Given that some young children from Kaina are reported to only understand a little Hunjara, Hunjara may not be inherently intelligible to speakers of Kaina Ke at a level where they could share
literature. Orokaiva is less well understood than Hunjara; therefore Orokaiva is less inherently intelligible than Hunjara to Kaina Ke speakers, so literature in Hunjara would better serve Kaina Ke
speakers. As there are generally no perceived dialects within Kaina Ke there should be no difficulty in all Kaina Ke speakers sharing literature developed anywhere within Kaina.
7.3.2 Recorded Text Tests
Results The scores obtained by Kaina Ke speakers listening to a Hunjara story vary between 81 and 95 percent,
with a mean of 88 percent and a low standard deviation 5 percent. Four of the highest scorers on the Hunjara story E25, R17, R14, E26 showed as much understanding of Hunjara as they did in their
hometown. The people who had the highest scores on the hometown test R12, R16, R19, T15, possibly meaning they are more reliable test-takers, had lower scores on the Hunjara story.
Table 30. Individual RTT scores
Subject SexAgeEd
Contact with Hunjara Hometown
Kaina score Hunjara
score
E23 F?Gr3
Aunt from Hunjara 94
83 E25
M10+?Gr6 None 94
95 E26
M9E2 None
92 91
R12 F?Gr4
Once year 100
81 R14
F13Gr4 3 times year, some family
there 92
91 R16
M18Gr8 None
97 88
R17 M16Gr8
fewyear – Hunjara 92
94 R19
F25Gr8 None
97 84
T12 F15Gr6
Aunt from Hunjara 100
86 T13
F14Gr5 None
94 91
T15 M14Gr5
None 97
84 average
95 88
count 11
11 standard deviation
0.03 0.05
That the scores are high averaging 88 percent, acceptable for passing the hometown, and the standard deviation is low implies that there may be some inherent intelligibility of Hunjara by speakers
of Kaina Ke. Grimes 1989:4.1.19 states that “A standard deviation of fifteen percent or more indicates the probable presence of a bilingual overlay.” That the standard deviation is well below this, at 5
percent, implies that understanding is due to inherent intelligibility rather than learnt understanding, though to be sure, ideal test subjects would have to be used. See Section 2.2.4 for further details.
That people exhibited good understanding of a simple narrative in Hunjara does not necessarily mean they could use all literature in Hunjara. Further testing with more complex texts would need to be
done to assess that. Grimes 1989:4.1.20 recommends that scores averaging 75–90 percent indicate marginal intelligibilty and further testing should be done with more complex discourse styles, such as
hortatory and expository discourse. Even if they can use literature written in Hunjara, attitudes towards reading in Hunjara could mean that Kaina Ke speakers may not want to do so.
Post RTT questions
Responses to the post RTT questions varied. Five people said the story was in their language, whereas six said it was a different language. However, everyone identified the speaker as being from a village in the
Hunjara area. The majority of candidates seven said it was only a little different; only one candidate said the speaker spoke exactly the same as them, while three said it was very different. All but one said
the first story the hometown was easier to understand, the one E25 said they were both easy he was also the person with the best score, 95 percent. When asked how much of the story they understood, the
candidates varied greatly. Five said they understood little, two that they understood most and four that they understood everything. There does not seem to be a correlation between the understanding they
showed and the understanding they claimed, but as there is not much variation in the understanding exhibited, this is not surprising.
It seems that attitudes to Hunjara among Kaina Ke speakers are not wholly positive, but equally are not wholly negative. The fact that all subjects exhibited a good understanding with half of those saying
they understood less than half of the text is evidence of negative attitudes. In addition, half the participants said the story they heard was in a different language; this implies that they may not be
prepared to use literature in Hunjara. However, this may be balanced by the responses of the other half of the participants who said it was the same language and they understood most or all of it.
7.4 Summary
