Neither Deep nor Shallow: A Classroom Experiment Testing the Orthographic Depth of Tone Marking in Kabiye (Togo)

Abstract

The experiment reported here tests the Lexical Orthography Hypothesis, that is, the notion that the output of the lexical phonology is the most promising phonological depth for an exhaustive representation of tone by means of diacritics in the orthography of atone language. We conducted a controlled classroom experiment with 97 secondary school pupils learning written Kabiye, a Gur language of northern Togo. After testing their baseline skills in writing the standard orthography, the pupils participated in an eleven-hour transition course spread over three weeks in four parallel groups: DEEP (an experimental orthography representing the input of the lexical phonology), LEXICAL (representing the output of the lexical phonology), PHONEMIC (representing a level between the output of the lexical phonology and the output of the post-lexical phonology), and a control group. On the final day of the experiment, we tested their acquired skills in a dictation exercise. The results show that the LEXICAL group outperforms the other groups in three of the error types associated with adding diacritics, although they performed less well on the error type associated with writing long vowels. This initial evidence supporting the Lexical Orthography Hypothesis needs confirmation with reading and writing experiments on a variety of other tone languages.

Is the Science of Reading Just the Science of Reading English?

“…For example, the four accent marks that designate the four tones of Mandarin Chinese in pinyin romanization are hardly ever written, yet tonal awareness has been shown to differentiate good and poor readers in mainland China (Ding, Liu, McBride, & Zhang, 2015). In many African tone languages, especially those in which tone carries a high functional load, many readers struggle with the lack of tone marking in the Roman orthographies imposed by Europeans (Coulmas, 1989; Roberts & Walter, 2021; Roberts, Walter, & Snider, 2016). Part of the problem is that (19th‐century) QWERTY2 technology, which still dominates the digital world, is still unaccommodating with regard to nonlinearity.…”

Digraphia: the Story of a Sociolinguistic Term

“…Bird 1999) and orthographic depth (Mfonyam 1989;Roberts, Snider, and Walter 2016). 7 In the following sections, we summarize the differences between the 1982 and 2014 orthographies.…”