In this context below is it permissible to use the (er) contraction and also the (in)g contraction? Or would that be confused to be the sound er and ing, instead of e r and I n g
For the totally blind kids and others who couldn't read print, it was practice in the writing and reading of Braille, beginning with the Braille alphabet, numbers, punctuation marks, and then a kind of shorthand: Braille contractions, hundreds and maybe thousands of contractions, the heart and soul of Braille, must be learned for the more common letter groupings such as “er” and “ing,” and some for whole words like “for,” “with,” “before,”
Since you are discussing braille in your transcription you will want to ensure your mention of contractions will give an accurate description of the sign without causing confusion in the braille-in-braille context.
I think Section 3 of the Rules of UEB should apply in this case:
UEB 3.13.1 Use a dot locator for ‘mention’ to set apart a braille symbol that is <u>under discussion</u>, as in a symbols list, a transcriber's note, or in a <u>publication about braille</u> such as this one. Place the dot locator for "mention" before the braille symbol and unspaced from it.
In your print text, “er” and “ing” should be transcribed uncontracted. The dot locator for “mention” is followed unspaced by the contraction as shown here: