Is reading in an agglutinating language different from an analytic language? An analysis of isiZulu and English reading based on eye movements

Abstract

In this article we examine the reading ability of Grade 4 learners in their home language, isiZulu and in English (first additional language), using both eye-tracking activities and traditional pen-and-paper reading comprehension assessment. The aim of the study was twofold: firstly, to compare bilingual reading performance in an agglutinating language (isiZulu) and an analytic language (English). The learners' eye-tracking profiles were obtained in both languages to see how they differed across the two languages and their eye-tracking profiles were also analysed according to their comprehension performance in both languages. Secondly, the eye-tracking profiles in both languages were also analysed in terms of reading ability, to determine how eye-tracking profiles differed among strong, average and weak readers in the two languages. In general, pen-andpaper tests showed that the entire group read with relatively low comprehension. The main findings from the eye tracker showed significant differences when the learners read in the two languages, on nearly all the selected eye-tracking variables. The eye movement profiles in isiZulu may be attributable to the longer word units in the conjunctive orthography of isiZulu. However, although there were several significant differences in eye movements between the reading ability groups in English, differences in eye movements due to differential reading skill did not emerge strongly in isiZulu. This may be due to floor effects in novice isiZulu readers or to a longer developmental trajectory in the early stages of reading in isiZulu. Some implications for early reading instruction in isiZulu are briefly considered.Van Rooy and Pretorius 282

Reading comprehension in South African schools: Are teachers getting it, and getting it right?

“…The very poor comprehension levels in both the HL and in English FAL, even in terms of literal understanding, suggest that teachers are not effectively developing learners' basic reading skills that support comprehension. Research into the relationship between decoding and comprehension skills in both the HL and FAL suggests that many learners struggle even to decode the texts that they read (Pretorius, 2012;Van Rooy & Pretorius, 2013;Pretorius, 2015). So even if South African teachers are spending more instructional time on decoding rather than on comprehension, it is not being done effectively.…”

Language learning and teaching in South African primary schools

“…Land's (2015) research found that isiZulu is indeed read at a much slower pace by competent adult readers than equivalent texts in English, which she put down to the agglutinative nature of the African language. This is supported by the analysis of reading in English based on eye movements by Van Rooy and Pretorius (2013), who found that three different groups of isiZulu early graders (strong, average and weak readers) showed similar eye movements when reading isiZulu but showed marked differences in reading rates, types of eye movements and duration of fixations when reading English.…”

Processing and learning from multiple sources: A comparative case study of students with dyslexia working in a multiple source multimedia context

“…Finally, Participant 2 and Participant 3 read the texts substantially faster (with average fixation duration 200 and 190 msc, and with 26.06% and 16.20% regressions, respectively), which closely resembles the behaviors typically reported for children without dyslexia of a similar age (average fixation duration 230-250 msc, 22% regressions) (Rayner et al, 2013). However, previous research has found that the transparency of the orthography can influence fixation time during reading; the deeper the orthography, the longer the fixations (Bahnmueller, Huber, Nuerk, Göbel, & Moeller, 2016;Rau, Moll, Snowling, & Landerl, 2015;Van Roy & Pretorius, 2013). Norwegian is a transparent orthography compared to English or French, and this should be considered when interpreting the reading rates of Participant 2 and Participant 3 in relation to the norms, which are established with English-or French-speaking children.…”