- Theses and placement reports Faculty of Arts

Master’s Thesis:
The Adaptation of the Bilingual Aphasia Test [BAT] English-Bemba
(Short Version)
Supervisor: Dr Roel Jonkers
University of Groningen
The Netherlands
Tel: +31(0)50 00315 0363 6129
Fax: +31(0)50 00315 0363 6855
Email: r.jonkers@rug.nl
Researcher: Njinga Kankinza
European Masters in Clinical Linguistics (EMCL)
Student number: 1843915
University of Groningen/University of Potsdam
Email: nkankinza@gmail.com
Page | 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NUMBER
CONTENTS
Table of contents
1
Abstract
4
List of figures
6
List of tables
6
List of terminology and abbreviations
6
CHAPTER 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
7
1.2 Statement of the problem
8
1.3 Purpose
11
1.4 Significance of the study
11
CHAPTER 2
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Zambia’s linguistic profile
12
2.2 Bemba
22
2.3 Zambian English
30
2.4 The Bilingual Aphasia Test (BAT)
33
3.4 Definition of terms
36
3.5 Research questions
40
Page | 2
CHAPTER 3
3.0 METHODOLOGY 3
3.1 Participants
42
3.2 Adaptation of the material
44
3.3 Procedure
49
3.4 Scoring
50
CHAPTER 4
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Quantitative analysis
51
4.2 Qualitative analysis
53
CHAPTER 5
5.0 DISCUSSION
57
CHAPTER 6
6.0 CONCLUSION
59
7.0 REFERENCES
60
8.0 APPENDICES
67
Appendix 1: A list of available BAT
Appendix 2: Tasks of the different versions of the BAT
Appendix 3: Ethical approval of the study
Appendix 4: Screening
Appendix 5: Outline of the BAT English-Bemba
Appendix 6: Part A- history of bilingualism
Appendix 7: Part A-Bemba version of the history of bilingualism
Page | 3
Appendix 8: English language background
Appendix 9: Bemba language background
Appendix 10: English spontaneous speech subtest
Appendix 11: Bemba spontaneous speech subtest
Appendix 12: The pointing subtest
Appendix 13: The pointing subtest stimuli
Appendix 14: The English verbal auditory discrimination subtest
Appendix 15: English verbal auditory stimuli
Appendix 16: Bemba verbal auditory discrimination stimuli words
Appendix 17: The Bemba verbal auditory discrimination subtest
Appendix 18: Bemba verbal auditory discrimination stimuli
Appendix 19: The syntactic comprehension subtest
Appendix 20: The repetition of words subtest
Appendix 21: The sentence repetition subtest
Appendix 22: The naming subtest
Appendix 23: The sentence construction subtest
Appendix 24: The Listening comprehension subtest
Appendix 25: The Part C subtest
Appendix 26: A list of the irreversible contrasts
Appendix 27: Introduction to aphasia
Appendix 28: Study information
Appendix 29: Consent form
Appendix 30: Participant's performance scores
Page | 4
Abstract
Background: Zambia is a multilingual landlocked country in the southern region of Africa with English as
an official language alongside 7 national others. Bemba, a central tonal Bantu language is the most widely
spoken national language with an estimated 3.7 million speakers (Marten & Kula, 2008; Spitulnik, &
Kashoki, 2001).
AIMS: The assessment of all language capabilities in both if not all of an individual’s languages with a
comparable or equivalent instrument is a relevant issue that needs to be addressed. Despite extensive
works in the field of aphasia, there has to date been no work undertaken on aphasic manifestation on a
Zambian population and nothing as far as we know on Bemba aphasia. The aim of this study is not a mere
translation but adaptation of the Bilingual Aphasia Test BAT (Paradis, 1987) into English-Bemba.
Method: 10 healthy control subjects and 5 individuals with speech problems 3 months post stroke were
assessed on the different tasks of the adapted version of the BAT English-Bemba.
Discussion: Healthy control subjects scored a ceiling as opposed to the individuals with speech
problems. The combination of the theoretical framework of the symptoms of the classical aphasia types, the
lesion and lesion site as well as the low scores on the different tasks directed the screening of aphasia and
drew attention to the different impairments. Moreover, the scores also indicated whether performance in
English was equal or better then in Bemba at a particular skill and linguistic level.
Conclusion: This tool will serve as a valid, reliable and adequate assessment tool which is not only time
and cost effective, but sensitive to Zambia’s unique culture and linguistic population. Findings will also not
only aid in future diagnosis or research but can also be used to motivate and devise particular treatment
and rehabilitation approaches. Aphasic speakers and their families will also learn more about their situation
and thus improving the quality of life.
Page | 5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Zambia, its provinces and neighbours
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: A list of the language groups and dialect clusters of Zambia
Table 2: Predominately and frequently used Language in Zambia
Table 3: Predominant Language of Communication by Province, Zambia
Table 4: Outcomes of Vowel Fusion
Table 5: Bemba noun classes
Table 6: An overview of the classical aphasia syndromes
Table 7: An overview of expected performance according to the classical syndrome types
Table 8: Participants with speech problems'information
Table 9: English performance on the spontaneous speech subtest
Table 10: Bemba performance of the spontaneous speech subtest
Table 11: Overview of assignment to specific aphasia group
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND TERMINOLOGY
SACMEQ: Southern Africa Consortium for Monitoring Educational Quality
UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
TRIABALISM: discrimination or preference based on ethnic identity
NSHIMA: mush of thick porridge made out of maize meal flour and water. It is the staple food of
Zambia
CPHA: Census of Population, Housing and Agriculture
Eggplant: aubergine
Page | 6
Page | 7
CHAPTER 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Heidegger (1977) described language to be the most obvious vehicle of communication. Besides it
mirroring ones personality it also represents one of the most powerful tools of interpersonal interaction
which defines us and demarcates our personality within our societies. Therefore acquiring aphasia or the
tragedy in the loss or impairment of this vital tool through brain damage cannot be overestimated. Formerly,
not much could be done for these victims but things have changed. Fortunately in today’s world prompt
treatment can greatly decrease the risk of permanent disability (Insel & Roth, 2006). However in order to
arrive at the right treatment or rehabilitation strategy, it is essential that a proper valid assessment tool
which adheres to the specific language and cultural variables be used to accurately diagnose the spared
and impaired language functions and processing abilities Kay, Byng, Esmundson, & Scott, 1990). Moreover
the assessment of all of the language capabilities if not all of an individual’s language should also be taken
into consideration (Paradis, 1987).
The Bilingual Aphasia Test [BAT] is a an example of a well known aphasia test which was published and
created by Micheal Paradis in collaboration with Gary Libben (1987). This standardized tool was originally
designed to assess bilingual aphasic speakers and to distinguish the extent in which aspects of a bilingual’s
language performance in one of the assessed languages is better recovered than the other. This is looking
at performance in the different linguistic skills (comprehension, repetition, grammatical judgment, lexical
access, propositionizing, reading, and writing) as well as the different structural levels (phonology,
morphology, syntax, lexicon, or semantics) in the visual, oral and auditory modalities. However, the BAT
Page | 8
also has the ability to use any single version of the test on its own in order to assess an individual’s
functioning in that single language and has been used for other functions such as the cognitive assessment
of normal aging individuals by Juncos-Rabadan (1994), individuals with Multiple sclerosis (Zivadinov et al.,
2001) as well as individuals with Parkinson disease (Moretti wt al., 2001a, 2002e, 2003: Zanini et al., 2003)
Paradis (1987) explained that the BAT also contains the classical tasks that can be used in the screening
or detection of the presence of aphasia and draw attention to the different underlying impairments. Scores
on the performance of the test can be regrouped to obtain a clinical picture of a specific linguistic structure
or skill. It is this grouping which can then be used to derive one’s linguistic or syndromatic profile. However
this is in the light of a chosen theoretical framework or classificatory scheme considering the fact that
different taxonomies of the classical syndromes do exist. To date, the BAT has been modified, translated
and adapted (to suit the specific purpose) in over 65 languages (see Appendix 1 for a list of languages) and
thus making it accessible to diagnose and treat many aphasic speakers. The adaptations have partly been
due to the lack of standardized aphasic batteries in the many multilingual countries within the course of
globalization.
1.2 Statement of the problem
Despite extensive works or advancement in the field of aphasia, as well as the numerous assessment tools
available worldwide none have been developed for a Zambian population. There has to date been no work
undertaken on aphasic manifestation on a Zambian population and nothing as far as we know on Bemba
aphasia. Therefore the aim of this study is to use the English BAT (Paradis, 1987) as a model in adapting a
tool that will serve as a valid, reliable and adequate assessment tool in identifying the existence of aphasia
amongst the Zambia population. Aphasic tools are not culture free, not even for English aphasic speakers,
Page | 9
many of the currently used items in the tests are not appropriate for all settings (Penn, 1993). Therefore in
doing so, there are a number of issues and challenges which pose a threat and need to be taken into
consideration in order to come up with a comparable instrument that will not only be time and cost effective,
but sensitive to Zambia’s unique culture and linguistic population.
One factor is the multilingualism and dynamic situation in Zambia which can cause the application of formal
testing inappropriate or impractical. Bilingualism is the norm rather than the exception as Zambia is home
to over 72 languages which have been clustered into 26 different dialect clusters and further grouped into
16 groups (Chanda 1996, 2002: Marten & Kula, 2008: Ohannessan & kashoki, 1978). English is the official
language alongside seven national languages: Bemba, Lozi, Kaonde, Lunda, Luvale, Tonga and Nyanja.
English as the official language and has a relatively high status is the language of the constitution, media,
education, government and business, and determines employment in the formal sector (Marten & Kula,
2008: Spitulnik, 1998). The proficiency and language use is largely dependent on the social, economic and
geographical circumstances. For example, one can use Lozi as a home language, then Tonga for local
communication and English and Bemba for a wider communication at work or outside his usual setting.
The lack of facilities is also another challenge. Physiotherapy and occupational therapy are the only
available rehabilitation services available after discharge. However these services have been reported to
be inadequate as they lack information on their availability, funding, equipment and trained clinicians who
due to the poor conditions, left the country for greener Pasteur’s (NPA, 2003). The high costs of the
services also contribute to the inaccessibility of these rehabilitation services (Phiri, 2009). There is also a
lack of facilities for the treatment of aphasia. Fagan and Jacobs (2009) reported that Zambia was amongst
the countries in the sub-Saharan region of Africa with no speech therapy services at all.
Page | 10
According to the World Bank’s heavily indebted poor countries initiative in 2005, Zambia qualified for full
debt cancellation and thus ranking it amongst the poor countries in the world. The effect of poverty on the
aphasic population include the high levels of unemployment and thus poor income and no transportation to
regularly attend the available rehabilitation services post illness.
Poverty has also had an effect on the education in terms of the high rates of school dropouts, low
enrolments and HIV infections in the sense that many students miss out on education to look after sick
family members. The poor learning environment with limited resources, malnourished students who as a
result of their condition are unable to reach their full learning potential, poor attendance due to long
distances to school and the engagement of other activities in order to supplement family income (Phiri,
2008) have all had a negative impact on the education system. These are some of the countless reasons
that cultivate what Penn (1993) termed to be a poorly educated, often functionally illiterate or barely literate
population. Studies by Nkamba and Kanyika (1998) and Williams (1996) substantiated these reports on the
poor education in Zambia when they showed that the majority of the primary school pupils were
inadequately able to read in English.
These factors need to be taken into consideration as they create a unique aphasic Zambian population and
have the potential to make the application of formal testing inappropriate.
1.3 Purpose
The aim of this study is to address the current lack of aphasia assessment tools in Zambia. Therefore the
aim is not a mere translation but adaptation of the Bilingual Aphasia Test [BAT] (Paradis, 1987) into
English-Bemba which can be used for clinical or research purposes.
Page | 11
1.4 Significance of the study
This tool will serve as a valid, reliable and adequate assessment tool in the screening of aphasia which is
not only time and cost effective, but sensitive to Zambia’s unique culture and linguistic population. Besides
determining which language is best available for communication to the aphasic speaker, families will also
be able to better understand their situation. Findings will also not only aid in future diagnosis or research
but can also be used to motivate and devise particular treatment and rehabilitation approaches thus
improving the quality of life.
Page | 12
CHAPTER 2
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Zambia’s Linguistic profile
Zambia is a landlocked country in sub-Saharan Africa inhabited by 11.5 million people over an area of
752,612 square kilometres. It is administratively divided into 9 provinces: Central, Eastern, Northern,
Luapula, North-Western, Western, Southern, Lusaka and Copperbelt which are further subdivided into 72
districts (See figure 1 for map of Zambia). An estimated 35 percent of the population live in urban areas
thus ranking Zambia among one of the most urbanized countries in the sub-Saharan region. The population
by province ranges from about 1.6 million in the Copperbelt province to 0.6 million in North-western province.
Lusaka and Copperbelt provinces are densely populated and predominantly urban while the rest of the
provinces are predominantly rural and not as populated (Census of Population, Housing and Agriculture
[CPHA], 2000).
Figure 1: Map of Zambia, its provinces and neighbours
Page | 13
Archaeological and historical traces of language in Zambia are traced back to 300 BC, when the ancestors
of who would be the present inhibitors were Bantu speaking horticulturalists believed to have migrated from
West Africa (Nurse, 2006). This was followed by a significant epoch in the late 19th century which marked
the introduction of the European languages through European explorers and settlers, missionary activity
and colonization (Posner, 2005). It was in this epoch that Zambia was colonized by the British Empire in
1953 through the formation of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. This Federation which was
dissolved in 1963 consisted of Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and
Nyasaland (now Malawi). In 1964, Zambia gained its independence and became a multiparty government.
In 1972 the government changed to a one party government which was later reversed to a multiparty
government in 1991 (Chidumayo, Fagerlind, Idemalm, McNab, & Mweene, 1989). These historic events
had a great influence on the present day linguistic situation in Zambia in which Language is very closed
linked to cultural, political ethnic and national identity ( Marten & Kula 2008; Posner, 2005).
Page | 14
According to a United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural organization report (1964), language and
its use especially in education was fairly straight forward during the colonial era in that English and a
dominant native language were taught post second grade. After independence, the “one Zambia, one
nation” slogan came with the implementation of one language against the exclusion of all others in an
attempt to unify the country and avoid tribalism (Linehan, 2004; Marten & Kula, 2008; Posner, 2005). After
the shift from the one party to a multiparty government in 1991, there was yet another shift towards the
promotion of some of the previously neglected languages (Manchisi, 2004; Kelly, 1995, 1991) at least in
terms of education.
In the present to day Zambia, the debate of what a language is as opposed to a dialect, the close relation
between language and ethnic identity in Zambia as well as the lack of comparative information that can
prove the variation of different languages as virtually all indigenous Zambian languages belong to the
central Bantu family and are therefore all related and similar at some level (Kashoki & Mann, 1978;
Lehmann, 1978) has caused a discrepancy in the number of languages spoken in Zambia. Grimes (1992)
reported 35 languages, while Spitulnik (1992) who did not give more information or examples of the
mentioned studies reported that comprehensive studies suggested 15 to 30 distinct languages and more
than 50 dialects. Contrary to these reports the CPHA (1990, 2000) reported that there are 72 languages.
The explanation of this number is that every indigenous Zambian belongs to a certain ethnic group or tribe,
each with its own traditions, history, and chief as the leader. There are 72 tribes, each with their own
language and hence the 72 languages. In the same line of thought Kapeya (1988) reported 73 and not 72
tribes and hence 73 languages.
To compound to the issue, Ohannessian and Kashoki (1978) approximated the languages to over 30.
According to them, the number of languages in the country does not equal to the number of tribes as
Page | 15
linguistic distinctiveness does not directly correspond to tribal or ethnic identity. They made a distinction of
83 Bantu languages which are grouped into 26 dialect clusters or languages and further into 16 groups as
can be seen in table 1.
Table 1: A list of the language groups and dialect clusters of Zambia
Adapted from Ohannessian and Kashoki (1978) as well as Marten and Kula (2008).
Group
Dialect cluster and location
A
Aushi, Chishinga, Kabende, Mukulu, Ngumbo, Twa, Unga, Bemba, Bwile, Luunda,
Shila, Tabwa (Northern province)
Bisa, Kunda (border of Northern and Eastern provinces)
Lala, Ambo, Luano, Swaka (Eastern and Central provinces)
Lamba, Lima (Copperbelt and Central provinces)
B
Kaonde (North-Western province)
C1
Lozi (Western province)
C2
Kwandi, Kwanga, Mbowe, Mbumi (Western province)
Simaa, Imilangu, Mwenyi, Nyengo, Makoma, Liyuwa, Mulonga (Western province)
Mashi, Kwandu, Mbukushu (Western province)
D
Lunda, Kosa, Ndembu (North-Western province)
E
Luvale, Luchazi, Mbunda (border of Western and North-Western provinces)
Chokwe (North-Western province)
F
Mambwe, Lungu (Northern province)
Inamwanga, Iwa, Tambo, Lambya (border of Northern and Eastern provinces)
G
Nyiha, Wandya (border of Northern and Eastern provinces)
H
Nkoya, Lukolwe (or Mbwela), Lushangi, Mashasha (North-Western and border of
Western and Southern provinces)
I
Nsenga, Ngoni (of Chief Mpezeni speak Nsenga) (Eastern province)
J
Chewa (Nyanja), Ngoni (Nyanja) (Eastern province)
K
Tonga, Toka, Totela, Leya, Subiya, Twa, Shanjo, Fwe (Southern and border of Western
and Southern provinces)
Ila, Lundwe, Lumbu, Sala (border of Southern and Central provinces)
Page | 16
Lenje, Twa (Central province)
Soli (Central province)
L
Tumbuka, Fungwe, Senga, Yombe, Ngoni (of Chief Magodi speak Tumbuka) (Eastern
province)
M
Goba, Shona (Central province)
N
Chikunda (Central province)
O
Swahili (Northern and Copperbelt provinces)
Within these 16 cluster groups, a further 7 language cluster groups namely Bemba, Tonga, North-Western,
Barotse (Lozi), Nyanja (or Eastern), Mambwe and Tumbuka were picked to represent language clusters
around which several other dialects exist. The grouping of the languages was based on how mutually
intelligent and similar the varieties were, in terms of lexicality and grammar. For example, Bemba which is
in group A as can be seen in table 1. It is not only an individual language but is also a language cluster
group language as it was picked at a cluster group level to represent and include a number of other related
languages such as Aushi, Chishinga, Kabende, Mukulu, Ngumbo, Twa, Unga, Bwile, Luunda, Shila and
Tabwa.
Other languages spoken as a result of a few European and Asian immigrants and with less than 1000
speakers identified by Ohannessian and Kashoki (1978) include Gujarat, Italian, German, Hindu, French,
Urdu, Portuguese and as well as an estimate of 500 Khoisan speakers from the San people who migrated
from neighbouring Angola (Robins, Madzudzo, & Brenzinger, 2001).
Despite the discrepancy Bemba, Tonga, North-Western, Barotse (Lozi), Nyanja (or Eastern), Mambwe and
Tumbuka are the official 7 language cluster groups or representatives of the number of languages in
Zambia, English is the official language of the country alongside 7 other official national languages namely
Bemba Nyanja, Tonga, Lozi, Luvale, Lunda and Kaonde, this according to the CPHA (1990, 2000) reports
Page | 17
official records. These national languages are known as iciBemba, ciNyanja, siLozi, kikaonde, iciTonga,
Luvale and Lunda, with the prefixes Chi- (or Ici-, Si-) so as to indicate the languages and not the names of
the people or tribes. However the prefixes are left out when writing in English (William, 1993). It is important
to note that Bemba, Tonga, Nyanja, Lozi and the North-Western (comprised of Lunda, Luvale and Kaonde)
can be either individual languages or language cluster groups that are representative of other similar
languages. It all depends on how whether you view at an individual or group and cluster level.
The different languages all have different social and political status (Kashoki, 1990; Marten & Kula, 2008)
or what Spitulnik (1992) termed as hierarchical ranking. As Marten and Kula (2008) elaborated, English as
the official language has a high status and is the language of the constitution, parliament, government
administration, publication and official websites. It is used in formal (e.g. at work) and semi-formal (at home
and amongst friends) contexts, business, scientific and formal education (medium of instruction at all levels
from primary to tertiary). In the media, it is used for current affairs discussions, international and local news.
