The process of searching for the meaning of the word used in the story in order to understand the meaning of the whole story was not easy. This is because many of the reference books and online dictionaries did not have many of the words which were used in the story. It therefore took me a lot of time searching for the meaning of the words from all possible sources which give meaning of words including research sites. However, I managed to find the meaning of the word and hence I was able to understand the meaning of the story.
At first, when I read the story for the first time, it appeared completely unintelligible. This is because it was full of vocabularies which were hard to comprehend. However, this changed after reading the story again; slowly and paying attention to the words used and how each word connected to the other one (Gibbson, 1940). By doing this I was able to discover some of the meaning of the words used without even looking for their meanings in the dictionaries, reference books and in research sites. For example, through careful reading of the story for more than three times, I was able to comprehend that the word ‘torffler’ meant ‘brother,’ ‘pulfistins’ meant ‘challenges’ and ‘rungle’ meant ‘county.’ Therefore, I discovered that, by paying much attention while reading or being keener to the connection of words in a paragraph or a phrase which makes use of a lot of vocabularies or strange words, one can be able to ascertain the meaning which is being conveyed in the given text (Unusual Words, 2010).
In case the story was being told or narrated to me by an individual in person instead of being read, I think the whole experience would have been more difficult. This is because it would have been hard to comprehend what the person was saying; first because the words used were strange and most probably, it would have been difficult to even get the spelling of some of the words. Second, because many of the words used in the story were strange, the person narrating the story may have had different pronunciation of the words therefore, making it hard for me to clearly get the exact word being pronounced. Due to these reasons, getting the meaning of the story would have been difficult and the only way I would have been able to do the task, was to request the person narrating the story to repeat the story over and over again, sentence by sentence, word by word, until I got every word in the story. Otherwise, if it was told in person and the narrator failed to repeat the story over and over again, then there would be no other additional information to draw the meaning of the story upon.
The thought process which I applied in deriving the meaning of the story when it was written would have been similar to the thought process I would have applied to perform the same task if the story was read to me by a person. This is because, for me to complete the task, I had to read the story several time, tried to make connections from one word to another and from one sentence to another until I was able to get the meaning of the story. If the story was told in person, the thought process would have been the same, although, more effort would have been required since the task would have involved first listening to the person telling the story, and then trying to comprehend what the story meant.
From a personal opinion, this task would have been unintelligible if it was given to a person who was a second language learner (in this case, a person who does not speak English as his or her native language). Second language learners have difficulty comprehending vocabularies and strange words written in the second language. Sometimes they even have difficulty in pronunciation of words including simple words because of the influence of their native language (Wilson, 2000). Telling a story in such a manner either verbally or from a piece of writing would have not made any sense at all to a second language learner.