhead paper.
« Last Edit: Wed, 28 September 2011, 13:42:00 by graywolf »

Offline dorkvader

  • ** Moderator Emeritus
  • Posts: 6694
  • Location: NE Massachusetts
  • ipse se nihil scire id unum sciat
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #52 on: Thu, 29 September 2011, 11:26:08 »
I have to use QWERTY at work, when I type up repair details for people. It's very little typing, but I can switch back to DVORAK at home pretty easily.

Actually, I had to do this all the time when I was learning DVORAK, and I don't think it impeded me at all.
---
Graywolf, that's a pretty cool design. I like the relatively compact design (If I'm imagining it right)
---
playtrumpet, don't you think "yt" should be "you there" instead of "yuh there"? though it is your layout, I feel like option #2 would be better.

Still, that's already an impressive list of abbreviations.
« Last Edit: Thu, 29 September 2011, 11:28:59 by dorkvader »
Keyboard springs are not all pandas and ghosts: sometimes they are quite real.

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #53 on: Thu, 29 September 2011, 13:39:27 »
For those of you who may be interested there is a video of Mirabai Knight talking about Plover at PyGotham 2011.

http://blip.tv/pygotham/plover-thought-to-text-at-240-wpm-5582245

Offline graywolf

  • Posts: 181
    • http://www.graywolfphoto.com/
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #54 on: Thu, 29 September 2011, 13:57:01 »
Quote from: dorkvader;423420
Graywolf, that's a pretty cool design. I like the relatively compact design (If I'm imagining it right)

[ Attachment Invalid Or Does Not Exist ] 27553[/ATTACH]

Actually allowing for non-English users to add extra 2-high keys on the bottom row makes the keyboard a bit taller, but that seems like an OK trade off. Main matrix would be on 0.75" x 1.5" centers.
« Last Edit: Thu, 29 September 2011, 14:33:59 by graywolf »

Offline Playtrumpet

  • Posts: 275
300+ wpm Stenotype (Chording) Machine? Why not a standard?
« Reply #55 on: Thu, 29 September 2011, 14:19:43 »
Quote from: dorkvader;423420
playtrumpet, don't you think "yt" should be "you there" instead of "yuh there"? though it is your layout, I feel like option #2 would be better.

Still, that's already an impressive list of abbreviations.


HAHA! I'm glad you caught that. I type "yuh there?" whenever I message my friends online so its frequency is much higher in my typing than the proper "you there?" That was just a personal thing, but it makes me happy that you caught that. Since I've posted that list I've added a few hundred abbreviations and edited quite a few of those on the list. Oh, and in every post here (including yours) I look for common words that I need to add and I thank you for giving me "relatively" and by extension, "relative," "option" and by extension, "optionally." Notice how incredibly easy it is to add more and more vocab. =P

And graywolf, it's so cool to see Mirabai speaking in real life! She's just as awesome and geeky as I imagined. ^_^
Das S Ultimate Brown | Dvorak