Zambian main newspapers the Times of Zambia, the Post and the Daily mail are all in English. The
Zambian national broadcasting co-operation (ZNBC) which owns a television station and 3 radio stations
have predominantly English programmes. Satellite and cable TV are also part of the media and popular in
urban areas with programmes predominately in English if not South African languages as they are provided
by South African broadcasting companies. Moreover English determines employment in the formal sector.
The indigenous languages Bemba, Nyanja, Tonga, Lozi, Lunda, Luvale and Luvale as the official national
languages are mainly and frequently used in the day to day communication and of less formal contexts
(e.g. at home). They are also used in cultural, traditional and developmental programmes mostly in rural
areas and lower ranks of formal administration such as police interrogations and local court proceeding
even though the legislating judicial law is actually in English. Media wise, they are restricted to weekly or
Page | 18
monthly magazines and short news programmes on the television and radio. However they play a big role
in broadcasting and publicizing certain government and health information such as cholera alerts mostly in
rural areas. In formal education they are taught (Marten & Kula, 2008; Spitulnik, 1998).
Table 2 demonstrates the percentage of the 20 most widely used languages (at an individual and not group
level) in Zambia as found in the 2000 population census (Marten & Kula, 2008). This is the use of the
languages as first or second language. Please note that the first language refers to the most frequently and
predominately used language on a daily basis and not necessarily the language associated with an ethnic
group. For example, one could be ethnically Kaonde but be unable to speak the language Kaonde or is
better at some other language or languages like Bemba or English and yet these languages do not
correspond to the language of the individual's ethnic identity. In an ideal setting, a person who is ethnically
kaonde should be able to predominately speak the language Kaonde. This is in line with the CPHA (1990,
2000) view that every indigenous Zambian belongs to a certain ethnic group or tribe, each with its own
traditions, history, and chief as the leader.
The most widely spoken language as reported by the 2000 population census is Bemba with 53 percent of
speakers both as a first and second predominately used language. Nyanja which shares a status with
Bemba as the "big two” is the second most widely spoken language in Zambia with 10.7 and 19.5 percent
of speakers as the most and second predominately used language respectively. Although English is the
official language, it is the third mostly used language with an overall of 28.0 percent speakers. Lozi and
Tonga are the next widely spoken languages with an overall of 10.9 and 15.0 percent of speakers
respectively. The widespread use of Nyanja and Bemba could be according to Molteno (1974) attributed to
the high value in urban labour and urbanization causing many to move to their language areas and acquire
the language. Note that the use of Nyanja as a second language is much higher at 19.5 percent than as a
Page | 19
first language with 10.7. Another reason is that the population of the Bemba people is much higher when
compared to the North-western languages Lunda, Luvale and Kaonde with 3.5, 3.6 and 3.8 percent
speakers respectively.
Table 2: Predominately and frequently used Languages in Zambia
(Based on 2000 population census)
20 most spoken Languages Use as Predominant Language Use as Second Language
Bemba
30.1
20.2
Nyanja
10.7
19.5
Tonga
10.6
4.4
Lozi
5.7
5.2
Chewa
4.7
2.3
Nsenga
3.4
1.6
Tumbuka
2.5
1.3
Lunda
2.2
1.3
Lala
2.0
1.0
Kaonde
2.0
1.8
Lamba
1.9
1.4
English
1.7
26.3
Luvale
1.7
1.9
Lenge
1.4
1.5
Namwanga
1.3
0.8
Ngoni
1.2
1.2
Mambwe
1.2
0.9
Bisa
1.0
0.4
Ila
0.8
0.8
Lungu
0.6
0.4
Senga
0.6
0.2
In addition to the association of the languages with prestige, values or domains and use in the country, the
languages are also geographically based and have a predominate area in which they are used as can be
Page | 20
seen in table 3 in accordance with the CPHA (1990, 2000). Bemba which is the most widely spoken
language both at a social and geographical level has a distribution of 69.4percent of speakers on the
Copperbelt, 55.3 percent in Northern, 56.6 percent in Luapula provinces and although to a lesser extent in
the Central province with 25.4 percent of speakers. Nyanja is predominately spoken in the Eastern and
Lusaka province with 52.8 and 9.6 percent of speakers respectively, Tonga is predominately spoken by
69.8 percent of speakers in the Southern province, 60 percent Lozi speakers in the Western province and
39.9 percent of Lunda speakers, 19.3 percent of Luvale speakers and 27.1 percent of Kaonde speakers all
in the North-Western province. English although predominately spoken in urban areas with 2.5 and 6.6
percent of speakers on the Copperbelt and Lusaka province than rural areas such as eastern and western
province with 0.2 percent of speakers has no geographical restriction.
Table 3: Predominant Language of Communication by Province in Zambia
(Based on 2000 population census)
Predominant
Language of
Central
Copperbelt
Eastern
Luapula
Lusaka
Northern
Bemba
25.4
69.4
1.1
56.6
14.5
55.3
Lala
17.1
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.2
Bisa
0.2
0.2
0.9
0.1
Lamba
2.5
8.9
0.0
Tonga
12.0
1.1
Lenje
11.7
Ila
North-
Southern
Western
2.0
2.8
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
6.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
4.6
0.1
0.3
69.8
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
2.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
3.8
0.0
Luvale
0.2
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
19.3
0.6
4.4
Lunda
0.1
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
33.9
0.1
0.4
Kaonde
1.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
27.1
0.1
0.4
Lozi
1.0
0.7
0.1
0.0
1.8
0.1
0.7
5.0
60.0
Chewa
0.6
0.4
33.8
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.1
Nsenga
0.9
0.6
20.6
0.0
3.1
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.0
Ngoni
0.5
0.3
6.6
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
use
Western
Page | 21
Nyanja
8.6
1.1
9.6
0.1
52.8
0.2
0.3
5.5
0.4
Lungu
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
Mambwe
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.6
8.5
0.0
0.1
0.0
Namwanga
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.4
8.5
0.0
0.1
0.0
Tumbuka
0.3
0.7
14.8
0.0
0.9
2.4
0.0
0.2
0.0
Senga
0.1
0.1
4.6
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
English
0.9
2.5
0.2
0.1
6.6
0.2
0.3
0.8
0.2
Others
13.4
9.4
7.2
42.7
8.8
12.7
13.9
9.5
33.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
890,370
1,439,298
1,134,948
674,049
1,259,258
1,088,565
500,939
1,051,663
663.842
Total
Percent
Total
Population
Due to the high degree of multilingualism, Zambian bilingual speakers differ greatly in their respective uses
of and proficiency in their languages. For example Chisanga (2002) described how a bilingual speaker
could be communicatively competent in his or her second predominately used language, English for work
purposes but have quite a limited English proficiency in other life domains such as church and home. This
consequently results in different levels of proficiency within the languages across those domains. Moreover,
depending on the geographical region of the different ethnic identities and their predominately used
language use different languages for different life domains the bilingual or multilingual situation will be
different. For example, one who is ethnically Tumbuka (ethnic identity from the Eastern province) and was
born on the Copperbelt province may speak Tumbuka as the most predominately used language with his or
her family at home, English as a second most predominately used language, as it is the official language of
the country used at work and in school and Bemba as the third most predominately used language, in less
formal domains with neighbours, friends and the rest of the surrounding community since Bemba is the
predominately used language of the Copperbelt province. This use of languages in the different domains
Page | 22
could be on a daily basis. Moreover if this bilingual speaker was to move to another province such as
Lusaka for work or educational purposes, then chances are that he or she will acquire Nyanja as it is the
predominately used language of the Lusaka province.
Because meaning does not simply belong to just language but more to culture (Caldas-Coulthard &
Coulthard, 1996) many Zambian bilingual speakers normally engage in code switching in order to what
Muñoz, Marquardt, & Copeland, (1999) describe as adding communicative intent, emphasis, or emotional
value to their speech. This frequent code switching is common and considered to be appropriate in a
Zambia context (Banda, 2005). An example of how sometimes a single word or two in Bemba are
necessary to provide a familiar image for a word that has no exact English translation is;
•
Speaker: Please use the Kabende to pound the maize
•
Kabende is a pounding mortar that can be used to crash maize garlic or spices.
Other examples include Banda (2005) who observed the code switching in Nyanja-English speakers while
Serpell (1978) reported the mixing of Nsenga with Cewa in the Eastern Province and thus adding to the
complex linguistic situation in Zambia.
2.2 Bemba
Bemba is a central Bantu language with an estimated 5-6 million speakers of which 3.7 million speak it as a
first language. The language is mainly spoken in Northern, Copperbelt, Central and Luapula provinces of
Zambia and to a lesser extent in the southern parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and
Tanzania. As a national language in Zambia, it is the most frequently used language on a day to day basis
and has more published magazines, radio times and television programs after English (Spitulnik, 1992;
Spitulnik & Kashoki, 1999). This might be because the Bemba people as an ethnic group are the majority in
Page | 23
the country. They cover 4 of the 9 provinces: Luapula, Northern, Copperbelt and Central. Moreover the
Copperbelt is a mining and urbanized area, which brought people from the different parts of the country in
search for jobs, schools for their children, health care and more available services when compared to the
rural areas (Stuebing, 1997).
2.2.2 Orthography
The earliest written texts on and in Bemba were by the White Fathers missionaries who published the first
Bemba grammar in 1907 and the first Bemba translation of the New Testament in 1923. This was followed
by a period of irregular, uncoordinated or officially backed orthography by the government which changed
when the publication of Zambian languages started. The use of Roman letters, the use of doubled vowel
graphemes to symbolize long vowels, the orthographic standardization of certain affricates, fricatives, and
nasals, the non-symbolization of tones, despite their semantic functions, and the adoption of a conjunctive
mode of spelling nouns, verbs, adjectives and other grammatical forms which represents them with their
bound affixes are the official rules of Bemba orthography that have been approved by the Ministry of
Education (1977). The grammar described here including all examples used is according Kashoki and
Mann's (1999) outline on icibemba grammar with additional work from Spitulnik and Kashoki's (2001)
linguistic profile on Bemba.
Basic Phonology
All letters with the exception of r, q, v, x, and z exist in the Bemba alphabet. Moreover the letters d, g, and j
can only be used with the letter n like in the words nda (louce/lice), nga (if) and njelwa (a brick). The
letters m, n
and ny are called nasals. Whenever they combine with a consonant, they form a nasal
Page | 24
compound. E.g p in pepeni (pray) is a simple consonant but mp in mpepe (should I pray) is a nasal
compound as the consonant p follows after the nasal m with no vowel in-between them. Moreover M, n
are also known as homorganic nasals, they sometimes represent the pronoun I or me. This can be seen in
the previous example of the nasal compound mpepe where the m in that word stands for the pronoun I.
They also function as plural prefixes of nouns for example ulwala (fingernail) becomes ingala
(fingernails). Several other letters have a special sound. These letters are:
•
B when the letter m does not come before it is a voiced bilabial fricative phonetic.
•
L is a variety of the d sound which is an alveolar flat or phonetic l. It changes to nd when it
accompanies a nasal m, n or ny.
•
is a velar nasal which is sometimes spelt as ng' or ñ and is pronounces as ng in the English
word singer.
•
C is a phonetic tš and is pronounced as ch like in the English word church.
•
S is a variety of the same sound as sh. It becomes sh when it accompanies i or y.
•
Y when placed in between two vowels causes a glide sound.
All words in Bemba end with a vowel: a, e, i, o, u or glide which are also the semi vowels y and w. The
way in which vowels meet and make sounds determines the length of words in Bemba. Two vowels running
together in the middle of the word give raise to a long sound. The examples below are examples of how
vowels show length in Bemba:
•
U/ku/pa/ma (to be brave) would be (short + short + short + short)
•
U/ku/paa/ma (to hide) would be (short + short + long + short)
Page | 25
Sometimes the vowels meet but do not run together; instead they cause a pause in speech or end in
clause. For example Umwaice ulya (that child) does not become umwaicoolya as one pauses after using
the word ulya-that . Another interesting feature of vowels is how they are pronounced like one word when
they come after one another. For instance bashita ubwalwa (they have bought beer) is pronounced as
bashitobwalwa as the vowels a + u become oo. However this is not always the case as vowels that meet
the semi-vowels y and w run differently, for example mukolwe uyu (this cockerel) becomes mukolwoyu
and not mukkolwyooyu. The table below, although not the standard rules of all the combinations of
vowels, shows some of the outcomes of the combination of vowels.
Table 4 Outcomes of Vowel Fusion
followed by:
i
E
a
O
U
I
ii
yee
yaa
Yoo
Yuu
E
ee
Ee
yaa
Yoo
Yoo
A
ee
Ee
aa
Oo
Oo
O
wee
wee
waa
Oo
Oo
U
wii
wee
waa
Oo
Uu
These features form the open syllabic structure of Bemba characterized by the vowel (V) isá (i-sa)-(come),
the consonant and vowel (CV) somá (so-ma) (read), the nasal consonant glide and vowel (NCGV) ímpwa
(i-mpwa) (eggplants) or the nasal consonant vowel (NCV) yambá (ya-mba)-(begin).
Tones form part of the complex pattern of speech in which morpho-syntactic, morpho-phonological, and
prosodic processes interact. It is impossible to correctly speak Bemba without using the right tone in each
word. Tones are characterized by their musical tone of a High (H) and Low (L) pattern. The High tone is
indicated with an accent while the low tone has nothing as in the example; ulúfungúlo (key) Low + High +
Low +High +low. Sometimes the tone changes from a high to a middle without a low tone in between. This
Page | 26
is known as a tone slip and can be seen in the following example; i!cungwa (orange) with high +Middle+
Low. ! indicates the lack of a lower tone in the change in tone from high to middle. Tones are very important
and have many functions such as
a. distinguishing of tense in verbs as indicated in the example below, with the verb root lya-eat, the
tense or aspect marker -lee- and tu- as the pronoun we
b.
•
tuléelyá ubwálí: we are eating nshima
•
túleélya ubwálí: should we eat nshima?
Distinguishing between the subject and object pronoun. The tone in the example given below
enables the distinction between the pronouns him and you with the tense or aspect marker -leeand tu- as the pronoun we, and tuka as the verb root.
•
Tuléémutúká ínselé: we are insulting him
•
Tuléemútúká ínselé: we are insulting you
c. Distinguishing similar words that have the same spelling but different meanings: ulúkungú dust as
opposed to ulúkúngú which is a verandah balcony or porch.
d. Grouping nouns according to the tone pattern on the stem of the word that they belong to: there
are four groups namely;
•
Rising stem e.g. amá-layá (shirts)
•
High stem e.g. úlú-kású (hoe)
•
Falling stem e.g. áma-cúngwa (oranges)
•
Variable stem e.g. icí-sóté (hat)
Page | 27
Basic Morphology
Every noun belongs to a certain class in which the plural form of the noun changes according to these
classes and adjectives, verbs and other parts of a sentence agree with the noun. Classes are shown
according to the prefixes of the nouns and there are 20 noun classes; 15 basic nouns, 2 sub nouns and 3
locative classes that add up to 20 noun classes. The 15 basic nouns and 3 locative make up the 18
agreement classes in which for example the class pair 1 consists of the agreement class 1 /2 with Umu-ntu
(a person) is in class1 while aba-ntu (people) is in class 2. There are 9class pairs. The different class
pair number and agreement classes can be seen in the table below;
Table 5 Bemba noun classes
Class pair
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Agreement class
1 /2
3/ 4
9/10
7/ 8
5/ 6
12/ 13
11 /10
11/ 6
14/ 6
15 / 16
16, 17, 18
Nouns and their plural forms
Umuntu/abantu (person)
Umuti/imiti (tree)
Imbushi/imbushi (goat)
Icitele/ifitele (chicken house)
Ifupa/amafupa (bone)
Akanwa/utunwa (mouth)
Ulukombo/inkombo (drinking vessel)
Ulukasa/amakasa (foot)
Ubutanda/amatanda (mat)
Ukuboko/amaboko (arm)
Pa anda, ku anda, mu anda, (at, by, in the house-locative noun clases)
An illustration of the agreement marking of nouns can be seen in the following example; Icuuni cilya
naacímwéne cíléelíísha ákaaná kááciko- that bird, I saw it feeding its chick (the direct translation
would be bird that, I saw it, it is feeding, young its). Icuuni-bird (ici-uni) agrees with the adjective ci-lya,
Page | 28
verbal subject pronoun ci-leelisha-its feeding, verbal object pronoun, naa-ci-mwene-I saw it, the special
possessive form kaa-ci-ko-its and prefix of the posseseive form agrees with aka-ana-young.
Subject Marker + Tense/Aspect/Mood Marker + Object Marker + Verb Root + Extension + Final Vowel +
Suffixes is the basic Bemba verb structure in which the root the final vowel and subject marker (except in
imperatives), are the only obligatory morphemes. Tense and mood are marked by the final vowel which
sometimes co-varies with the tense marker before it. A modified root or -ile are used for past tense. Other
tenses forms can be seen from the verb arrive in example below in which tu- and tw- are the pronoun we, fik- the root arrive;
•
Tw-a-fik-ílé – we arrived (some days ago)-remote past
•
Twa-a-fik-á- we have just arrived-recent past
•
Tu-ka-fik-a- we will arrive-later future
•
Tu-léé-fik-á- we are arriving-today future
•
Náa-tú-fik-á- we have arrived-present
Basic syntax
Bemba is an SVO language in which all verb forms have to be marked for the subject. However these verb
forms are sometimes marked for the object in order to pre-pose the object for emphasis as there are no
case markings for nouns. This can be seen in the example below;
•
Chanda, u-ací-sáng-a icúúní kwíì? - Chanda, where did you find the bird (today)?
Chanda 2sg-PASTtd-find-FV bird where
Page | 29
Verb forms can be marked for the subject or object and there is no case marking on nouns. Verbal
extensions also indicate a relation to the indirect object. For example in the sentence náámupééla icítábó
(I have given him or her a book), the icítábó (book) cannot be represented by a pronoun and is an
indirect object. Moreover the pronoun in this sentence could be him or her and thus indicating that Bemba
has no obituary gender. To denote negative sentences, the prefix ta- and shi- are used, for example in Shíleefwáya (I don’t want) and ta-tú- leefwáya (we don’t want).
Due to trade, missionary activity, urbanization, employment in urban areas and direct contact with people
from around the region (that surrounds the Bemba people) Bemba has been influenced by a number of
loan words from other languages which have been incorporated into the vocabulary such as in-sápátó
(shoe/shoes), from the Portuguese word sapato, in-sá (clock); from the Arabic word saa which means
hour, umú-shikáále/abá-shikáále (soldier/soldiers) from Swahili, shuga (sugar) from English, pasóópo
(beware) from Afrikaans and katoolika/bakatoolika (Catholic/Catholics) from Latin. Moreover different
varieties of Bemba exist such as town Bemba which has a lot of loan words from English and is mostly
used in urban areas (Spitulnik & Kashoki, 1999).
2.3 Zambian English
Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe are the ex-British colonies of
the sub-Saharan African countries with the exception of South Africa which was under apartheid. These
countries are home to what Kamwangamalu and Chisanga (1997) call non-native Englishes for more than a
century ago as English is the official language with the exception of South Africa in which this status is
shared with Afrikaans.
Page | 30
In Zambia, English arrived around the late 19th century; it was used throughout colonization and became
the official language after colonization. However the English spoken in Zambia is not the exact same one
that could hear in the streets of London as the language has modified (Kamwangamalu &Chisanga, 1997).
It is still the global and Standard English which one can still communicate in with native British speakers.
The difference is that it has imported some African culture and values to it in order to suit its new users and
their socio-cultural environment (Quirk, 1985). This section provides an overview of some of the features
that have slightly modified Zambian English to the Native or colonial British English. These linguistic
features used to explain the modification according to Kamwangamalu and Chisanga, (1997) are namely
lexical transfer, hybridisation, semantic extension, and syntactic transfer.
