The invention of
writing, which occurred independently in distant parts of the word at many
times, even occasionally in the modern era, must rank among mankind’s highest
intellectual achievements. Without
writing, human culture as we know it today is inconceivable.
-O. Tzeng and W. Wang
When I
first began reading Maryanne Wolf’s study on how the brain learns to read, or
how it doesn’t, I was shocked at how wrong my preconceived notions about
reading were. I always believed that
everyone was born with the ability to read at some level. For those students, and adults, who have
difficulties reading, there was a ‘misfire’ occurring somewhere that prevented
successful manipulations of text.
However, Wolf presents and explains in great detail about how the human
brain is not built to read. Over time,
humans have developed systems that allowed for such connections to occur. In Chapter two, Wolf presents the earliest
known writing systems that started this process in motion.
Maryanne
Wolf explains that writing began with three breakthroughs in early
cultures. First, a new form of symbolic
representation was created, more so than drawings on the wall of a cave. An example of this was an Incan Quipu, a
series of ‘talking knots’. These knots
can represent either something concrete things in the world around them such as
goods to be traded, or something abstract as a number. The second breakthrough was that these
symbols can be used to communicate an idea.
The third breakthrough did not happen in all cultures, but was certainly
one of the most profound human developments was sound-symbol
correspondences. Wolf describes this
stunning realization that, “all words are composed of tiny individual sounds
and that symbols can physically signify each of these sounds for every word…”
was truly the beginning of written language in the culture of human beings.
To
revisit the first breakthrough, symbolic representation, was the first to
emerge. When a symbol is given meaning,
our brain connects visual areas to both the language system and the conceptual
systems in the brain. This symbolization,”
exploits and expands our capacity for specialization and our capacity for
making new connections among association areas.” As Wolf explains, these associations are what
separate us from other primates.
The
earliest known use of the second breakthrough, symbols used for communicating,
can be found in Sumerian cuneiform.
Cuneiform refers to the wedge-like appearance of early script that was
likely etched using a nail, hence the name ‘cuneiform’, which is derived from
the Latin word cuneus, or ‘nail’. The
early characters were easily recognized by the visual system, and required only
a further match to a name in spoken language.
In creating such a system, the Sumerians created a logographic writing
system where the symbols stood for concepts in the language rather than sounds
within the words.
An example of Sumerian Cuneiform
At this
point in the text, Wolf departs from discussing how the brain reads to discuss
how the early Sumerians instructed their youth to read. Novice readers learned lists of words based
on one of several particular linguistic principles. Some groups were meaning based, and some
lists shared similar pronunciations.
Requiring the students to learn semantically and phonetically related
words, helped them recall the words more efficiently, increased their
vocabulary, and increased conceptual knowledge.
Thousands of years before Gee expressed his theory of explicit
instruction among Discourses, the Sumerians saw the importance of providing
explicit instruction in more than one aspect of writing and reading. What I found interesting and of value in this
portion of the text is that today, in the 21st century, educators
are still debating what is more important, phonics or meaning, and the Sumerians
were incorporating both in their instruction thousands of years ago!
The
Sumerian writing system was so valuable an effective that fifteen peoples,
including the early Persians and Hittites adopted their cuneiform, long after
the language disappeared, roughly around 600 BCE. Though influential and one of the earliest,
Sumerian may not be the ‘first’. It is
heavily debated among scholars that the Egyptian Hieroglyphic Writing may have
come earlier.
Similar
to the Sumerian system, the Egyptian Hieroglyphic system, over time, employed a
rebus principle, where a symbol represents not its meaning by rather its
sounds. In doing so, the Egyptians
essentially discovered the phoneme. This
new group of symbols would become the third cognitive breakthrough, which is
discussed in greater detail in chapter 3.
Through
both systems described above, the human brain began evolving, making
connections with symbols and language.
These connections have set the stage for the brain to decode, find
meaning and truly read. In the next blog
entry, I will discuss chapter 3 where Wolf elaborates on the third
breakthrough, sound-symbol correspondences, through alphabetic principles.
Until next time…
I found your comment on how the Sumerian writing system incorporated both phonics and meaning in their writing really interesting. After reading the second chapter of my own book the idea that phonics was established earlier on in life and that most of the difficulty associated with understanding a text comes not from phonics but meaning was exemplified. I must say though that if a student is reading a text and there are large words that they can not pronounce it often times creates a barrier between them and their understanding of the reading, which I think reinforces the idea that both phonics and meaning are necessary to the overall understanding of the text and apparently the Sumerian people understood that early on. It makes me wonder when we shifted from a focus on both to a comparative focus on one over the other? It is really interesting to see the connection our brain makes between symbols and language.
ReplyDeleteI once heard an administrator say, "The trends in education are influenced by the publishers of curriculum." I wondered myself about the shift of focus and wonder if we'll be going back to a dual-view any time soon?
DeleteYes, reading and learning to read is far more complex than just memorizing one's sounds. It was interesting that her work on the brain shows that our brain doesn't naturally read, then the development of written language over time. Do you think that the children who come to us as natural readers, read because of simply being exposed to language, being read to, enriched environment of play and conversation... I do feel that plays a huge part in reading. Many children simply don't need phonics and just read. This is where Gee believes reading to be social and as a result, some children naturally read because it was in the primary Discourse- read your world.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the section on the Sumerian methods of teaching reading, too. It is interesting to hear how a people for whom reading and writing were such a new skill undertook teaching it to their children. Lots of memorization of word lists and plenty of caning.
ReplyDeleteThis is really interesting how Wolfe takes you back to the forms of language and how it began. I had a western civ professor who took a day to explain the human writing evolution. Very enlightening! I also had the same misconceptions that you did about reading. I can't get over that we as humans aren't born with the ability, rather we just develop a system to help us. This makes me wonder about students who struggle, if they are having a hard time matching up or Discourse with theirs, and that's why they get frustrated and start to hate reading?
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting blog. I think I am reading your posts backwards but interesting nonetheless. i find it intersting when you stated that your author says the brain was not designed to read. This amazes me that the brain is capable of so many things. Just think if humans did not start to think about symbolic representation we would not have the Bible and the past would be a mystery. I also think that humans needed to a way to communicate because people do tend to forget things. Ha Anyway I am glad they found a way to communicate that stands the test of time.
ReplyDeleteI like your connections to Gee and his theory and how early people were thinking the same way. I say that meaning is important but we can't get there without going through decoding/phonics. Phonics becomes automatic like riding a bike so the real focus should be on meaning to promote understanding and further acquisition of knowledge.