Text Comprehension and Analysis
This domain tests how well you understand and analyse an unseen Sorbian non-fiction text, usually a journalistic commentary, report, essay or speech. You must identify the main thesis, reconstruct the argument, explain vocabulary in context and distinguish the author’s attitude from the facts reported. The exam expects close reading, not general knowledge about the topic.
A reliable reading procedure
- First pass (gist): read the headline, subheading, first and last paragraphs; write one sentence: what is the text about and what does the author want?
- Second pass (structure): number the paragraphs and label their function: anecdote, thesis, evidence, concession, rebuttal, conclusion.
- Third pass (detail): underline signal words (pak, wšak, tuž, přetož, dokelž, na přikład) and mark any shift from fact to opinion.
- Answer with line references and paraphrase in your own Sorbian; quote only key terms.
Core concepts
- Thesis vs example: the thesis is the claim the whole text defends; examples and statistics support it.
- Argument structure: claim, grounds, implicit warrant, concession, rebuttal. A concession is not the thesis, even when it occupies a full paragraph.
- Tone: ironic, polemical, neutral, sympathetic. Identify the linguistic signals: rhetorical questions, evaluative adjectives, exaggeration, understatement.
- Text type: a report aims to inform; a commentary evaluates; an essay reflects. The task’s verb tells you which response is required.
Worked example
A commentary on bilingual signage in Bautzen opens with a personal anecdote, then cites a council decision, then concedes that signs cost money, and finally argues that legal obligations and practical orientation outweigh the cost. A weak answer calls the text ‘about costs’ because paragraph three is long. The reasoning that earns marks: the anecdote frames the issue, the council decision supplies grounds, the cost paragraph is a concession introduced by a contrast marker, and the final paragraph contains the thesis - bilingual signage is a legal duty and a low-cost public service. The author’s attitude is therefore supportive but not uncritical.
Traps that cost marks
Treating the first sentence as the thesis; summarising paragraph by paragraph instead of reconstructing the argument; confusing the author’s opinion with a quoted view; importing outside knowledge about Sorbian policy; ignoring the headline and subheading; and paraphrasing so closely that the answer reproduces the source instead of explaining it.