In a process of lexical transfer, many words from African languages have been transferred and in
cooperated into English. For example the African word Lobola is a widely common word used amongst
Bantu speakers of the sub-Saharan African countries. It means the same thing in Zulu of South Africa,
Bemba and Nyanja of Zambia and SiSwati of Swaziland to name a few. For the many Zambian and other
English speakers of the sub-Saharan African countries Lobola is equated with the word Dowry, it has been
intergraded into English and is the preferred or mostly used over dowry. However the word Dowry
according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary is the ‘property or money brought by a bride to her husband.
This is contrary to its equivalent Lobola which is the price money or property (e.g. in the form of cows) of
the bride that is paid to the parents of the bride by the groom. It is a form of a bridal fee.
Another feature is the frequent addition of English bound morphemes such as -ism, -ed/-ise, un-, etc to
African words in a process called Hybridisation. The product is a phonetically neither entirely siSwati nor
English new word. For example "She pâpa-ed the baby". "Pâpa" is a Bemba word and verb which means to
carry a child or something normally with a cloth on the back. The morpheme -ed has been added to
indicate the past. The past tense of pâpa in Bemba would be "ali pâpa" .
Page | 31
In the process of semantic extension, already existent English words are given new meaning as shown by
examples from Chishimba (1983: 219) "The woman jumped him" which means the woman slept with
another man and Chisanga (1987:185) "He was charged with damage and had to pay a lot of money
because the girl has lost her place in school". In this example Chisanga (1987) shows how the word
damage has been given a new English meaning of: illegally impregnating a young school girl and not the
original meaning of: causing impairment to a person or thing. Another example would be the kingship terms
used in Zambia. Father and mother are not only used to refer to biological parents, they could also be used
to refer to one's father or mother’s sibling who are actually an aunt or uncle. The same refers to sister and
brother who could be cousins, usually the terms "same mother same father" are added to indicate one's
biological sibling (Chisanga, 1987: 190).
Three examples of syntactic transfer (Yes/No question, tag questions and subject copying) will be
explained. In the Yes/no questions syntactic transfer the use of yes and no might not always be according
to the normal standard British English. Please note the example from Kamwangamalu and Chisanga
(1997);
•
Didn’t the college send you an application form?
The Answer could be ‘Yes’, meaning, ‘the college did not send me an application form’ or ‘No’, meaning,
‘the college did send me an application form’. This could be very confusing if one is not aware of the
phenomenon. Kachru (1976) explained that it is not a case of ambiguity or misunderstanding in colloquial
British or American usage as expanded replies have not been ‘yes they did’ or ‘no they didn’t’ are used but
more of indirect case interference from the bantu languages. Moreover it is not unique to Africa and has
been observed in south East Asia. A good example of the tag questions can be observed in the following
scenario which occurred when a Zambian was at a local supermarket in South Africa (Kamwangamalu
&Chisanga, 1997);
Page | 32
C: Good morning.
K: Good morning.
C: How is your wife?
K: She is fine, thank you.
C: Is it? How come she did not come with you today?
K: She wasn’t ready when I left.
C: Is it? Shame. Please give my regards to her.
K: I sure will thank you.
C: Bye bye.
K: Bye.
In the normal standard British English, the question
is it " should take gender, number or person into
account but according to the example given above, "is it" does not take gender, number nor person into
account because it implies that the listener is paying attention. According to Kamwangamalu and Chisanga
(1997) this is a very widely used phenomenon especially amongst South Africans. Lastly subject copying
occurs when an independent subject pronoun is purposefully placed in between the subject noun and its
verb. Some examples from a study by Chisanga (1987) are “Having seen the proposals put forward by the
chairman, me I do not agree with him" or "Mr Chongwe he has left the bank". He now works on the Mines.
The awareness of these features is essential when assessing a participant in English in order to not
misinterpret certain answers during the assessment as wrong.
2.4 The Bilingual Aphasia Test (BAT)
Do the languages of a bilingual have the same cerebral representations? Is each grammar of the bilingual’s
languages stores and or processed separately? Answers to these questions are beyond the scope of this
study nevertheless, they are evident of some of the pressing issues in the bilingual or multilingual research
Page | 33
from a neurolinguistic point of view. Besides the development of Bilingual aphasia test such as the Aachen
Aphasia Test by Huber, Poeck, Weniger, & Willmes (1983), the Spanish version of Kay, Lesser, and
Coltheart (1992) Psycholinguistic Assessment of Language Processing in Aphasia (PALPA) as well as the
Spanish the Multilingual Aphasia Examination (Benton & Hamsher, 1994; Rey, Sivan, & Benton, 1991) in
the field of aphasia, more work need to be done that can be used for clinical and research purposes
(Fabbro, 1997; Lorezen & Murray, 2008; Paradis & Libben, 1987; Paradis, 2001).
In addressing this issue, Paradis and Libben (1987) developed the Bilingual Aphasia test (BAT), a
neuropsychological tool designed to assess whether or not performance in one language is better than the
other, and if so, at what linguistic skill or level? The BAT is not a mere translation but adaptation of the test.
Therefore all developed tests taken into account the bilingual’s cultural and linguistic complexity of his or
her language. The BAT consists of three parts which all use language to assess cognition in the hearing,
speaking, reading and writing modalities. Part A of the test is a mere translation of the history of
Bilingualism questionnaire with 50 items aimed at gathering information on the premorbid languages of the
aphasic speaker before insult. The questionnaire is helpful in interpreting results. This questionnaire is
administered once and information could be obtained from family, friends or colleagues.
Part B of the test contains 32 subtests with a total of 472 items designed to assess the language disorders
in the bilingual’s spoken languages. This section of the test allows the direct comparison of performances in
another language. A 17items questionnaire is first administered in the language being tested in order obtain
information on the proficiency and use of the specific language. This questionnaire is followed by the
following subtests; spontaneous speech, pointing to objects, simple, semi-complex and complex
commands, Verbal auditory discrimination (VAD), syntactic comprehension, semantics, grammaticality
judgement, repetition of words and sentences and lexical decision, series, verbal fluency, sentence
Page | 34
construction, derivational morphology, narrative description, text comprehension, reading aloud and
extemporaneous speech and writing. This part of the test is available in over 65 languages.
Part C is separate from Part A and B and is currently available in over 160 language pairs. It consists of
four subtests with 58 items each. The subtests are word recognition, translation of words, translation of
sentences and grammaticality judgement. The translation of sentences and grammaticality judgement
subtests makes use of irreversible or morphsyntactic features which the word for word translation from one
language to another creates an ungrammatical sentence to assess an individual’s interference detection in
each of the language pairs.
Test administration can be by anyone who only has to follow the explicit administration and scoring
instructions. The scoring instructions available are objective and quantitative except for selected subtests
(picture description, spontaneous speech and writing tasks) which require a subjective analysis. In scoring
the test administrator simply writes down not less than the 835 given response.
As can be noted, the test although comprehensive is quite long and could be tedious to both the aphasic
speaker and administrator. This is inclusive of the short version with its 22 subtests which Kertesz (1989)
described to as impractical with certain subtest suited for the lightly affected aphasic speakers. However
the BAT has been compared to the Western Aphasia battery (WAB) in that the items are really easy
enough with a few exceptional subtests and therefore easily highlight language impairments due to scores
which are below the required criteria.
An important note of the BAT in relation to the present study is that Paradis (1987) constructed the BAT for
bilinguals and not necessary to tell us something we do not already know about aphasia or to distinguish
between the different aphasia types however because the BAT does contain the classical tasks that can be
Page | 35
used in the identification of the presence of aphasia. It is a useful test especially in cases like Zambia
where no standardized test is available in any of the 83 distinguished languages.
Research on the use of the BAT includes Ivanova and Hallowell's (2009) re-examination of the adapted
Russian version of the BAT (Paradis & Zeiber, 1987) into a more standardized short version. The short
version was then used to test 83 patients who were found to have mild to severe aphasia. Other reports of
the development of a standardized instrument include the study by Atamaz, Ya ız On & Durmaz, (2003)
who developed several subtests from the Minnesota Test for Differential Diagnosis of Aphasia (MTDDA) as
well as the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE) and came up with the EAT which is now a
standardized Aphasic Turkish instrument.
Closer to home, reports of aphasic manifestation on a South African population include Jones‘ (1989)
adaptation of the BAT into an Afrikaans version, Mosdell´s (2006) investigation on how 30 control
participants and 3 aphasic speakers who participated in the adaptation of aphasia tests for a South African
context-English isiXhosa and Afrikaans, Penn´s (2001) report on the mild to moderate aphasic
manifestation through the use of the Afrikaans version of the Western Aphasic Battery (WAB) as well as the
Afrikaans version of the PALPA which was used to explore the reading and writing skills of bilingual
aphasic speakers (Millar, 1998).
The issue of assessment of all language capabilities in both, if not all of a bilingual’s languages with a
comparable and equivalent instrument for the proper diagnosis of aphasia is without a doubt an issue that
needs to be addressed. In addition to this issue, there is a dire need to take into consideration the unique
population that is going to be assessed.
Page | 36
2.4 Definition of terms
In order to reduce the possibility of attributing post morbidly differences between the bilingual's languages
to brain damage as they may have differed premorbidly (Kiran & Tuchtenhagen, 2005) and due to the
complex and dynamic linguistic situation in which proficiency and use of language in Zambia is linked to
one’s geographical region, social and ethnic identity (Marten &Kula, 2008), bilingualism in this study was
defined in accordance to Grosjean's (1989) definition as the daily use of one or more languages
irrespective of the perfect knowledge or levels of proficiency of the languages. The first language therefore
referred to the most comfortable and frequently used language on a day to day communication basis.
The ability to read or write was not a requirement and therefore was excluded in the definition due to the
different positions that Bemba and English hold in the Zambian linguistic situation. English as the official
language of instruction in schools countrywide has ample printed material (Linehan, 2004) while Bemba
which is the most widely spoken language in the country is restricted to a subject taught in only specific
provinces such as the Copperbelt and Northern Province (Marten & Kula, 2008; Kashoki, 1990). Despite
the government’s effort and attempts to reverse the use of only English and incorporate the national
languages into the education system (Ministry of Education, 1992; Kelly, 1995, 2000; Linehan, 2004) many
Zambians are still unable able to read or write in Bemba nor do they regularly see it or any of the other local
languages in written form (Kashoki, 1990).
Due to the struggle to classify between the different aphasia types (Prins et al., 1978; De Renzi et al., 1980;
Albert et al., 1981) as well as the different classification frameworks that exist, the definition of syndromes
that was incorporated in this study and used to sketch the classical aphasia types was operationally defined
according to Goodglass’s (2000) theoretical framework. Please note that although Aphasia is a central
Page | 37
language disorder which affects both spoken and written language, emphasis was only on spoken
language with specific reference to production, comprehension and repetition. This once again as
explained is due to the different positions that Bemba and English hold in the Zambian linguistic situation.
This theoretical framework according Goodglass’s (2000) is as follows:
Broca's aphasia: is mainly associated with a lesion on the third frontal gyrus which is nowadays known as
the Broca’s area. Speech production is non fluent as the speech is telegraphic with mainly content words
resulting in very few words per minute. Comprehension is relatively good although problems do arise once
comprehension of complex sentences is tested. Repetition of single words is good as opposed to the
telegraphic repetition of sentences. Articulation problems, hemiplegia and apraxia of speech are usually
Comobid with this type of aphasia.
Wernicke's aphasia: which is also known as sensory or acoustic Gnostic aphasia associated with a lesion
on the Wernicke’s area (posterior parts of the superior gyrus of the left temporal lobe). It is characterized by
the so called word salad in which speech production is fluent but incomprehensible as it contains verbal
and literal paraphasias, paragrammatism as well as neologisms. Repetition and comprehension (at a word
or sentence level) are all impaired. Therefore well constructed sentences with a variety of word types
(function verbs, nouns and verbs) are used but with very little specific information in the fluent speech
production.
Anomic aphasia: Is known as amnestic or acoustic –mnestic aphasia. It is characterized by relatively good
comprehension, repetition and reading of words and sentences. Although the speech production is fluent, it
is characterized by word finding problems and sometimes paraphasias. The fluency is affected by the long
Page | 38
pauses, inability to find words, circumlocutions as well as the high frequency of general words used which
provide very little information and thus giving raise to the term empty speech. Although no specific lesion
site has been allocated, attention will be paid to the left posterior regions of the temporal and or parietal
lobe.
Conduction aphasia: is relatively rare and associated with a lesion on the left supramarginal gyrus.
Speech production is fluent but characterized by phonemic approximation, transpositions, omissions and
substitution of words. Phonemic paraphasics are apparent in repetition and have the potential to decrease
the speaker's fluency when many are produced. However comprehension is more or less spared with
possible problems with long grammatically complex sentences.
Transcortical aphasia: is associated with lesions that are widespread and over the cortex. The lesion
does not involve the classical language areas but rather surrounds these classical language areas. This
type of aphasia is classified into the sensory and motor transcortical aphasia. In Sensory aphasia, speech
production is fluent but with paraphasics and neologisms resulting in hardly any spontaneous speech
output. Repetition is relatively good, although the speaker cannot comprehend what is repeated. The lesion
site is said to isolate Wernicke's area from the rest of the brain. Motor transcortical aphasia is characterized
by automatic responses and no spontaneous speech production. It shares the same characteristics as
Broca's aphasia except that repetition in this case is spared. The lesion site is associated with the isolation
of the frontal language region from the rest of the brain.
Global aphasia: Is the severe case of aphasia in which all language modalities are impaired.
Communication is therefore very difficult. Speech production is limited to one or two words and is thus non
fluent. Repetition and comprehension are both impaired and the associated lesion sites are usually large.
Page | 39
An overview of the discussed classical aphasia syndromes adopted from the Jonkers (2008) can be seen in
the table below.
Table 6: An overview of the classical aphasia syndromes (- means impaired, + means relatively intact;
transc. sens. aphasia = transcortical sensory aphasia; transc. mot. aphasia = transcortical motor aphasia).
Fluency/Production comprehension Repetition characteristics
Broca’s aphasia
Wernicke’s
aphasia
anomic aphasia
conduction
aphasia
transc. sens.
aphasia
transc. motor
aphasia
global aphasia
-
+
-
telegraphic speech
+
-
-
Paraphasias
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
+
-
-
-
word-finding
problems
phonemic
paraphasias
repetition relatively
spared
repetition relatively
spared
all modalities
impaired
(Aphasia types and struggle to classify, chapter 3: Hoofdstuk 2class, pg6)
2.5 Research questions
The main focus of this study was to develop an assessment tool which can be used in the screening or
detection of the presence of Aphasia for clinical or research purposes. Therefore the main research
questions were;
•
Can the results on the translated and adapted BAT English-Bemba function as part of a diagnosis
of Aphasia?
•
Will the different scores objectively determine whether one is aphasic or not?
Page | 40
Because the performances on the BAT English-Bemba were expected to exhibit a pattern of deficits in
English and Bemba, the question of whether there was a significant difference or relationship between the
performances in the two languages was also addressed. Moreover the significant difference or relationship
between the two languages was looked at a particular linguistic skill: comprehension, repetition or
production and structural level: phonology, morphology, syntax, lexicon and semantics.
No work had been done on the aphasic manifestation in Zambia; therefore we did not know whether the
performance on the adapted English version of the BAT will be better, lower or equal to that of the Bemba
version. However we predicted that performance on the Part B of the adapted BAT English- Bemba would
draw attention to the different impairments or symptoms. This would allow us to detect the presence of
aphasia and possibly assign the participant to a specific aphasia type group in accordance with
Goodglass’s (2000) classification framework as well as the consideration of the connection between
symptoms and lesions and lesion sites. The expected high and low scores on the different tasks in relation
to the different aphasia types that were described above can be seen in table 7. It is important to note that
this was suggestive and more of a guideline to be viewed with extreme caution as Goodglass’s (1981)
explained that the mixed aphasic manifestation is much more common than the classical type. Moreover
we are also open to findings that might show or suggest one type of aphasic symptoms and syndromes in
English and another type in Bemba (or vice versa) in the same participant.
Table 7: an overview of expected performance according to the classical syndrome types (means
impaired, + means relatively intact; Wern. Aphasic =Wernicke’s aphasia, Cond. aphasic = Conduction aphasia,
transc. sens. aphasia = transcortical sensory aphasia; transc. mot. aphasia = transcortical motor aphasia).
Broca’s
Wern.
Anomic
Cond.
transc.
transc.
Global
aphasic
aphasic
aphasic
aphasic
sens.
Motor
aphasic
aphasic
aphasic
Page | 41
Overall
+
_
+
+
_
+
_
Pointing
+
_
+
+
_
+
_
VAD
+
_
+
+
_
+
_
_
_
+
_
_
+
_
+
_
+
+
_
+
_
-
_
+
_
+
+
_
+
_
+
_
+
+
_
_
_
+
_
+
+
_
_
+
+
+
+
_
_
Spont. speech
_
+
_
+
+
_
_
Naming
+
+
_
+
+
_
_
_
_
_
_
+
_
_
Temporo
Supra
Parietal
Margn.
lobes
gyrus
Compr.
Syntactic
Compr.
Listening
Compr.
Overall
repetition
Word repetition
Sentence
repetition
Overall
production
Sentence
Constr.
Lesion and
Broca’s
Wern.s
lesion site
area
area
Wide
spread
Over
cortex
Frontal
Lang.
region
Large
lesions
Page | 42
Page | 43
CHAPTER 3
3.0 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Participants
The modified short version of the BAT English-Bemba was ethically approved by the University of Zambia
(UNZA) Biomedical Ethics Committee (see Appendix 3) and administered to 5 participants with speech
problems recruited from the inpatient and outpatient unit of the University Teaching Hospital (UTH) and the
Maina Soko Military hospital in Lusaka and the Kitwe General hospital in Kitwe. Selection criteria were: (1)
participants had suffered from a stroke, traumatic brain injury, brain tumor or brain infection and had
speech problems; (2) they were according to the operationally defined proficiency, able to speak both
English and Bemba; (3) they were above the ages of 30; (4) they were right handed and (5) at least
3months post onset. Due to the undeveloped health care system, the medical records were not detailed
and the verification of the presence of brain damage through radiology reports based on the computer
tomography or magnetic resonance imaging was only found on the medical records of one of the
participants. The relevant participant data are summarized in table 8.
Table 8: Information of participants with speech problems
RH=right handed
Participants
Age
Gender
Handedness
Ethnic origin
Years of
education
Previous
Occupation
KC
38
Female
RH
Bemba
12
SK
43
Male
RH
Tumbuka
12
GK
30
Male
RH
Toka-Leya
16
CM
34
Male
RH
Bemba
16
FB
55
Male
RH
Bemba
13
Bank supervisor
Solder and driver
in the Zambian
Army
Worked at a
VCT counseling
institution
Logistics in the
Mines
Time post
onset
8 years and 1
months
4 months
11 months
5 months
Mine Contractor,
clerk, then
departmental
accountant
3 years and 6
months
Page | 44
Clinical
diagnosis
CT Scan
Co-morbid and
Current
condition
Receiving
treatment
Languages
spoken in order
of best
proficiency
Rt pueumonia,
CVA in 2003
and dysarthic,
open heart
surgeryInfraction on the
left frontal
temporal and
parietal region
RT hemisparasis
Speech
problems
Attends
occupational
therapy
English, Bemba,
Tonga and
Nyanja
Viral
encephalitis,
Bells palsy and
cervical
lympadenopathy
No CT scan
Stroke
Stroke: celebral
intract aphonia
Stroke
No information
on CT scan
No information
on CT scan
No CT scan
Speech
problems and
although not
paralyzed,, has
with the handling
of a pen on the
right hand
None
Rt hemiparasis
and speech
problems
No others
problems apart
from speech
Rt hemiparasis
Attends
physiotherapy
None
None
English,
Tumbuka,
Nyanja and
Bemba
English, Bemba
Nyanja and
Tonga
English, Nyanja
and Bemba
English, Bemba,
Swahili and
Nyanja
A group of 10 healthy control participants (mean age 39.30 years, range: 30–58; mean education 14.30
years, range: 12–20; 6male and four female) were selected to pilot the study. All were right handed,
proficient in English and Bemba (they could all read and write in both langauges) with no history of any
psychiatric or other conditions that might influence their performance. No neuropsychological evaluation of
the participant's attention, memory or other executive functioning impairments was performed due to the
lack of tests or literature on the assessment of neurocognitive functioning in Zambia. However a self
reported questionnaire was administered to ensure that no participant had a history of neurological or
psychiatry conditions nor any vision or hearing problems (See Appendix 4 for the screening form).
Page | 45
3.2 Adaptation of the material
In order to come up with the translated and adapted version of the BAT English-Bemba (see appendix 5 for
an outline of the test) certain tasks that adheres to the main objective of the study were selected. A total of
15 subtests of the parts A, B and C were translated and adapted from the original English version of the
BAT (Paradis, 1987). All instructions to the test administrator and participant were simply translated into the
most natural possible instructions in Bemba. No scores were modified as all content was altered to fit the
scoring scheme. The content translation and adaptation was aimed to create a much simpler appropriate
test with familiarized items depicting a Zambian setting were necessary in order to accommodate
participants from both rural and urban areas as well as to not find brain abnormalities where there are
none. The following changes were made to the different items within the different subtests.
Part A of the test consists of a questionnaire that assesses the history of the participant's multilingualism. In
this section, the 50 questions from the English version (see Appendix 6) of the test were straightforwardly
translated into Bemba (see Appendix 7). This questionnaire was only administered once in the language
best spoken by the participant.
The part B consists of 10 subtests. The first subtest is the language background questionnaire. Besides the
word Bemba which was substituted for the word English, all the 17 questions within the questionnaire were
straightforwardly translated and administered to the participants in the language being tested. The
questionnaire provided information on the age of acquisition, pattern and frequency of the participant's
Bemba and English use (see Appendix 8 for the English version and Appendix 9 for the Bemba version).
Page | 46
In the spontaneous speech subtest, the 5 leading questions about some aspect of the participant’s life
aimed at providing a quick clinical impression of the participant's speech were altered. Firstly two and a half
instead of 5 minutes of speech were recorded in attempt to keep the test short. The option of questions on
the participant’s illness, work, family and experience in other countries were adapted to questions about the
participant’s current positive situation. These questions were then were directly translated into Bemba (see
Appendices 10 and 11.)
In the pointing subtest, there was no consideration of the important linguistic features such as length or
lexicalization as the task was designed to measures one’s ability to recognize the names of common
everyday objects. In line with the study's goal of creating an appropriate tool that would not find brain
abnormalities where there are none, some items on the original BAT were substituted for more common
everyday objects used amongst the Zambian population. The items ring, button, gloves, scissors, envelope
and brush were substituted for charcoal, soap, earring, cooking stick, envelope and comb respectively. The
reason for the substitution was that the substituted items were much more commonly used amongst the
Zambian population. See Appendix 12 for the adapted version. Moreover pictures taken against a white
background were used instead of the actual objects as the pictures were much more portable and readily
available than using the actual objects (See Appendix 13 for the pictures used).
For the verbal auditory discrimination (VAD) subtest, the participant was presented with four pictures of
phonemically similar words on one page and an x on the other. The participant was expected to associate
the stimulus word with one of the four pictures. See Appendices 14 and 15 for the task material. The
pictures of the following items were swapped in order to come up with a much easier and fair test:
•
Item number 52; the picture of thick was ambiguous and therefore swapped with chick.
Page | 47
•
Item number 54; the picture of the van was swapped with the picture of the man as the new target
word because a van amongst the Zambian population is any car that has an open and not closed
trunk. Therefore the picture illustrated in this task is considered to be a truck and not a van.
•
Item number 55; the picture of the car became the target word and was swapped with the less
commonly used jar.
•
Item number 56; chin became the target word and not shin
•
Item number 58; was cramp which was swapped for stamp as the new target word
•
Item number 59; bear for pear as pears are not imported and mostly afforded by the well to do.
•
Item number 60; ship for chip because in Zambia, chips are known as crisps and one would be a
crisp and not chip. Chips are known and considered to be French fries.
•
Item number 64; mice for lice because lice is a borrowed English word that means rice.
•
Item number 65; the picture of the tap with dripping water was substituted for a more commonly
looking tap.
For the Bemba version, four picturable words that differed from each other by only one initial phoneme
where used to create the stimuli for this task. See Appendices 16 and 17.
In the syntactic comprehension subtest, canonical, non-standard and negative sentences as well as
reversed noun phrase constructions were all used alongside the picturable actions in attempt to manipulate
the subject verb object constructions. Because there are some English words that do not have a Bemba
equivalent, it was not possible to do a straightforward translation of the sentences. Words like restaurant
and director are used when speaking Bemba as they do not have Bemba equivalents. This might be due to
the influence of colonization and the introduction of new terms, ideas and culture. Therefore the following
sentences were altered to more familiar items that do have a translation in Bemba; the pot of nshima
Page | 48
instead of vase of flower, chief of the village instead of manager of the restaurant, dress of the tailor instead
of book of the author and Shepherd of the sheep instead of director of the film. Moreover because Bemba
has no gender, the items 66 to 70, were also adapted and not translated. The adapted sentence made use
of the plural distinction for the subject and object pronominal reference. See Appendix 19 for details of the
task.
The English word repetition subtest was straightforwardly translated. It has a total of 30 words with 10
monosyllabic words (10 real words; items 193, 195, 197, 201, 207, 211, 213, 215, 217, 221 and 5 non
words; items 199, 203, 205, 209, 219), 5 bisyllabic words (5real words; items 223, 225, 229, 235, 237 and 5
non words; items 227, 231, 233, 239, 247) and 5 trisyllabic real words; items 241, 243, 245, 249, 251. This
is the model that was used to create the Bemba version of the test. The non words were created by taking
a real word and changing its consonant to form a phonologically acceptable word. See Appendix 20 for
details of the subtest in English and Bemba.
The Sentence repetition subtest was straightforwardly translated into Bemba except for the verb in the last
sentence; the man does not kiss the woman was adapted to the man does not bit the woman. See
Appendix 21 for more details.
For the naming subtest, pictures and not the actual objects were presented to the participant one at a time.
Moreover the following items were changed for more commonly known items amongst the Zambian
population. These old items were book, glasses, tie, scissors, glove, pencil, playing cards thermometer,
button, fork, ring, candle and envelope. See Appendix 22 for details. Moreover some verbs were added to
the subtest as they are known to be very important in consideration of agrammatism (Thompson, Lange,
Schneider, & Shapiro, 1997; Bastiaanse & Jonkers, 1998).
Page | 49
In the Sentence construction subtest, 2, 3 and 4 words which are the same in English and Bemba are
presented to the participant, who is expected to construct the simplest possible sentence. The target words
desk open and drawer were altered into the more commonly used words pot, open and lid. The adjective
green in the target words tree, green leaf and see was changed to the adjective tall as green is a borrowed
English word that is used instead of the original Bemba word katapa katapa. For the same reasons the
adjective blue was also changed to big. See Appendix 23.
In the Listening comprehension subtest, the same information load for the Bemba and English test was
used. An identical story with the same number of referral nouns, phrases and predicates but different
lexical items is told to the participant who is expected to answer a few questions afterwards. See Appendix
24.
The part C of the BAT consists of 58 items and is available separately. It assessed the participant’s
translation abilities and interference detection in English and Bemba. The task used common everyday
objects to assess the participant’s ability to recognize translation equivalents of words in Bemba and
English and vice versa. A few of the items within the task were altered and substituted with familiar items.
At the sentence level, sentences were constructed in order to include reversible morphsyntactic features
meaning the word for word translation from English to Bemba or vice versa Bemba to English is
ungrammatical. See Appendices 25 and 26 for details.
Page | 50
3.3 Procedure
Because no work has ever been done on aphasic manifestation on a Zambian population, all participants
were briefed about the study and given a short introduction on what aphasia is. Then they signed their
consent forms which also had the option of a thumb print for participants that were unable to write. See
Appendix 27 for information on the introduction to aphasia, Appendix 27 for the study information sheet and
Appendix 29 for the consent form.
Administration was consistent and the test items were all presented and scored according to the published
instructions for the BAT in general (Paradis, 1987). On average the entire test took 60 to 90 minutes to
administer and was completed in two sessions. Although the different subtests could be administered and
interpreted separately, the following order was followed; Part A was first administered, then part B of the
one language (English or Bemba). In the second session part B of the other language was administered
and then followed by part C of the test.
The easy to score items by any person without a speech pathology or psychology background (Kertesz,
1989; Paradis, 1987) ensured the tightly controlled and explicit administration of the test. All subtest except
the spontaneous speech and repetition which required recording during the test administration. The healthy
control participants were first administered the translated and adapted test in order to clarify any
ambiguities in the administration procedure and recording of responses.
Page | 51
3.4 Scoring
Detailed but easy to apply scoring criteria were defined according to the original scoring procedure of the
original BAT for all subtests of the BAT English-Bemba. Therefore no scoring procedure was modified. All
scoring was objective and standard except for the subjective multiple choice option in the spontaneous
speech subtest and the evaluation of the grammaticality of the sentence in the sentence construction
subtest. There was no opinion or judgment from the administrator. The requirement was to simply write
down the participant's response in which + was for the correct response, - for the wrong response and 0 for
no response. For the pointing, VAD and syntactic comprehension tasks, instructions were to touch and not
just point to the chosen response. The picture that was touched first was scored.
A quantitative and qualitative analysis was performed. For the quantitative analysis, numerical scores from
each subtest were counted and the spontaneous speech was analyzed. These scores were then grouped
into clusters by affinity in order to obtain a profile for performance in production (Spontaneous speech,
naming and sentence construction), comprehension (pointing, verbal auditory discrimination, syntactic
comprehension and listening comprehension) and repetition at a sentence and word level. Therefore for
the qualitative analysis, the participants’ language profiles relative to the scores were used to infer aphasic
syndromes that were considered to be characteristics of a specific type of aphasia according to Goodglass'
(2000) theoretical classificatory framework.
Page | 52
CHAPTER 4
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Quantitative analysis
The purpose of the data analysis was to use and group the scores on each subtest in order to assign
participants to a specific aphasia type group. For the quantitative analysis, the different subtests of the
adapted BAT were scored independently. The scores across categories of tasks for all participants which
show the differences in performance between the participants with speech problems and the healthy
control participants are summarized in Table 1. The healthy control participants showed ceiling effects in all
the subtests while the participants with speech problems exhibited a heterogeneous, albeit inferior
performance in both the English and Bemba subtests. See Appendix 30 for the full actual scores of all
participants.
Table 9: Results of the performance on the BAT English-Bemba
Participants with speech problems
Max
Bemba scores
Mean and Std.
Deviation
Pointing
VAD
Syntactic
comprehension
Repetition of words
Reptetion of
sentences
naming
Sentence
construction;
stimulus words
Sentence
Bemba scores
Mean and Std.
Deviation
Healthy control participants
English scores
Bemba scores
Std. Deviation
and mean
Std. Deviation
and mean
10
18
9.40
15.00
.894
2.449
9.20
15.20
1.304
2.280
.000(a)
.000(a)
10.00
18.00
.000(a)
.000(a)
10.00
37
16.60
10.090
17.40
9.503
.000(a)
37.00
.000(a)
37.00
30
18.40
10.213
19.00
11.769
.000(a)
30.00
.000(a)
30.00
7
1.60
3.050
6.40
5.941
.000(a)
7.00
.000(a)
7.00
20
10.40
7.797
7.60
6.656
.000(a)
20.00
.000(a)
20.00
16
6.40
7.266
7.40
6.465
.000(a)
16.00
.000(a)
16.00
15.40
16.817
13.00
10.932
2.685
30.90
2.312
21.30
18.00
Page | 53
construction; total
words
Listening
comprehension
PART C
Word recognition
Translation of Words
a.
Times text
read
b. Groups without
errors
a.
Judgment
b. Corrected
sentence
5
2.40
1.817
2.20
1.924
.000(a)
5.00
.000(a)
5.00
5
10
4.00
2.20
2, 236
1.924
4.00
2.20
2.236
1.924
.000(a)
.000(a)
5.00
10.00
.000(a)
.000(a)
5.00
10.00
6
6.00
4.243
6.00
4.243
.000(a)
6.00
.000(a)
6.00
3.40
3.130
3.40
3.130
.000(a)
.00
.000(a)
.00
8
6.40
3.578
6.40
3.578
.000(a)
8.00
.000(a)
8.00
8
2.80
3.899
2.80
3.899
.000(a)
6.00
.000(a)
6.00
Scores from spontaneous speech were analyzed according to the multiple choice option (Paradis, 1987).
The healthy control participants all scored normal on the amount of speech, fluency, pronunciation,
grammar and vocabulary in both the English and Bemba test. The participants with speech problems
performance varied. The performance is summarized in table 10 and 11.
Table 10: Spontaneous speech English performance of the participants with speech problems
Spontaneous
speech
a. Amount of
speech
b. Fluency
c. Pronunciation
d. Grammar
e. Vocabulary
KC
SK
GK
CM
FB
Very little
Normal
Very Good
Very little
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Good
Bad
Normal
Normal
Bad
Fair
Bad
Bad
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Less than
normal
Good
Normal
Normal
Good
Table 11: Spontaneous speech Bemba performance of the participants with speech problems
Spontaneous
speech
KC
SK
GK
CM
FB
a. Amount of
speech
b. Fluency
Very little
Normal
Very little
Very little
Bad
Fair
Bad
Bad
Less than
normal
Good
Page | 54
c. Pronunciation
d. Grammar
e. Vocabulary
Normal
Bad
bad
Bad
Fair
fair
Fair
Bad
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Normal
Normal
Good
4.2 Qualitative analysis
For the qualitative analysis, the performance on the BAT English-Bemba was then used to draw attention to
the different impairments. These impairments emerged and allowed for the participant to be assigned to a
specific aphasia type group in accordance with Goodglass'(2000) theoretical classificatory framework. An
outline of the assignment to a specific aphasia type group can be seen in table 12. The analysis was as
follows;
•
KC scored low on the overall repetition (English-Word repetition 25/30; sentence repetition 0/7 and
Bemba-Word repetition 27/30; sentence repetition 1/7) and overall production (Englishspontaneous speech was not fluent with a limited vocabulary; naming 18/20 and Bembaspontaneous speech was worse than the English, non fluent with a limited vocabulary; naming
1/20) but relatively higher on the overall comprehension (English-Pointing 10/10; VAD 16/18;
syntactic comprehension 14/37; listening comprehension 1/5 and Bemba-Pointing 9/10; VAD
12/18; syntactic comprehension 10/37; listening comprehension 2/5). She was the only participant
with detailed information on a CT scan which revealed an Infraction on the left frontal temporal and
parietal region (a region around the Brocas area). Based on this profile which agrees with the
theoretical framework, she was assigned to the Broca’s aphasic group with English being the more
dominant language.
•
SK scored low on the overall repetition (English-Word repetition 16/30; sentence repetition 0/7 and
Bemba-Word repetition 17/30; sentence repetition 2/7) but relatively higher on the overall
production (English-spontaneous speech was fluent but coupled with very bad pronunciation;
Page | 55
naming 18/20 and Bemba-spontaneous speech was fluent but like in English was coupled with
pronunciation problems; naming 14/20) and comprehension (English-Pointing 10/10; VAD 12/18;
syntactic comprehension 18/37; listening comprehension 3/5 and Bemba-Pointing 10/10; VAD
16/18; syntactic comprehension 15/37; listening comprehension 3/5). Based on this profile which
agrees with the theoretical framework, he was assigned to the conduction aphasic group with
English being the more dominant language. Dominance of English might be due his proficiency as
Bemba was in the history of bilingualism and langauge background reported to be the fourth mostly
used language.
•
CM scored relatively low on the overall repetition (English-Word repetition 2/30; sentence repetition
0/7 and Bemba-Word repetition 0/30; sentence repetition 0/7) and production (Englishspontaneous speech was not fluent and limited to only the words okay and the non word noko;
naming 0/20 and Bemba-spontaneous speech was like English limited to two words; naming 0/20)
but relatively higher on the overall comprehension (English-Pointing 10/10; VAD 16/18; syntactic
comprehension 19/37; listening comprehension 0/5 and Bemba-Pointing 10/10; VAD 16/18;
syntactic comprehension 13/37; listening comprehension 0/5). Based on this profile which agrees
with the theoretical framework, he was assigned to the Broca’s aphasic group with English being
the more dominant language.
•
GK scored low on the overall repetition (English-Word repetition 21/30; sentence repetition 1/7 and
Bemba-Word repetition 21/30; sentence repetition 1/7) and production (English-spontaneous
speech was not fluent; naming 6/20 and Bemba-spontaneous speech was also not fluent; naming
10/20) but relatively higher on the overall comprehension (English-Pointing 8/10; VAD 13/18;
Page | 56
syntactic comprehension 2/37; listening comprehension 2/5 and Bemba English-Pointing 7/10;
VAD 14/18; syntactic comprehension 15/37; listening comprehension 2/5). Based on this profile
which agrees with the theoretical framework, he was assigned to the Broca’s aphasic group with
Bemba being the more dominant language although reports from the history of bilingualism and
langauge background reveal that English was more widely used than Bemba before insult.
•
FB scored relatively high on the overall repetition (English-Word repetition 28/30; Sentence
repetition 7/7 and Bemba-Word repetition 30/30; sentence repetition 7/7) and overall production
(English-spontaneous speech; naming 10/20 and Bemba-spontaneous speech; naming 13/20) but
relatively higher on the overall comprehension (English-Pointing 10/10; VAD 18/18; syntactic
comprehension 30/37; listening comprehension 5/5 and Bemba-Pointing 10/10; VAD 18/18;
syntactic comprehension 34/37; listening comprehension 5/5). Based on this profile which agrees
with the theoretical framework, he was assigned to the Anomic aphasic group with both Bemba
being the more dominant language.
Although the scores of the Bat English-Bemba part C are not mentioned above, they were used to
determine the dominate language. The scores for this section of the test can be seen in the Appendix 30.
These findings are suggestive, additional and more comprehensive tests would provide more insite to the
identified impaired language deficits.
Table 12: An outline of the assignment to a specific aphasia group
+ means relatively intact, -means impaired
Participant Production Comprehension Repetition Assigned aphasia group
KC
-
+
-
Broca's aphasia
Page | 57
SK
+
+
-
Conduction aphasia
CM
-
+
-
Broca's aphasia
GK
-
+
-
Broca's aphasia
FB
+
+
+
Anomic aphasia
Page | 58
CHAPTER 5
5.0 DISCUSSION
The findings in the study are in line with the study’s main objective to address the current lack of aphasia
assessment tools that can be used for both clinical or research purposes. The adaptation of the BAT into
English-Bemba gave rise to a tool that plays a role in the diagnosis of Aphasia. There is no consensus on
most aphasic syndromes and one could disagree with Goodglass'(2000) classificatory framework and
hence the findings of the study or correlation of the BAT English-Bemba's tasks to Goodglass'(2000)
classical aphasic syndromes which in this study were used to assign participants to specific aphasia
groups. However one would have to agree that the different tasks of the BAT English-Bemba do reveal
residual and different language capacities or abilities as well as the patterns of deficit in both of the
languages and therefore fits into the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps
(ICIDH) model of the WHO (World Health Organization, 1995). These languages can be compared and
used to determine which language is the most appropriate and available for communication. Moreover it
sheds light on what aspects of language can be concentrated in the case of treatment, therapy or
rehabilitation.
The performance on the BAT English-Bemba was interpreted in the light of the participants’ premorbid
competence in both English and Bemba. Because most aphasic tests are not culture free (Penn, 1993) the
adaptation to the Zambian culture into account ensured that the material for testing was appropriate and
tailored for the Zambian population. The results of the performance of the healthy control participants
substantiate the reports of the BAT items are designed easy enough that a score below criterion in any
language can be interpreted as evidence of impairment in that language. It could be that some participants
Page | 59
performed better in English than Bemba because they are more literate in English (reading and writing)
than Bemba or that they can read in Bemba but rarely have the chance to write. The different statuses of
the languages in the country (Marten & Kula, 2008: Spitulnik, 1998) do definitely have an influence in terms
of their influence on testing for aphasia.
Other factors that might have influenced the study include factors such as code switching as a
sociolinguistically accepted and quite common during everyday conversation in Zambia (Banda, 2005;
Serpell 1978), and how it might obscure the diagnosis of specific language deficits. Other factors that might
obscure the diagnosis include the lack of a neuropsychological assessment of abilities such as cognitive
and mnestic deficits, memory.
Needless to say, the BAT English-Bemba has served as a screening tool that can function as part of the
diagnosis of aphasia. It is a basic assessment that provides information of one’s linguistic abilities and
additional comprehensive tests are required in order to further explore the surfaced deficits. There are
many variables to consider that were not covered in the study. There was a lot of data that was also
collected and could be analyzed in so many ways, however we had to stick to the study’s aim and
objectives that addresses the current lack of aphasia assessment tools for both clinical or research
purposes.
Page | 60
CHAPTER 6
6.0 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the adaptation of the BAT English-Bemba represents an important first step towards the
development of standardised, valid, and reliable language assessment tools for a Zambian population. It
presents an adequate starting point in aphasia diagnosis for a Zambian population. The tool was successful
in using its different tasks to draw attention to and shed light on the different language impairments. Despite
its limitations, its potential application is very promising as it addresses some of the obstacles that pose a
threat in the diagnosis and rehabilitation of the Zambian aphasic population. For instance it is time and cost
effective and therefore able to meet the country’s inadequate infrastructure for rehabilitation coupled with
large distances and few resources. It is also easy to administer and does not require a skilled professional
and thus addressing the issue of the lack of trained clinicians.
There is no doubt that more work needs to be done and future research should not only be directed
towards the issues of validity, further revision of the BAT English-Bemba items, more tests in other
languages, treatment strategies and a larger sample size but also towards the type of errors on
performances of different subtests particularly on the Bemba spontaneous speech samples or the
representation and processing of Bemba in the brain. It would also be interesting to compare the Bemba
aphasic manifestations across other Bantu languages similar to Bemba and how they apply to the present
universal traits in bilingual aphasia.
Page | 61
Page | 62
7.0 REFERENCES
Albert, M.L., Goodglass, H., Helm, N.A., Ruberns, A. & Alexander, M.P. (1981). Clinical Aspects of
Dysphasia. New York: Springer Verlag.
Atamaz, F., Yagil, O., A. & Durmaz, B. (2007). Ege Aphasia Test: Description of the Test and Performance
in Normal Subjects. Turkish Journal of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 53, 5-10.
Banda, F. (2005). Analysing Social Identity in Casual Zambian/English Conversation: A Systemic
Functional Linguistic Approach, Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 23: 217-231.
Bastiaanse, R. & Jonkers, R. (1998). Verb retrieval in action naming and spontaneous speech in
agrammatics and anomics aphasia. Aphasiology, 12, 951-969.
Benton, A. L. & Hamsher, K. D. (1994). Examen de Afasia Multilingue [Multilingual Aphasia Exam]. San
Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Chidumayo, S., Fagerlind, I., Idemalm, A., McNab, C. & Mweene, B. (1989). Supporting Zambian education
in times of economic adversity. Education Division Documents, 44. Stockholm: SIDA.
Chanda, V. M. (1996). Les langues en Zambie’, in J.-P. Daloz and J. D. Chileshe (eds.), La Zambie
contemporaine (Paris: Karthala, Nairobi: IFRA), 301-316.
Chanda, V. M. (2002). Orthography planning across languages and countries: Some thoughts and
proposals, in F. Banda (ed.), Language across borders (Cape Town, CASAS), 27-59.
Chisanga, T. (1987). An investigation into the forms and functions of Educated English in Zambia. PhD
thesis, York University.
Chisanga, T. (2002). Lusaka Chinyanja and Icibemba, in K.K. Prah (ed.), Speaking in Unison: the
Harmonisation of Southern African Languages (Cape Town: CASAS), 103-116.
Page | 63
Chishimba, M. (1983). African varieties of English: Text in context. PhD Thesis, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign (USA).
De Renzi, E., Faglioni, P. & Ferrari, P. (1980). The influence of sex and age on the incidence and type of
aphasia. Cortex, 16, 627-630.
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolingual speakers in one person.
Brain and Language, 36(1), 3–15.
Fagan, J. & Jacob, M. (2009). Survey of ENT services in Africa: need for a comprehensive intervention.
University of Cape Town, South Africa.
Goodglass, H & Kaplan, E. (2000). The Assessment of Aphasia and Related Disorders (3rd ed.).
Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Heidegger, M. (1977). Gesamtausgabe. Bd. 5: Holzwege. Frankfurt (Main).
Hoch, E. 1983 [1960]. Bemba Pocket Dictionary: Bemba-English and English-Bemba. Lusaka: National
Educational Company of Zambia.
Huber, W., Poeck, K & Springer, L. (2006). Klinik und Rehabilitation der Aphasie. Stuttgart, New York:
Thieme Verlag.
Insel, P.M., & Roth, W.T. (2006). Core concepts in health (10th ED). New York, McGraw-Hill.
Ivanova, M.V. & Hallowell, B. (2009). Short form of the Bilingual Aphasia Test in Russian: Psychometric
data of persons with aphasia. Aphasiology, 23(5), 544-556.
Jones, D. (1989).The assessment of English/Afrikaans bilingual aphasic patients using the Bilingual
Aphasia Test. Unpublished research report, University of the Witw'atersrand. Kemp, M.A. Dept of
Linguisticsts were sourced.
Kashoki, M. E. (1990). The factor of language in Zambia. Zambia: Kenneth Kaunda Foundation in Zambia.
Kashoki, M. E. (1992). Language policy in multilingual countries vis-a`
vis language maintenance,
language shift and language death. Paper presented at a colloquium jointly organized by Philosophy and
Page | 64
Humanistic Studies (PHS) and UNESCO on the theme ‘‘Life or Disappearance of Language, in particular in
Africa,’’ Harare, Zimbabwe.
Kachru, B.B. (1976). Models of English for the Third World: White man’s linguistic burden.
Kamwangamalu, N. M. &Chisanga, T. (1997). Owning the other tongue: English in Southern Africa, Journal
of multilingual and multicultural development,18, 2.
Kapeya, M. (1988). The use of vernacular languages in broadcasting. Paper presented at a broadcasting
seminar in Maputo, Mozambique.
Kelly, M.J. (1995). Language Policy in Education in Zambia. Paper prepared for presentation at the Zambia
National Reading Forum, Lusaka, 1995.
Kelly, M.J. (1991). Education in Declining Economy. The Case of Zambia. 1975-1985. Washington: The
International Bank for Construction/World Bank.
Kelly, M.J. (2000). Reading Comes First: Primary Reading Programme Baseline Reading Study. Lusaka:
August, 2000.
Kertesz, A. (1989). Critic of the BAT. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 4, 314, 531436
Linehan, S. (2004). Language of Instruction and the Quality of Basic Education in Zambia. UNESCO Paper
Presentation.
Lorenzen, B. & Murray, L.L. (2008). Bilingual Aphasia: a theoretical and clinical view. American journal of
speech language pathology, 17. 299-317.
Kay, J., Byng, S., Esmundson, A. & Scott, C. (1990). “Missing the wood and the trees: a reply to David,
Kertesz, Goodglass and Weniger.” Aphasiology, 4, 115-122.
Kay, J., Lesser, R., & Coltheart, M. (1992). PALPA: Psycholinguistic Assessment of Language Processing
in Aphasia.Hove, England: Erlbaum.
Manchishi, P.C. (2004). The status of indigenous language in institutions of learning in Zambia, past,
present and future, Lusaka, University of Zambia.
Page | 65
Mann, M. (1977). An Outline of Bemba Grammar. In Language in Zambia: Grammatical Sketches, Volume
I. Lusaka: University of Zambia, Institute for African Studies.
Marten, L. & Kula, N. C. (2008). Zambia: one Zambia, One Nation, many languages, in Simpson, A. (ed.),
Language and National Identity in Africa, Oxford: OUP, 291-313.
Millar, M. (1998) Unpublished research, University of Witwatersrand.
Ministry of Education (Republic of Zambia). (1977). Zambian Languages: Orthography Approved by the
Ministry of Education. Lusaka: NECZAM.
Ministry of Education [Zambia]. (1992). Focus on Learning, Lusaka: Ministry of Education.
Mosdell, J. (2006). Adaptation of Aphasia tests for a South African context. Psychology honours project.
University of Cape Town.
Muñoz, M. L., Marquardt, T. & Copeland, G. (1999). A comparison of the code-switching patterns of
speakers with aphasia and neurologically normal bilingual speakers of English and Spanish. Brain and
Language, 66, 249–274.
Nkamba, M. & Kanyika, J. (1998). The Quality of Education: Some Policy Suggestions Based on a Survey
of Schools, SACMEQ Report No. 5, IIEP. UNESCO, Lusaka.
National Plan of Action on Disability in Zambia, (2003). Central statistic office, Lusaka.
Nurse, D. (2006). Bantu Languages, in K. Brown (ed.), Encyclopdedia of Language and Linguistics (Oxford:
Elsevier), 1, 679-685.
Ohannessian, S. & Kashoki, M. E. (eds.), (1978). Language in Zambia (London:International African
Institute).
Paradis , M. (1987). The assessment of bilingual aphasia. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Paradis, M. (2001). Assessing bilingual aphasia. In B. Uzzell & A. Ardila (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural
neuropsychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Page | 66
Paradis, M. & Zeiber, T. (1987). Bilingual Aphasia Test (Russian version). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.
Paradis, M. & Libben, G. (1987). The Assessment of Bilingual Aphasia. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Penn, C. (1993). Aphasia therapy in South Africa: Some pragmatic and personal perspectives. In A.
Holland, & M. Forbes (Eds.), Aphasia treatment: World perspectives (pp. 25-53). San Diego: Singular
Publishing Group Inc.
Penn, C., Venter, A & Ogilvy, D. (2001). Aphasia in Afrikaans: a preliminary analysis. Journal of
neurolinguistics, 14, 111-132.
Phiri, D.C. (2008). Untitled. Faculty of kinesiology and rehabilitation. KU Leuven University Unpublish
thesis.
Posner, D. N. (2005). Institutions and Ethnic Politics in Africa, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Prins, R.S., Snow, C.E. & Wagenaar, E. (1978). Recovery of aphasia: Spontaneous speech versus
language comprehension. Brain and Language, 6, 192-211.
Quirk, R. (1985). The English language in a global context. In R. Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (eds) English
in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Rey, G. J., Sivan, A. B., & Benton, A. L. (1991). Multilingual Aphasia Examination–Spanish Version. Lutz,
FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Robins, S., Madzudzo, E. & Brenzinger, M. (2001). An Assessment of the Status of the San in South Africa,
Angola, Zambia and Zimbabwe, Windhoek: Legal Assistance Centre.
Serpel, R. (1978). Comprehension of Nyanja by Lusaka School children. In Sirarpi Ohannessian and
Mubanga E. Kashoki (Eds.), Language in Zambia (pp. 9-46). Lusaka: International African Institute.
Page | 67
Spitulnik, D & Kashoki. E, M. (2001). "Bemba," in Facts about the World's Languages: An Encyclopedia of
the World's Major Languages, Past and Present. J. Garry., J & Rubino., C. (eds.), New York and Dublin:
H.W. Wilson 81-85.
Spitulnik, D. (1992). Radio Time Sharing and the Negotiation of Linguistic Pluralism in Zambia,” Pragmatics
2, pp. 335-354.
Spitulnik, D. (1998).The Language of the City: Town Bemba as Urban Hybridity, Journal of Linguistic
Anthropology, 8: 30-59.
Thompson, C.K., Lange, K.L., Schneider, S.L., & Shapiro, L.P. (1997). Agrammatics and non brain- injured
subjects, verb and verb agreement structure, Aphasiology, 11(4), 473-490.
UNESCO. (1964). Report of the UNESCO Planning Mission: Education in Northern Rhodesia, Lusaka:
Government Printer.
Van Sambeek, J. (1955). A Bemba Grammar, London: Longmans, Green and Company.
White Fathers. (1991). White Fathers'Bemba-English Dictionary, Ndola: Mission Press by the Society of
the Missionaries of Africa (White Fathers), Reprint of 1954 edition by Longmans, Green and Company
(London).
Williams, E. (1993). Report in Reading in English in Primary Schools in Zambia, ODA Research Project
4770, Serial No. 5, University of Reading.
Williams, E. (1996). Reading in two languages at year five in African primary schools.Applied Linguistics,
17(2), 182–209.
World Health Organisation (WHO). (1980). International classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation.
Zambia Analytical Report. (1990). Census of Population, Housing and Agriculture ,10, Central Statistical
Office, Lusaka.
Zambia Analytical Report. (2000). Census of Population, Housing and Agriculture, Central Statistical Office,
Lusaka.
Page | 68
Zambia Analytical Report. (2003). On Census of Housing and Population, 2000, Central Statistical Office,
Lusaka.
Zambia demographic and health survey. (2007). Central Statistical Office, Lusaka
Page | 69
8.0 APPENDICES
Appendix 1
A list of the available BAT
!"
!"
#
!
!(
)
$
#
%
#
#
&
&
'
%
&*
+
$ ,
$
$
$
&*
%
%
'
%
%
&*
+
/
/
%
. '
%
%
+
%
0*
"
'
&
/
% .
.
"
'
$ ,
$
2
2
$
-
1
3
4
&
&
5.
.
&
&*
5
&
7
6
1
'
&
$ ,
$
$
/
%
-
"
&
2
+
+
$
/
+
&
0*
'
&
&*
%
%
&
-
1
%
.
"
'
.
5
&
6
&
&*
Page | 70
%
$
%
/
$
.
$
+
%
'
/
.
&
%
-
/
&*
.
%
%
-
$
%
0*
1
1
1
2
2
2
"
"
3
4
%
.
'
&
&*
&
!&
"
#
%
!$ +
!
*
#
#
'
-
'
'
&*
+
%
&
&
&
&
&*
&*
&
&
0*
.
&
!
!
*
#
#
)
$ ,
%
&
2
+
.
%
.
%
%
. '
5.
5
6
7
Page | 71
Appendix 2
.
3
.
4
$
6
&
.
*
4
$
'
8
8
9
:
;
=
>
?
@
A
8B
88
89
8:
8;
8=
8>
8?
8@
8A
9B
98
99
9:
9;
9=
9>
9?
6
' $
2
&*
.
*
& *
6
&
&
&
%
&
' *
&
&
6
3
&
&
/
" *
/
*
"
2
'
'
'
*
*
* <
*
C
*
*
**
*
**
*
*
*
Page | 72
9@
9A
:B
:8
8
9
:
;
/
/
'
'
*
*
'
(
(
&
%
*
C
Page | 73
Appendix 3
The ethical approval of the study
Page | 74
Appendix 4
The screening of participants
!
" ###################################
!
$
$
"###########################################
!
*
#
.
$
&
&*
$!
C
*
*
#
* *
"
/
/
/
/
+
+
*
D
E
.
*
F
*
E
F
F
!
E
#F
D
F
-
*
!"
D
%
$
#
!
!
& '
!$ !
!#
!
Page | 75
Appendix 5
Outline of the BAT English-Bemba
Short Version of the Bilingual Aphasia Test (BAT) English/Bemba
Ukuipifya ifisambililo ya mashindano iya Afasia
mudimi Icisungu-Icibemba
PART A/CHIPANDWA A
• History of bilingualism/Milandu ya kale iya mudimi
PART B/CHIPANDWA B
• Language background/ Intuntuko ya lulimi
• Spontaneous speech / Ukulanda mukukonkanya
• Pointing/ Ukusonta
• Verbal auditory discrimination / Ukupusanya nokupalanya ishiwi waumfwa
• Syntactic comprehension/Ukumfwikisha amashiwi
• Repetition of words /Ukubwekeshapo amashiwi
• Repetition of sentences/ Ukubwekeshapo kwa miseela
• Naming/Ukulumbula amashina
• Sentence construction/ Ukupanga imiseela
• Listening comprehension/ Ukumfwikisha kwakukutika
PART C/CHIPANDWA C
•
Word recognition /Ukwishiba kwa amashiwi
• Translation of words /Ukupilibula kwa mashiwi
• Translation of sentences /Ukupilibula imiseela
• Grammaticality judgment /Ukumfwa nokupingula imilandile
Page | 76
Appendix 6
Part A- history of bilingualism
The following questions are to be read, as given below to the participant. If the participant is unable
to supply the information, someone else (e.g. a family member) may be asked the questions. If the
answer to a question cannot be obtained, DO NOT leave it blank. Instead circle or write 0 in the
answer space. This indicates that no answer was available. In the body of the test all instructions to
the test administrator are proceeded by ***. These instructions are not to be read to the participant.
***Begin reading aloud here
1. What was your date of birth? __________________________________________(1)
2. Where were you born? ________________________________________________(2)
3. As a child, what language did you speak most at home? ______________________(3)
4. As a child, did you speak any other languages at home? Yes or No (4)
*** If the answer to (4) is “no” than go to question (6).
5. What other languages did you speak at home as a child?
____________________________________________________________(5)
6. What was your father’s native language? _________________________________(6)
7. Did he speak any other languages? Yes or No (7)
***If the answer (7) is “no” than go to question (12).
8
What was your father’s other language(s)?
____________________________________________________________(8)
9
What language did your father speak most to you at home? __________________(9)
10 Did your father speak any other languages at home? Yes or No (10)
***If the answer (10) is “no” than go to question (12).
11. What other languages did your father speak at home?
__________________________________________________________(11)
12. What was your mother’s native language? _________________________________(12)
13. Did she speak any other languages? Yes or No (13)
Page | 77
*** If the answer (13) is “no” then go to question (18).
14. What was your mother’s other language(s)?
___________________________________________________________(14)
15. What language did your mother speak most to you at home? _________________(15)
16. Did your mother speak any other languages at home? Yes or No (16)
*** If the answer (16) is “no” than go to question (18).
17. What other languages did your mother speak at home?
___________________________________________________________(17)
18. Did anyone else take care of you as a child? Yes or No (18)
***If answer to (18) is “no” than go to question (25).
19. What was his/her native language? _______________________________________(19)
20. Did he/she speak any other languages? Yes or No (20)
*** If the answer to (20) is “no” than go to question (25).
21. What was his/her other language (s)?
____________________________________________________________(21)
22. What language did he/she speak most you at home? _________________________(22)
23. Did he/she speak any other languages at home? Yes or No (23)
***If answer to (23) is “no” than go question (25).
24. What other languages did he/she speak at home?
___________________________________________________________(24)
25. What language did you speak most with friends as a child? ____________________(25)
26. How many years of education have you had? ________________________________(26)
27. When you started school what was the language of instruction? ________________(27)
28. At that time, did you take any subjects in other language? Yes or No (28)
***If the answer to (28) is “no” than go to question (30).
29. What were the other languages of instruction?
__________________________________________________________(29)
30. What language did most of the other students speak at this school? ____________(30)
31. Did you change to a school with another language of instruction after that? Yes or No.(31)
***If the answer to (31) is no then go to question (49).
32. What was this language? _______________________________________________(32)
Page | 78
33. After how many years did you switch to this new language of instruction? _________(33)
34. At that time, did you take any subjects in another language? Yes or No (34)
***If the answer to (34) is “no” then go to (36).
35. What were the other languages of instruction?
___________________________________________________________(35)
36. What language did most of other students speak at this school? ________________(36)
37. Did you change to a school with other language of instruction after that? Yes or No (37)
***If the answer to (37) is ”no” then go to question (49).
38. What was this language? _______________________________________________(38)
39. After how many years did you switch to this new language of instruction? _________(39)
40. At that time did you take any subjects in another language? Yes or No (40)
***If the answer to (40) is ”no” then go to question (49).
41. What were the other languages of instruction?
___________________________________________________________(41)
42. What language did most of other students speak at this school? _______________(42)
43. Did you change to a school with a different language of instruction after that? Yes or No (43)
***If the answer to (43) is “no” then go to question (49).
44. What was this language? _______________________________________________(44)
45. After how many years did you switch to this language of instruction? ____________(45)
46. At that time, did you take any subjects in another language? Yes or No (46)
***If the answer to (46) is “no” then go to question (48).
47. What were the other languages of instruction?
___________________________________________________________(47)
48. What language did most of the other students speak at this school? _____________(48)
49. And after your education was completed, what was your occupation?
___________________________________________________________(49)
50. Before your accident/illness what languages were you able to speak?
____________________________________________________________(50)
Page | 79
Appendix 7
Part A-Bemba version of the history of bilingualism
Cipandwa A
Milandu ya kale iya mudimi
8. Bushikunshi mwa fyelwe? _______________________________________(1)
9. Nikwisa mwa fyalilwe? __________________________________________ (2)
10. Ku bwaice, citundunshi mwalelandisha sana pa nganda? _______________(3)
11. Ku bwaice, bushe mwalelandapo ifitundu fimbi pa nganda? Ee/Awe
(4)
*** Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (4) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga (6).
12. Ci/fitundu nshi fimbi ifyo mwalelanda pa nganda ku bwaice?
_____________________________________________________________(5)
13. Bushe ululimi lwa cifyalilwa lwa bawiso luliminshi? _____________________(6)
14. Bushe balelandapo ifitundu fimbi? Ee/Awe
(7)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (7) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(12).
11 Ci/fitundunshi fimbi ifyo balelanda bawiso? ____________________________(8)
12 Citundunshi bawiso balemilandisha sana pa nganda? ________________ (9)
13 Bushe bawiso balelandapo ifitundu fimbi pa nganda? Ee/Awe
(10)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (10) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(12).
51. Fitundunshi fimbi ifyo bawiso balelanda pa nganda? _____________________(11)
52. Bushe ululimi lwa cifyalilwa lwa banoko luliminshi? _______________________(12)
53. Bushe bawiso balelandapo ifitundu fimbi? Ee/Awe
(13)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (13) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(18).
54. Ci/fitundunshi fimbi ifyo balelanda banoko? _____________________________(14)
55. Citundunshi banoko balemilandisha sana pa nganda? _______________
(15)
56. Bushe banoko balelandapo ifitundu fimbi pa nganda? Ee/Awe
(16)
Page | 80
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (16) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(18).
57. Fitundunshi fimbi ifyo banoko balelanda pa nganda? _______________________(17)
58. Bushe kuli umbi uwami sungileko ku bwaice? Ee/Awe
(18)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (18) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(25).
59. Bushe ululimi lwa cifyalilwa lwa bamisungile luliminshi? __________________(19)
60. Bushe balelandapo ifitundu fimbi? Ee/Awe
(20)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (20) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(25).
61. Ci/fitundu nshi fimbi ifyo balelanda? __________________________________(21)
62. Citundunshi balelandisha sana pa nganda? ______________________
(22)
63. Bushe balelandapo ifitundu fimbi pa nganda? Ee/Awe
(23)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (23) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(25).
64. Fitundunshi fimbi ifyo balelanda pa nganda? ____________________________(24)
65. Citundunshi mwalelandisha sana na banenu ku bwaice? _________________ (25)
66. Bushe imyaka mwapwile ku sukulu ni inga? ___________________________ (26)
67. Ilyo mwatampile isukulu, citundunshi bale mifundilamo? ____________
(27)
68. Pali iya nshita, kwaliko icisambililo mwale sambilila mucitundu cimbi? Ee/Awe
(28)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (28) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(30).
69. Bushe fitundunshi fimbi balemifundilamo? ________________________________(29)
70. Bushe Citundunshi ico balelandisha sana abana be sukulu pali ili line isukulu?
____________________
(30)
71. Bushe mwali cinjishe ukuya ku sukulu kumbi ukwaba icitundu cimbi nakabili? Ee/ Awe(31)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (31) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(49).
72. Cali icitundunshi ici? __________________________________________
(32)
73. Papitile imyaka inga pakuti mwatampile ukubombfya ici icitundu cimbi? ___
(33)
74. Pali iya nshita, kwaliko icisambililo mwale sambilila mucitundu cimbi? Ee/Awe
(34)
Page | 81
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (34) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(36).
75. Bushe fitundunshi fimbi balemifundilamo? _________________________________(35)
76. Bushe Citundunshi ico balelandisha sana abana be sukulu pali ili line isukulu? _____________
(36)
77. Bushe mwali cinjishe ukuya ku sukulu kumbi ukwaba icitundu cimbi nakabili? Ee/Awe (37)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (37) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(49).
78. Cali icitundunshi ici? _______________________________________________
(38)
79. Papitile imyaka inga pakuti mutampe ukusambilila muli ici icitundu ? _____
(39)
80. Pali iya nshita, kwaliko icisambililo mwale sambilila mucitundu cimbi? Ee/Awe
(40)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (40) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(49).
81. Bushe fitundunshi fimbi balemifundilamo? _________________________________ (41)
82. Bushe citundunshi abana be sukulu balelandisha sana pali ili line isukulu? _________(42)
83. Bushe mwali cinjishe ukuya ku sukulu kumbi ukwaba icitundu cimbi nakabili? Ee/Awe(43)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (43) ni “Awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(49).
84. Cali icitundunshi ici? ___________________________________________
(44)
85. Papitile imyaka inga pakuti mwatampile ukubombfya ici icitundu cimbi? _______
(45)
86. Pali iya nshita, kwaliko icisambililo mwale sambilila mucitundu cimbi? Ee/Awe
(46)
***Nga cakuti ubwasuko kucipusho calenga (46) ni “awe” ninshi kabiyeni
kucipusho calenga(48).
87. Bushe fitundunshi fimbi balemifundilamo? __________________________________(47)
88. Bushe citundunshi ico abana be sukulu balelandisha sana pali ili line isukulu? ___________
(48)
89. Panuma wakupwisha isukulu/amasambililo, mwale bomba mulimonshi?
________________________________________________________________
(49)
90. Ilyo tamula sangwa mubu sanso/panuma yakulwala fitundunshi ifyo mwalelanda?
_______________________________________________________________
(50)
Page | 82
Appendix 8
English language background
Language Background
The following questions are to be read exactly as given below to the participant. For multiple choice items,
circle the appropriate alternative. For the other items, put the appropriate information in the space provided.
In the body of the test, all instructions to the test administrator are proceeded by ***. These instructions are
not to be read aloud to the participant.
***Give the participant the following introductions and then proceed with the questions.
Now I will ask you some questions about your English. Ready?
1. Have you ever lived in another country where English was spoken? Yes\No
(1)
*** If your answer is no, then skip to question 4.
2. What was the name of the country? _____________________________
(2)
3. How long did you live there? (years) ____________________________
(3)
4. Before your illness, was your English speaking?
(4)
1. Not good,
2. Good,
3.Very fluent
5. How old were you when you learnt to speak English? (years) _________
(5)
6. Before your illness, did you speak English at home? Yes\No
(6)
7. Before your illness, did you speak English at work? Yes\No
(7)
8. Before your illness, did you speak English with friends? Yes\No
(8)
9. In your daily life before your illness, did you speak,
(9)
1. Everyday 2.Everyweek 3.Everymonth 4.Every year 5.Once a year
10. Did you ever learn to read English?
Yes\No
(10)
*** If the answer was no, then skip to spontaneous speech (Question 18)
11. How old were you when you learnt to read English? (years) ___________
(11)
12. Before your illness, was your English reading,
(12)
1. Not good
2.Good
3. Very good
Page | 83
13. In your daily life, before your illness, did you read English,
1. Everyday
2. Every week
4. Every year
5. Less than one year
(13)
3. Every month
14. Did you ever learn to write English? Yes\No
(14)
*** If the answer is no, then skip to spontaneous speech (Question 18)
15. How old were you when you learnt how to write English? (Years) ________
(15)
16. Before your illness, was your English writing
(16)
1. Not good
2. Good
3. Very good
17. In your daily life before your illness, did you write English,
1. Everyday
2. Every week
4. Every year
5. Less than one year
(17)
3. Every month
Page | 84
Appendix 9
Bemba language background
Intuntuko ya Icibemba
18. Bushe mwalikalapo mucalo cimbi umo balanda Icibemba? Ee\Awe
*** Nga cakuti icasuko ni Awe, tolokeni kucipisho calenga 4.
19. Cali calonshi? _____________________________
(1)
20. Mwaikelemo imyaka inga? _____________
(3)
21. Bushe ukulanda kwenu kwa Icibemba kwaliba shani…….
(4)
1. Takwaba bwino
2.Bwino
(2)
3.Bwino sana
22. Mwali nemyaka inga ilyo mwasambilile ukulanda Icibemba? _____
(5)
23. Mulalanda icibemba pa nganda? Ee\Awe
(6)
24. Mulalanda icibemba ku ncintu? Ee\Awe
(7)
25. Mulalanda icibemba na banenu? Ee\Awe
(8)
()# "
.
-
G G G !A#
1. Cila Bushiku 2.Cila Mulungu 3.Cila Mweshi 4.Cila Mwaka 5. Ukucila pa mwaka
27. Bushe mwali sambilila ukubelenga icibemba? Ee/Awe
(10)
*** Nga cakuti icasuko ni awe, tolokeni ku cisambililo ukulanda mukukonkanya
(cipusho 18)
28. Mwali nemyaka inga ilyo mwasambilile ukubelenga icibemba? ____ (11)
29. Bushe kubelenga kwenu kwa Icibemba kwaliba shani………….
1. Takwaba bwino
2.bwino
(12)
3. bwino bwino sana
30. Mubumi mwenu bwa cila bushiku, mubelenga shani icibemba……… (13)
1. Cila Bushiku
2. Cila Mulungu
3. Cila Mweshi
4. Cila Mwaka
5. Ukucepa pa mwaka
31. Bushe mwali sambilila ukulemba Icibemba? Ee\Awe
(14)
*** Nga cakuti icasuko ni awe, tolokeni ku cisambililo ukulanda mukukonkanya
(cipusho 18)
32. Mwali nemyaka inga ilyo mwasambilile ukulemba Icibemba? ______ (15)
33. Bushe ukulemba kwenu kwa Icibemba kwaliba shani…………..
1. Takwaba bwino
2. Bwino
(16)
3. Bwino sana
34. Mubumi mwenu bwa cila bushiku, mulemba shani Icibemba……….. (17)
1. Cila bushiku
4. Cila mwaka
2. Cila mulungu
5. Ukucepa pa mwaka
3. Cila Mweshi
Page | 85
Appendix 10
English spontaneous speech subtest
SPONTANEOUS SPEECH
Record 2 and a half minutes of the participant’s spontaneous speech. The function of this section of the test
is to obtain a sample of the participant’s spontaneous speech and to allow the test administrator to
establish a comfortable testing atmosphere. To keep the conversation going, it is suggested that you
prompt the participant with any of the following lead questions:
a) Can you tell me something about your life when you were younger?
b) What did you do for fun, what are your hobbies?
c) Can you tell me what you usually do during your day?
d) Can you explain the method of cooking nshima?
***After the participant has finished speaking, the test administrator should turn the tape recorder off, and
circle the appropriate alternative for each of the following five items. This is intended only to give a general
subjective, preliminary indication of the characteristics of the participant’s speech on the tape which can be
analyzed later in detail.
Can prompt or change topics if necessary to ensure that 2 and a half minutes of speech is obtained.
Subjective preliminary indication of the characteristics of the speech
18. Amount of speech
1. Nothing
2. Very little
3. Less than normal
4. Normal
(18)
19. Fluency
1. Bad
2. Fair.
3. Good
4. Normal
(19)
2. Fair.
3. Good
4. Normal
(20)
2. Fair.
3. Good
4. Normal
(21)
2. Fair.
3. Good
4. Normal
(22)
20. Pronunciation
1. Bad
21. Grammar
1. Bad
22. Vocabulary
1. Bad
Page | 86
Appendix 11
Bemba spontaneous speech subtest
Ukulanda mukukonkanya
Kopa amaminiti yabili ne cipandwa, incito iya ici ciputulwa mu mesho kukwatako icilangililo ku ulesendamo
ulubali lwa kukonkanya ukulanda pakuti kangalila wa mesho afwaye incende iya yana. Mu ku twalilia uku
lanshanya kusuma calilinga ukupela ulesendamo ulubali amesho pali:
a.Kuti mwanjebako fimo kabwikashi bwenu ilyo mwali umwaice?
b. Malango nshi mwale angala ku bwaice? Finshi mwatemwa ukwangala?
c. Njebeniko efyo mwatemwa ukucita mubushiku bumo?
d. Londololeni umusango banailamo/ipikilamo ubwali?
Kuti waipusha icipusho cakupumikisha nangu ukupilibula ilyashi nagcakuti cafwaikwa.
Ifyasangwa muku lanshana no ulesendamo ulubali muku landa kwakwe.
18. Ubwingi bwa milandile
1. 2. 3. 4. (18)
19. Ukwangukilwa
1.Ukubipa 2.ukulungika 3.bwino 4.bwino sana (19)
20. Imisoselo
1.ukubipa 2.ukulungika 3.bwino 4.bwino sana (20)
21. Imisoselo ya cibemba
1.Ukubipa 2. ukulungika 3.bwino 4. bwino sana(21)
22. Amashiwi
1.Ukubipa
2.ukulungika 3.bwino 4.bwino sana (22)
Page | 87
Appendix 12
The pointing subtest
VERBAL COMPREHENSION
*** in this section the participant is required to act out some command that he/she hears the commands
should be read slowly and clearly with normal intonation. If the participant gives no response after
5seconds, score 0 and move on to the next question. SCORE ONLY THE FIRST ITEM THAT THE
PARTICIPANT TOUCHES. The participant’s responses are scored either by + - or 0 in the area provided.
Circle + if the participant’s response is correct. If the participants response is incorrect circle - .Finally if the
participant produces no response (or a response that indicates that he/she did not understand what was
required of him/her.). For example if the participant is asked to touch the picture of a book that is on the
table and he/she touches some other object on the table. Then the examiner should circle -. If, however he
does not touch anything (or claps his hands) then the examiner should touch 0.
Pointing
Pictures of the following objects should be placed on the table in front of the participant so that he /she can
be able to touch each individual picture. The pictures should be arranged in the following order from left to
right: soap, earring, cooking stick, money, charcoal, comb, glass, matches, key, and watch.
Instructions to the patient
***Begin reading aloud here.
Here are pictures of some objects. I am now going to say the name of an object and you must touch it. For
example if I say “Shoe” then you touch this picture of the “Shoe”. Are you ready?
23. Please touch the charcoal
24.
the soap
+ - 0 (24)
25.
the matches
+ - 0 (25)
26.
the earring
+ - 0 (26)
27.
the key
+ - 0 (27)
28.
the cooking stick
+ - 0 (29)
29.
the watch
+ - 0 (29)
Page | 88
30.
the money
+ - 0 (30)
31.
the glass
+ - 0 (31)
32.
the Comb
+ - 0 (32)
Bemba Version
Ukusonta
Icilangilo ku mulwele
***Tendeka ukubelengesha apa
Apa pali ificokope ifya fintu fimo. Nalalanda ishina iya cintu icili pa cikope elyo mwalacikata. Cakumwenako
ngefi natila “Insapato” elyo mwalaikata ici icokope ca “Insapato”. Mwai pekanya?
23. Napapata ikateni pe cikope ca ililasha
24.
Sopo
+ - 0 (24)
25.
Machisa
+ - 0 (25)
26.
Isikiyo
+ - 0 (26)
27.
Lufungulo
+ - 0 (27)
28.
Umwinko
+ - 0 (29)
29.
Inkoloko
+ - 0 (29)
30.
Ulupiya
+ - 0 (30)
31.
Tambula
+ - 0 (31)
32.
Icisakulo
+ - 0 (32)
Page | 89
Appendix 13
Pictures of the pointing subtest
Page | 90
Page | 91
\
Appendix 14
The English verbal auditory discrimination subtest
Verbal Auditory discrimination
***In this section, the participant must touch the picture that best represents the word which he/she hears.
The pictures are identified by the numbers on the top right hand corner of each frame. For each item, circle
the number of the picture (1-4 or X) that the participant touches. If the participant does not touch any
picture nor X then circle 0 in the area provided.
Instruction to Participant
*** Begin reading aloud here.
You are going to hear a word. Please touch the picture that shows the meaning of the word. If none of the
pictures show the meaning of the word, then touch the large X. So, for example, if I say “rain”, you would
touch this picture because it represents the rain. If I say “bird”, you touch this X because there is no
picture of a bird on that page. Are you ready?
Number 0f
Target
Score
item
word
48
Mat
X
1
2
3
4
0 (48)
49
Ball
X
1
2
3
4
0 (49)
50
Duck
X
1
2
3
4
0 (50)
51
Brew
X
1
2
3
4
0 (51)
52
Chick
X
1
2
3
4
0 (52)
53
Knees
X
1
2
3
4
0 (53)
54
Man
X
1
2
3
4
0 (54)
55
Car
X
1
2
3
4
0 (55)
56
Chin
X
1
2
3
4
0 (56)
57
Plate
X
1
2
3
4
0 (57)
58
Stamp
X
1
2
3
4
0 (58)
59
Bear
X
1
2
3
4
0 (59)
Page | 92
60
Chip
X
1
2
3
4
0 (60)
61
Rose
X
1
2
3
4
0 (61)
62
Crane
X
1
2
3
4
0 (62)
63
Dead
X
1
2
3
4
0 (63)
64
Mice
X
1
2
3
4
0 (64)
65
Drip
X
1
2
3
4
0 (65)
Page | 93
Page | 94
Page | 95
Page | 96
* )
Bemba verbal auditory discrimination stimuli words
%
!
$
-* $
/ 0
0
20
0
+.
1
3 # '
6'
'
/'
7'
1 *
1
1 *
1
1
' '
$ '
:#
!
9#
D
!
. D* .
*
*.
8#
+
.
:
!
8#
*
*
.
*
*
.
8(# 7 0$
;0$ 1
;0$
5 0$ 1
D
.
8<#
.!
83# - 0
> 0
? 0
0
!
$'
1
0
0
5 0 1
0
0
5 0
=0
0
!
%
!
1
1
1 *
1
8 #
+,
'
3 # 240
/40
0
540
89# .%
$
1
1
1
1
D
*
!
9#
.
,
+
.
;#
D
D
. * .D
!
;#
1
D
Page | 97
88# 6 0
5 0
=0
/=0
!
.
.
D
D .
*
8 # .$ %
:
1
8 # =0 1
5=0
/=0
0 1
!
9#
.
* . *!
:#
* !
D .
#
0% 1
.!
5 0% 1
6 0% 1
0% 1 * .
)9# 6@0
0
6=0
40
**
D
8)# 6 0$ % 1
0$ %
0$ % 1
5 0$ % 1
8 #
:#
8#
.
C .
.
.
* .
D
1
1
1
!*
D
.
>8 )(# / 0$ %
0$ %
6 0$ %
0$ %
*D
.
H
*
C
1
1
1
1
)<# 2 0 1
0 1
0 1
A 0 1
)3# 40 1
6 0 1
6 0 1
9#
+
D
!
;#
*
!
.
:#
*!
*
:#
-
*
.
Page | 98
40 1
)8# =0'
2=0' 1
6 0' 1
0' 1
*
!
*
8#
Page | 99
Appendix 17
The Bemba verbal auditory discrimination subtest
Ukupusanya nokupalanya isiwi waumfwa
Mwalaumfwako ishiwi. Napapata mwikate icikope icilelenga ubupilibulo bweshiwi. Ngacakuti tapali icikope
icilelenga ubupilibulo bweshiwi mwikate pacishilwa cikalamba “X”. Ngefi nga natila “penda” mulingile
ukwikata icikope ici pantu cileiminina ukupenda. Nga natila “akoni” kwikata iyi “X” pantu tapali icikope ca
akoni pebula ili.
Mwai pekanya?
Ishiwi
48
Cûla
X
1
2
3
4
0
49
Twa
X
1
2
3
4
0
50
Ibata
X
1
2
3
4
0
51
Popa
X
1
2
3
4
0
52
Nama
X
1
2
3
4
0
53
Bosa
X
1
2
3
4
0
54
Washa
X
1
2
3
4
0
55
Lota
X
1
2
3
4
0
56
Lomba
X
1
2
3
4
0
57
Imbale
X
1
2
3
4
0
58
Tôla
X
1
2
3
4
0
59
Toba
X
1
2
3
4
0
60
Posha
X
1
2
3
4
0
61
Iluba
X
1
2
3
4
0
62
Lemba
X
1
2
3
4
0
63
Mona
X
1
2
3
4
0
64
Bûka
X
1
2
3
4
0
65
Bôwa
X
1
2
3
4
0
Page | 100
Appendix 18
The Bemba verbal auditory discrimination stimuli
Page | 101
Page | 102
Page | 103
Appendix 19
The syntactic comprehension subtest
Syntactic Comprehension
***In this section the participant must touch the picture which best represents the idea expressed in the
sentence read to him/her. The sentences should be read with normal intonation. The participant’s response
is recorded by circling in the area provided the number of the picture that he /she touches. If the participant
gives no response after 5minues circle 0 and move on to the next sentence. The participant should have
the section of the booklet titled syntactic comprehension in front of him/her so that it is possible to easy
point to any one of the pictures on the page.
Syntactic Comprehension
You are going to hear a sentence. Please touch the picture that shows the meaning of the sentence. If I say
“the boy sits” you should touch this picture which shows the sitting boy.
Page 1
Page | 104
66. The boys hold the girl.
1 2 3 4 0 (66)
Abalumendo baikata umukashana
67. The girl holds the boy.
1 2 3 4 0 (67)
Umukashana aikata umulumendo
68. She holds him.
1 2 3 4 0 (68)
Amwikata.
69. She holds them.
1 2 3 4 0 (69)
Abeikata.
70. They hold them.
1 2 3 4 0 (70)
Babeikata.
Page 2
Page | 105
81. The girl pushes the boy.
1 2 3 4 0 (81)
Umukashana alasunka umulumendo.
82. The boy pushes the girl.
1 2 3 4 0 (82)
Umulumendo alasunka umukashana.
83. The boy is pushed by the girl.
1 2 3 4 0 (83)
Umulumendo asunkiwa kumukashana.
84. The girl is pushed by the boy.
1 2 3 4 0 (84)
85. Umukashana asunkiwa kumulumendo.
86. It’s the boy who pushes the girl.
1 2 3 4 0 (85)
Mulumendo ewa sunka umukashana.
87. It’s the girl who pushes the boy.
1 2 3 4 0 (86)
Mukashana ewa sunka umulumendo.
88. It’s the boy that the girl pushes.
1 2 3 4 0 (87)
Mulumendo eo umukashana asunka.
89. It’s the girl that the boy pushes.
1 2 3 4 0 (88)
Mukashana eo umulumendo asunka.
Page | 106
Page 3
89. The dog bites the cat.
1 2 3 4 0 (89)
Imbwa ilasuma puushi.
90. The cat bites the dog.
1 2 3 4 0 (90)
Puushi ilasuma imbwa.
91. The dog is bitten by the cat.
1 2 3 4 0 (90)
Imbwa isumwa kuli puushi.
92. The cat is bitten by the dog.
1 2 3 4 0 (91)
Puushi isumwa kumbwa.
93. It’s the dog that bites the cat.
1 2 3 4 0 (92)
Nimbwa eisuma puushi.
94. It’s the cat that bites the dog.
1 2 3 4 0 (93)
Nipuushi eisuma imbwa.
95. It’s the cat that bites the dog.
1 2 3 4 0 (94)
Nipuushi uwo imbwa eisuma.
96. It’s the dog that bites the cat.
1 2 3 4 0 (95)
Nimbwa uwa puuhi eisuma
Page | 107
Negative sentences
Page 4
121. The truck does not pull the car.
1 2 0 (121)
Icimbayambaya tacitnta motoka
122. The truck is not pulled by the car.
1 2 0 (122)
Icimbayambaya tacitntiwa kumotoka
123. The car does not pull the truck.
1 2 0 (123)
Motoka taitinta icimbayambaya.
124. The car is not pulled by the truck.
1 2 0 (124)
Motoka taitintiwa ku cimbayambaya.
Page | 108
Page 5
129. The dog is not bitten by the cat.
1 2 0 (129)
Imbwa taisumwa kuli puushi.
130. The cat is not bitten by the dog.
1 2 0 (130)
Puushi taisuma kumbwa.
131. The dog does not bite the cat.
1 2 0 (131)
Imbwa taisuma puushi.
132. The cat does not bite the dog.
1 2 0 (132)
Puushi taisuma imbwa.
Reversible Noun Phrases
Page 6
Page | 109
137. Show me the mother’s baby/umwana waba nyina.1 2 0 (137)
Page | 110
Page 7
138. Show me the niece’s uncle/ba wiso ba mwana. 1 2 0 (138)
Page 8
Page | 111
139. Show me the pot of this nshima/ Impoto ya ubu ubwali. 1 2 0 (139)
Page 9
140. Show me the chief of this village /Infumu iay ubu umushi. 1 2 0 (140)
Page 10
141. Show me the dress of this tailor/Ilaya ya ubu kabila. 1 2 0 (141)
Page 11
Page | 112
142. Show me the dog’s master/Bene ba mbwa. 1 2 0 (142)
Page | 113
Page 12
143. Show me the doctor’s patient./Shinganga wa mulwele. 1 2 0 (143)
Page 13
144. Show me the shepherd of this sheep/Kacema wa mpaanga 1 2 0 (144)
Page | 114
Appendix 20
The repetition of words subtest
In this section the participant is being tested on the ability to repeat words. For each item, first read the
word then wait for the participant to repeat it. The participant must repeat exactly what he/she hears. Circle
+ if the participant’s repetition is correct (allow for the differences of accents or dialects). Circle – if the
participant’s response is incorrect. If he/she produces no response in 5seconds, circle 0.
***Turn the tape recorder and begin reading aloud here.
I am going to ask you to repeat some words. Please repeat them after me. Are you ready?
Ukubwekeshapo amashiwi
Nalamipusha uku bwekeshapo amashiwi yamo. Napapata muyabwekeshepo efyo nala sosa . Mwai
pekanya?
Words /Amashiwi
Repetition/ Ukubwekesha
193
Mat/ Twa
+
-
0 (193)
195
Ball /Cûla
+
-
0 (195)
197
Chay/ Tôla
+
-
0 (197)
199
Brew /Mosa
+
-
0 (199)
201
Thick /Mona
+
-
0 (201)
203
Goom /Nowa
+
-
0 (203)
205
Flup /Fosa
+
-
0 (205)
207
Van /Bûka
+
-
0 (207)
209
Rop /Fibe
+
-
0 (209)
211
Pear /Nama
+
-
0 (211)
213
Chip /Pôsa
+
-
0 (213)
215
Crane/ Bôwa
+
-
0 (215)
217
Lice /Kopa
+
-
0 (217)
219
Bim /Kwita
+
-
0 (219)
221
Jar /Toba
+
-
0 (221)
223
Signal/ Bwinga
+
-
0 (223)
Page | 115
225
Paper /Nsofu
+
-
0 (225)
227
Chetty /Befya
+
-
0 (227)
229
Liquid /Lyashi
+
-
0 (299)
231
Barsen/ ambe
+
-
0 (231)
233
Summip/ Tupwa
+
-
0 (233)
235
Dolphin /Kolwe
+
-
0 (235)
237
Promise / anga
+
-
0 (237)
239
Kimmid /Nshile
+
-
0 (239)
241
Melody /Toloka
+
-
0 (241)
243
Elephant/ Umfwikisha
+
-
0 (243)
245
Potato /Cibelushi
+
-
0 (245)
247
Sollick /Balulu
+
-
0 (247)
249
Disaster/ Shikulu
+
-
0 (249)
251
Seminar /Cilonda
+
-
0 (251)
Appendix 21
The sentence repetition subtest
Now you are going to hear some English sentences all you have to do is repeat them after me. Are you
ready?
253. The boy pushes the girl.
+ - 0 (253)
254. He is held by her.
+ - 0 (254)
255. It is the dog that bites the cat.
+ - 0 (255)
256. It is the girl that the boy holds.
+ - 0 (256)
257. The car is not pulled by the track.
+ - 0 (257)
258. He dresses him.
+ - 0 (258)
259. The man does not bit the woman.
+ - 0(249)
Ukubwekesha kwa imiseela
Nomba mwalaumfwako imiseela mu cibemba, elyo mwalayabwekeshapo efyo nala sosa. Mwai pekenya?
253. Umulumendo alasunka umukashana.
+ - 0 (253)
254. Aiketewe kuli ena.
+ - 0 (254)
Page | 116
255. Nimbwa eisuma puushi.
+ - 0 (255)
256. Mulumendo eo umukashana ekata.
+ - 0 (256)
257. Motoka taitintiwa ku cimbayambaya.
+ - 0 (257)
258. Amufwika.
+ - 0 (258)
259. Umwaume ta uma umwanakashi.
+ - 0 (259)
Appendix 22
The naming subtest
***In the following section, the participant is required to name the pictures shown to him or her. Hold each
picture up so that the participant can easily see it. The pictures should be out of the participant’s sight
before they are presented.
***Begin reading aloud here.
I am going to show you some pictures. Tell me what the thing you see is called: Are you ready?
3
.
. * " C
.
*
. *
* .
F
269. Book/Icitabo
+ - 0 (269)
270. Praying/Ukupepa
+ - 0 (270)
271. Key/lufungulo
+ - 0 (271)
272. Glass/Tambula
+ - 0 (272)
273. Sleeping/ukulala
+ - 0 (273)
274. Cooking stick/umwinko
+ - 0 (274)
275. Spoon/spooni
+ - 0 (275)
276. Earring/isikiyo
+ - 0 (276)
277. Matches /machisa
+ - 0 (277)
278. Drinking/ukunwa
+ - 0 (278)
279. Combing/ukusakula
+ - 0 (279)
280. Soap/sopo
+ - 0 (280)
281. Cigarette/fwaka
+ - 0 (281)
282. Comb/cisakulo
+ - 0 (282)
283. Feather/busako
+ - 0 (283)
284. Charcoal/malasha
+ - 0 (284)
Page | 117
285. Eatin/ukulya
+ - 0 (285)
286. Money/impiya
+ - 0 (286)
287. Toothbrush/muswaki
+ - 0 (287)
288. Watch/nkoloko
+ - 0 (288)
"
Page | 118
Appendix 23
The sentence construction subtest
***In this section, the participant must creat a sentence using the words you read to him/her. For each
sentence to be created, you should note: 1. whether the participant responds at all: 2. whether the
sentence is a correct English sentence or not: 3 whether the sentence makes sense: 4whether he/she used
all the sentences that were read to him: 5Finally the number of words in the sentence should be recored.
***begin reading aloud here.
I will give some words. With these words make the simplest and shortest sentence possible. So for
example if I give you the words “door, ” “open, “ “nurse” you try to make a simple sentence that uses all the
words, like “The nurse opens the door”. Ready?
289. House/cat
Response obtained
Correct English sentences?
Does it make sense?
Number of stimulus words used?
Total number of words
+ 0
+ + ___
___
(289)
(290)
(291)
(292)
(293)
Page | 119
294. Chair/doctor/sit
299. pot/open/lid
304. tree/tall/leaf/see
309. Pencil/write/black/ paper
Response obtained
Correct English sentences?
Does it make sense?
Number of stimulus words used?
Total number of words
+ 0
+ + ___
___
(294)
(295)
(296)
(297)
(298)
Response obtained
Correct English sentences?
Does it make sense?
Number of stimulus words used?
Total number of words
+ 0
+ + ___
___
(299)
(300)
(301)
(302)
(303)
Response obtained
+ 0 (304)
Correct English sentences?
+ - (305)
Does it make sense?
+ - (306)
Number of stimulus words used? ___ (307)
Total number of words
___ (308)
Response obtained
Correct English sentences?
Does it make sense?
Number of stimulus words used?
Total number of words
+ 0
+ + ___
___
(289)
(290)
(291)
(292)
(293)
Ukupanga Imiseela
Nalakupelako amashiowi muli aya mashiwi pa ngamo utimi seela utwipi sana. Icakumwenako nganakupela
amshiwi icibi,“ isula , nashi weshe ukupanga mo akamuseela akempi akengabomfwa ayamashiwi ba nashi
belesula icibi.
289. Inganda/puushi
Ubwasuko bwasangwamo
+ 0 (289)
Umuseela wacibemba uusuma
+ 0 (290)
Bushe cilepanga ubupilibulo
+ - (291)
Imiku amashiwi yapalako yabomfwe ___(292)
Amashiwi yabimfwe
___ (293)
294. Icipuna/shinganga/ikala
Page | 120
Ubwasuko bwasangwamo
Umuseela wacibemba uusuma
Bushe cilepanga ubupilibulo
Imiku amashiwi yapalako yabomfwe
Amashiwi yabimfwe
299.impoto/isula/kupiko
304. Cimuti/ubutali/ ibula/ mona
+ 0 (294)
+ 0 (295)
+ - (296)
___ (297)
___ (298)
Ubwasuko bwasangwamo
+ 0 (299)
Umuseela wacibemba uusuma
+ 0 (300)
Bushe cilepanga ubupilibulo
+ - (301)
Imiku amashiwi yapalako yabomfwe ___ (302)
Amashiwi yabimfwe
____ (303)
Ubwasuko bwasangwamo
Umuseela wacibemba uusuma
Bushe cilepanga ubupilibulo
Imiku amashiwi yapalako yabomfwe
Amashiwi yabimfwe
+ 0 (304)
+ 0 (305)
+ - (306)
___ (307)
___ (308)
309. pensulo/lemba/icikalamba/ipepala
Ubwasuko bwasangwamo
+ 0 (309)
Umuseela wacibemba uusuma
+ 0 (310)
Bushe cilepanga ubupilibulo
+ - (311)
Imiku amashiwi yapalako yabomfwe ____ (312)
Amashiwi yabimfwe
____ (313)
Appendix 24
The Listening comprehension subtest
***Read the following instruction and story to the participant. Ask him/her the five questions below and
record the responses as right + and if the participant gives no response or declares that he does not know
score 0,
***begin reading aloud here
You are going to hear a little story. Listen carefully to the story and then I will ask you some questions
about it. Ready?
One Saturday afternoon, the boy and his sister were at the show grounds. The boy bought an ice-cream for
his sister because it was very hot. But before she could eat it, the girl dropped the ice-cream on the floor.
Page | 121
362. Where were the boy and his sister?
+ - 0 (362)
363. What day of the week was it?
+ - 0 (363)
364. What did the boy buy her?
+ - 0 (364)
365. Why did the boy buy an ice-cream for his sister?
+ - 0 (365)
366. Why didn’t the girl eat the ice-cream?
+ - 0 (366)
Ukumfwikisha kwakukutika
Mwala umfwako akalyashi akanono. Mumfwikishe sana kwilyashi elyo nomba nalamwi pushako amepusho
pelyashi. Mwai pekanya?
You are going to hear a little story. Listen carefully to the story and then I will ask you some questions
about it. Ready?
Ubushiku bumo munshita yaka suba, Chanda na Mulenga baile kumabala. Mulenga ali swa inkonde apela
Chanda pantu Chanda aliumfwa insala sana. Chanda aliubula inkonde lelo talile pantu tayapile.
(On one summer day, Chanda and Mulenga went to the fields. Mulenga picked a banana and gave it to
Chanda because Chanda was very hungry. Chanda peeled the banana but could not eat it because it was
raw).
362. Bushe Chanda na Mulenga bailekwi?
+ - 0 (362)
(where did Chanda and Mulenga go?)
363. Bushe ninshita nshi baile ko?
+ - 0 (363)
(What time of the year was it?)
364. Bushe finshi Mulenga apelele Chanda?
+ - 0 (364)
(What did Mulenga give Chanda?)
365. Mulandushi Mulenga aswilile Chanda inkonde?
+ - 0 (365)
(Why did Mulenga pick the banana for Chanda?)
366. Mulandushi Chanda talilile inkonde?
+ - 0 (366)
(why didn’t Chanda eat the banana?)
Page | 122
Appendix 25
The Part C subtest
TEST OF APHASIA IN BILINGUALS
MASHINDANO IYA AFASIA MUNDIMI
PART C/CHIPANDWA C
English-Bemba Bilingualism
Icisungu-Icibemba Indimi
WORD RECOGNITION/ UKWPALANYA KWA AMASHIWI
*** Point out the words to the patient, one at a time and simultaneously read each word aloud.
The patient must tell and or show the word in the list of 10 words which is its equivalent in
Bemba. Circle the number corresponding to the patient’s choice. If after 5seconds the patient has
given no response, circle “o” and go on to the next stimulus word. If the patient cannot read, read
the 10 choices aloud until the patient has indicated a choice. If, after three consecutive readings
of the list, the patient has not indicated a choice, circle “o” and go on to the next stimulus word.
***Start reading here.
I am now going to show you a word in English and you are going to tell me which of the words
in the list has the same meaning in Bemba. Are you ready?
428. Tree
1. Nkonde (banana)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (428)
429. Rain
2. Mfula (rain)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (429)
430. Window
3. Mwele wa mfula
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (430)
(Lightening)
431. Hoe
4. Lukasu (hoe)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (431)
432. Fish
5.Icibi (door)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (432)
6. Isabi (fish)
7. Iwindo (window)
8. Kasembe (axe)
Page | 123
9. umuti (tree)
10. Mpanga(sheep)
The words apples, snow, hammer and pliers were all adapted as they are not common concrete
nouns used in a Zambian population;
•
Apples- are not grown but imported into Zambia. Therefore they are not accessible or
known to all Zambians especially those that live in rural areas like in villages. They are
more known to people of a higher social status/people who can afford them. Moreover
the word apple is usually used even when speaking Bemba.
•
Snow-there is no snow in Zambia due to the geographical region. Snow is known by the
well educated and those who are privileged with the television.
•
Hammer and pliers- more common only in urban areas. They were substituted for a hoe
and an axe which are more commonly known and used equipment in fields or gardens of
both urban and rural areas.
***Tendeka ukubelenga apa.
Nomba nala milangako ishiwi mucibemba naimwe mwalajebako ishiwi mucisungu ili lepilibula
cimo cine mumashiwi ya tantikiwe.
Mwai pekanya?
433. Umukaka (milk)
1. Arm-chair
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (428)
434. I ombe (cow)
2. Milk
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (429)
435. Ilaya (shirt)
3. Shirt
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (430)
436. Iluba (flower)
4. Table
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (431)
437. Icipuna (chair)
5. Flower
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (432)
6. Water
7. Necktie
8. Cow
9. Leaf
10. Donkey
Page | 124
The word horse was adapted to cow as cow is a more commonly known than a horse in the
Zambian environment.
TRANSLATION OF WORDS/ UKUPILIBULA KWA MASHIWI
***Read the following words aloud, one at a time, If the answer is the word in the
parenthesis, circle“-”; if the word is different, but acceptable, circle “1”; if the translation is
wrong, circle “-“. If after 5seconds the patient has given no response, circle “0” and go on to
the next word.
***Start reading here.
I am going to say a word in English and you will give me its Bemba translation. Are you
ready?
438. Knife
( Umweele)
+ - 0
(438)
439. Door
(Icibi)
+ - 0
(439)
440. Ear
(Ukutwi)
+ - 0
(440)
+ - 0
(441)
441. Sand
442. Bag
443. Love
444. Ugliness
445. Strength
446. Sadness
447. Reason
(Iloba/Umucanga/Umusenga)
(Icola)
(Ukutemwa/Icitemwiko)
(Ukubipa/Ububi)
(Amaka/Ukukosa/Ukushipa)
(Ubulanda)
(Icalenga/Ukutontonkanya/Umulandu)
+ -
0 (442)
+ - 0
(443)
+ - 0
(444)
+ - 0
(445)
+ -
0 (446)
+ - 0 (447)
Suitcase and courage have been adopted into familiar common terms. Reason could mean the
reason why/because or to think therefore any of these responses would be right..
***Belenga amashiwi sana limo limo. Nga cakuti icasuko ca balwele eshiwi lilepilibula
shingulush “+”. Ngabakweba ati ishiwi nali pusana lelo kuti lya suminishiwa, singulusha “1”.
Nga cakuti ubupilibulo nabu pusana nangu tabulibwino shingulusha “-“. Nga cakuti balwele
Page | 125
tabapele ubwasuko ubuli bonse panuma yansa shisano, singulusha “0” elyo belenga ishiwi
ilya konkapo
***Tendeka ukubelengesha apa.
Nala belenga ishiwi mucibemba elyo mwalajebako ubupilibulo mucisungu.
Mwai pekanya?
448. Akasembe
(axe)
+ - 0 (448)
449. Icibumba
(Wall)
+ - 0 (449)
450. Umukoshi
(Neck)
+ - 0 (450)
451. kotapela
(Avocado)
+ - 0
452. Icisote
(Hat)
+ - 0 (452)
453. Lupato
(Hatred)
+ - 0 (453)
454. Nsansa
455. Ukutinya
456. Bushilu
457. Ubusuma
(451)
(Joy/happiness)
+ - 0 (454)
(Scared/Fear/Fright)
+ - 0 (455)
(Crazy/Madness)
(Beautiful/Beauty)
+ - 0 (456)
+ - 0 (457)
The word blade is normally called razor blade and its Bemba translation is hardly if not used.
The word butter was also adapted into avocado which is far more common and accessible to
the entire Zambian population (Urban and rural areas). Additionally avocado is usually
mashed to make a spread which is spread on the bread like butter.
TRANSLATION OF SENTENCES/ UKUPILIBULA IMISEELA
*** Read the sentences aloud to the patient up to three times in accordance with the patients
request for repetition and circle the digit corresponding to the number of times that the text
was read. The score corresponds to the number of word groups (as indicated in the suggested
translation in parenthesis) correctly translated. Circle the number corresponding to the
number of word groups containing no error. An omission also counts as an error. If all groups
Page | 126
contain one or more errors, or if the patient says nothing, after three consecutive repetitions,
circle “o”. If the patients translation is not the one suggested but nevertheless acceptable,
“circle” +”.
***Start reading aloud here
Now am going to give you some sentences in English. You will translate them into Bemba.
Are you ready?
458. They went by bike.
Text read 1 2 3 times (458)
(Baile ne ncinga)
Groups without error
+
01 2 3
(459)
They went with bike.
•
by - with
460. Open your eyes.
Text read 1 2 3 times (460)
(Isula amênso)
Groups without error + 0 1 2 3 (461)
Open Ø eyes.
•
Your - Ø
462. Mutale got married without paying for the bridal price.
Text read 1 2 3 times (460)
(Mutale ali upwa/aupwile kwabula ukulipila insalamu)
Groups without error + 0 1 2 3 (463)
Mutale got married without to pay bridal price.
• Without + gerundive - without+ infinitive: without paying-without to pay
•
Pay for - pay Ø
464. I gave him the watch.
Text read 1 2 3 times (464)
(Namupele inkoloko)
I him gave the watch.
• V + Pron
Pron + V: gave him
•
Ind. Obj + dir. Obj
Groups without error
+ 0 1 2 3 (465)
him gave
Dir. Obj + Ind. Obj: watch ind. Obj + him dir. Obj
watch
dir.Obj + him ind.obj
466. Where are my two combs?
Text read 1 2 3 times (466)
Page | 127
(Ifisakulo fyandi fibili fili kwi/kwisa?)
Groups without errors + 1 2 3 (467)
Combs my two are where?
•
WH question
•
Adj + N – N + Adj :two combs-combs two
•
Poss. Pron + N – N + Poss. Pron. :My combs-combs my
468. They didn’t all go on foot.
Text read 1 2 3 times
(Bonse tabalile pa makasa)
(468)
Groups with out errors + 1 2 3 (469)
All not they go on feet.
•
Singular - plural: on foot - on feet
•
Negation: they are not- not they are
•
Position of ADV: Pron + ADV + V
ADV + Pron + V : they all go/all they go
***Belenga umuseela ukufika kunsa itatu ukulingana no kufwaya kwa balwele
ukubwekeshapo kabili shingulusha inambala ila pala kumiku umuseela waci belenga.
Ukuconga kufwile ukupalama namashiwi yali pamo (ukulungana no kulangilila kwakwilula
muma bulaketi). Shingulusha inamba iilepilibula amashiwi ayali pamo ayashikwete cilubo.
Elyo ukucilila nako cilepilibula icilubo. Ngacakuti amabumba yonse yasangwamo icilubo
cimo nangu ukucilapo, nangu cakuti umusambi talandile nangu cino, panuma
yakubwekeshapo imiku itatu, shingulusha “0”. Nga cakuti ukupilibula kwa balwele teko
kupelwe lelo kulepalako, singulusha “+”.
***Tendeka ukubelengesha apa
Nomba nala mipelako imiseela mu cibemba elyo mwalajebako ubupilibulo mu cisungu.
Mwai pekanya?
470. Baile ne ndeke.
(They went by plane)
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (470)
Masese yabula cibula +
1 2 3 (471)
Page | 128
They went with plane.
•
By-with
472. Sakula imishishi.
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (472)
(comb your hair)
Masese yabula cibula +
1 2 3 (473)
Comb Ø hair
•
Your – Ø
474. Chanda alilya kwabula ukulipila ifyakulya.
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (474)
(Chanda ate without paying for the food) Masese yabula cibula +
1 2 3 (475)
Chanda ate without to pay Ø the food.
•
Without + gerundive - without+ infinitive: without paying-without to pay
•
Pay for - pay Ø
476. Nabapele impiya.
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (476)
(I gave them money)
Masese yabula cibula +
1 2 3
(477)
I them gave money.
•
V + Pron
•
Ind. Obj + dir. Obj
Pron + V: gave him
him gave
Dir. Obj + Ind. Obj: watch ind. Obj + him dir. Obj
watch
dir.Obj + him ind.obj)
478. Abana benu batatu bakesa lisa?
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (478)
(When are your three children coming?) Masese yabula cibula + 1 2 3 (479)
Children your three are coming when?
•
WH question
•
Adj + N – N + Adj :three children-children three
•
Poss. Pron + N – N + Poss. Pron. : your children-children your
480. Bonse tabalefwaya ukuya pa makasa.
(They didn’t all want to go on foot)
Umuseela waci belengwa imiku 1 2 3 (480)
Page | 129
Masese yabula cibula +
All not they want to go on feet.
• Singular - plural: on foot - on feet
•
Negation: they are not- not they are
•
Position of ADV: Pron + ADV + V
1 2 3 (481)
ADV + Pron + V : they all go/all they go
*** In this section the patient must indicate whether a sentence which is read to him/her is a
correct English sentence or not. If the patient judges the sentence to be ungrammatical, she or he
is asked to make it right. For the patients judgment, circle “+” if the patients considers the
sentence to be correct, irrespective of whether the patient is right or wrong, “-“if the patient
considers the sentence to be incorrect and “0” if the patient gives no answer. Then score the
corrected sentence as “+” if acceptable, “-” if unacceptable, and “0” if the patient declares she or
he is unable to make it right, or has wrongly declared an incorrect sentence as “correct”, in which
case there is no point in trying to make it right or if the patient says nothing. When a correct
sentence (486, 492) is declared incorrect, and subsequently made wrong, score “-“ for both
judgment and correction. If the patient makes some changes to the sentence which does not make
it incorrect, then score “+” for correction.
***Start reading aloud here.
I am going to give you some sentences in English. Tell me if they are correct English sentences.
If they are not, I will ask you to make them right. For example, If I say “Nshima of chicken” you
say “incorrect” and you correct it: Nshima with chicken. Ready?
482. I am with hunger.
Judgment + - 0 (482)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (483)
484. The beer from too cold.
Judgment + - 0 (484)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (485)
486. This is the knife that we use to skin the animals with.
Judgment + - 0 (486)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (487)
Page | 130
488. I live at Lusaka.
Judgment + - 0 (488)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (489)
490. The dog is barking the stranger.
Judgment + - 0 (490)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (491)
rd
492. On the 3 day of Christmas.
Judgment + - 0 (492)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (493)
494. She wears glasses when to read.
Judgment + - 0 (494)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (495)
496. Wait for minutes 5.
Judgment + - 0 (496)
Corrected sentence + - 0 (497)
***Muli ulu lubali, abalwele bafwile balanga ngacakuti umuseela ulebelengwa kuli ena museela
wacibemba usuma nangu iyo. Ngacakuti abalwele bapingula ati umuseela taulandiliwe bwino,
bwepusheni ukubulanda bwino. Pakupingula kwa musambi, shingulusha “+”ngacakuti abalwele
bamona ukuti umuseela ulifye bwino, nangu cakuti abalwele nabaluba nangu alifye bwino.
Shingulusha “-” nagcakuti abalwele bamona kuti taulandiliwe bwino elo shila pali “0” ngacakuti
abalwele tabapele ubwasuko ubuli bonse. Nomba conga pa miseela iya lungamikwa nga “+”
ngacakuti casuminishiwa, “-“ ngacakuti teti cisuminishiwe elo “0” ngacakuti abalwele balanda
ukuti teti balungamikwe nangu balandile ukuti umuseela ushili bwino ati ulibwino muli ulu
lubali tacingalola mo uku uwamya, nangu abalwele tabalandile Nangu cimo. Ngacakuti
umuseela ulibwino(500/504) walandwa ati tauli bwino, kabili mukutwalilila ubwasuka
walufyanishiwa, conga “-“ pa kupingula konse noku lungikwa. Ngacakuti abalwele bacinja
ubupingulo ubushile cinja bupilibulo ninshi conga “+” pakwalula.
***Tendeka ukubelengesha apa
Nala mipelako imiseela imo mucibemba. Njebeni ngacakuti miseela isuma mucibemba. Nga taili
bwino nala mipusha uku ulungamika. Icakumwenako nganatila “Ubwali kwa nama” Kutila
taulibwino nokuli lungamika “Ubwali bwa nama”.
498. Ali cilaka.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (498)
Page | 131
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (499)
500. Ubwali bwa pya.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (500)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (501)
502. Umwinko uo twipikila umusaluko.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (502)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (503)
504. Njikala ku Lusaka.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (504)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (505)
506. Imbwa shile bosa ku kabôlâla.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (506)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (507)
508. Pa citatu bushiku bwa.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (508)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (509)
510. Umwana alalila pa lesamba
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (510)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (511)
512. Lolela pa yatatu maminiti.
Ubupingulushi + - 0 (512)
Umuseela ulungamikwe + - 0 (513)
Tree
1. Nkonde
Rain
2. Mfula
Window
3. Umwele wa mfula
Page | 132
Hoe
4. Ulukasu
Fish
5. Icibi
6. Isabi
7. Iwindo
8. Akasembe
9. Icimuti
10. Mpanga
Umukaka
1. Arm-chair
I ombe
2. Milk
Ilaya
3. Shirt
Iluba
4. Table
Icipuna
5. Flower
Page | 133
6. Water
7. Necktie
8. Cow
9. Leaf
10. Donkey
Page | 134
Appendix 26
A list of the irreversible contrasts
The list of English-Bemba reversible contrastive features followed by their incorporation
into translation and grammaticality judgment stimuli.
English Bemba
1. ADJ + N N + ADJ (e.g. naughty children/children naughty)
2. Poss. Pron.
Ø (e.g. open your eyes
open Ø eyes)
3. Prep.
No Prep.
• bark at someone/something bark Ø someone/something
4. without + gerundive without + infinitive
5. is hungry/thirsty is with hunger or thirst
6. Poss. Pron + N N + Poss. Pron (e.g. my bag/bag mine)
7. WH word in question (e.g. where is Mutale? /Mutale is where?)
8. Position of ADV: Pron + ADV + V ADV + Pron + V (e.g. they all cried/all they
cried)
9. Singular plural (on foot /on feet)
10. by with (by plane/bicycle with plane/bicycle)
11. pay for pay Ø
12. 3rd day day of 3
13. live in live at (e.g. in England/at England)
14. 3 minutes
minutes 3
15. Pron + V + negation Negation + Pron +V (e.g. they do not want/Not they do want)
16. V + Pron Pron + V (e.g. give him/her/it/them him/her/it/them give)
17. Ind. Obj + dir. Obj Dir. Obj + Ind. Obj (e.g. I gave him a book: book ind. Obj/book
dir.Obj, child dir. Obj/child ind.obj)
18. Position of with: the cooking stick that we cook vegetables with
the cooking stick
that we cook with vegetables
19. is
of (beer/nshima is hot/cold beer/nshima of hot/cold)
20. When + gerundive When + infinitive (20)
Translations
English to Bemba
458. They went by bike. (10)
460. Open your eyes. (2)
462. Mutale got married without paying for the bridal price. (4, 11)
464. I gave him the watch. (16, 17)
466. Where are my two combs? (1, 6, 7)
468. They didn’t all go on foot. (8, 9, 15)
Page | 135
Bemba to English
470. They went with plane. (10)
472. Comb hair. (2)
474. Chanda ate without to paying the food. (4, 11)
476. I they gave the money (16, 17)
478. Children your three are coming when? (1, 6, 7)
480. All don’t they want to go on feet. (8, 9, 15)
Grammaticality judgments
Bad English (except for 486 and 492 = correct)
Example-Go through in the books you have read, Correction: go through the books you have
read
482. I am with hunger. (5)
484. The beer from too cold. (19)
486. This is the knife that we use to skin the animals with. (18)
488. I live at Lusaka (13)
490. The dog is barking the stranger. (3)
492. On the 3rd day of Christmas. (12)
494. She wears glasses when to read. (20)
496. Wait for minutes 5. (14)
Bad Bemba (except for 500 and 504 = correct)
Example-Go through the books you have read, correction: go through in the books you have
read
498. She is thirsty. (5)
500. The nshima from cooked. (19)
502. The cooking stick that we use to cook vegetables with. (18)
504. I live at Lusaka. (13)
506. The dog is barking at the thieves. (3)
508. On the 3rd day. (12)
510. The child cries when bathing. (20)
512. Wait for 3minutes. (14)
Introduction to aphasia
Appendix 27
Page | 136
! "
#
!
$$
"
"
&
%
'
(
&
'
! )))))))
!
&
*+
,
Page | 137
"
$
.
"
$$$
(/ "
Page | 138
! "
0
#
$
!
Appendix 28
Study information
. $
. 6- ? / B? C-2 1
D
&
!
!#
$
!
I
!
* *
* *
*
$
I7
.
*
.
*
*
J
*
*
7
*
.
.
.
<*
D *
I-
#
*
. *
I
$
*
*
*
. *
. *
-
. *
.
-
.
*
I
*
*
* C
I
%
* C
K
3
E
*
5
3C
E
5
%
1
. +
Page | 139
I
5
I-
J
E
,
.
*
*
2
'
*
$
4 $4 H =B88B 2
*
BB9>B89=>B>?
53J 2 .
< 5 3 J 25 J ;;:?B
2 $$
. J
1A
A
!A % '
J
H BB9>B89=B?=:
+
L + +
B
17 E
5
4 $ < ?B?>= 3
J
BB9>BA?=AA=>BA
. . +L
&
5
3
1G B
%
F
C
!'5 % # / *
*
3
M:8 !B#=B :>: >89A
< M:8 !B#=B :>9 >@==
'C . L
*
2
* DD
DNC .
Appendix 29
Consent form
!
"
%
& %
'
#$
%(
(
)
Page | 140
(
)
(
(
)
)
"
(
)
(
)
''
!!!!!!!!!!!!&
!!!!!!!!
"
#$%& #'()*+(&,,&- .!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*
#$
+'
!!!!!!!!!!!!&
!!!!!!!
"
#$%& #'()*+(&,,&- .!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Appendix 30
Performance results of all participants
Page | 141
English Performance of the Aphasic speakers
Subtests
Spontaneous
speech
a. Amount of
speech
b. Fluency
c. Pronunciation
d. Grammar
e. Vocabulary
Pointing
Verbal
Auditory
Discrimination
(VAD)
Syntactic
Comprehension
Word Repetition
Sentence
Repetition
Naming
Sentence
Construction
a. Response
b. Grammar
c. Sensibility
d. Stimulus word
e. Total words
Listening
comprehension
Word recognition
Translation
of Words
Translation of
Sentences
a. Times text read
b. Groups without
errors
Grammaticality
Judgments
a. Judgment
b. Corrected
sentence
Max.
score
KC
SK
GK
CM
FB
Very little
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Normal
Good
Bad
Normal
Normal
Very Good
Bad
Fair
Bad
Bad
Very little
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Less than
normal
Good
Normal
Normal
Good
10
18
10
16
10
12
8
13
9
16
10
18
37
14
18
2
19
30
30
7
25
0
16
0
21
1
2
0
28
7
20
18
18
0
10
a.Yes
b.No
c.No
d.0
e.0
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.12
e.27
a.Yes
b.No
c.No
d.4
e.12
a.No
b.c.d.e.-
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 38
5
2
3
2
-
5
5
5
5
1
PART C
5
3
5
2
-
5
5
a.18
b.0
a.6
b.6
a.6
b.5
a.12
b.6
-
a.6
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.0
-
a.8
b.6
GK
CM
FB
Bemba Performance of the Aphasic speakers
Subtests
6
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.
Max.
score
KC
SK
Page | 142
Spontaneous
speech
a. Amount of
speech
b. Fluency
c. Pronunciation
d. Grammar
e. Vocabulary
Pointing
Verbal
Auditory
Discrimination
(VAD)
Syntactic
Comprehension
Word Repetition
Sentence
Repetition
Naming
Sentence
Construction
a. Response
b. Grammar
c. Sensibility
d. Stimulus word
e. Total words
Listening
comprehension
Word recognition
Translation
of Words
Translation of
Sentences
a. Times text read
b. Groups without
errors
Grammaticality
Judgments
a. Judgment
b. Corrected
sentence
Very little
Bad
Normal
Bad
bad
Normal
Fair
Bad
Fair
fair
Very little
Bad
Fair
Bad
Bad
Very little
Bad
Normal
Bad
Bad
Less than
normal
Good
Normal
Normal
Good
10
18
9
12
10
16
7
14
10
16
10
18
37
10
15
15
13
34
30
7
27
1
17
2
21
1
0
0
30
7
20
1
14
10
0
13
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.
a.Yes
b.No
c.No
d.10
e.17
a.Yes
b.No
c.Yes
d.9
e.15
a.Yes
b.No
c.No
d.2
e.5
a.No
b.c.d.e.-
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 28
5
1
3
2
-
5
5
5
5
1
PART C
5
3
5
2
-
5
5
a.18
b.0
a.6
b.6
a.6
b.5
a.12
b.6
-
a.6
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.0
-
a.8
b.6
Controls Participants data: English scores
Max-maximum score, N-normal
Subtests
Spontaneous speech
a.
Amount of
Ma
x
a.N
Control participants
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
a. N
Page | 143
b.
c.
d.
e.
speech
Fluency
Pronunciation
Grammar
Vocabulary
Pointing
Verbal Auditory
Discrimination(VAD
)
Syntactic
Comprehension
Word Repetition
Sentence Repetition
Naming
Sentence
Construction
a.
b.
c.
d.
b.N
c.N
d.N
e.N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d .N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 30
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 32
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.27
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 30
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.31
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 29
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.35
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.28
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e.35
a.Yes
b.Yes
c.Yes
d.16
e. 32
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Response
Grammar
Sensibility
Stimulus
word
Total words
e.
Listening
comprehension
Word recognition
Translation of Words
Translation of
Sentences
a.
Times text
read
b. Groups
without errors
Grammaticality
Judgments
a.
Judgment
b. Corrected
sentence
5
5
10
5
10
5
10
PART C
5
5
10
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
a.18
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.6
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
8
9
10
Controls Participants data: Bemba scores
Subtests
Spontaneous speech
f. Amount of
speech
g. Fluency
h. Pronunciation
i. Grammar
Vocabulary
Pointing
Verbal Auditory
Max
10
18
Control participants
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d .N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
a. N
b. N
c. N
d. N
e. N
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
10
18
Page | 144
Discrimination(VAD)
Syntactic
Comprehension
Word Repetition
Sentence Repetition
Naming
Sentence
Construction
f. Response
g. Grammar
h. Sensibility
i. Stimulus
word
j. Total words
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
30
7
20
Listening
comprehension
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.20
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e. 23
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.20
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.24
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.21
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.25
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.20
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e. 18
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.23
5
a.Ye
s
b.Ye
s
c.Ye
s
d.16
e.19
5
Word recognition
Translation of Words
Translation of
Sentences
c. Times text
read
d. Groups
without errors
Grammaticality
Judgments
c. Judgment
d. Corrected
sentence
5
10
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
PART C
5
5
10
10
a.6
a.6
b.0
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
5
10
a.6
b.0
a.8
b.8
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
a.8
b.6
Page | 145