Redacted

1000001910000019 Alum Member
edited April 2020 in Off-topic 3279 karma

Redacted

Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • theLSATgrind2017theLSATgrind2017 Alum Member
    440 karma

    I subvocalize but do not see a difference in timing and find that it actually increases my comprehension of the passage. I do have to be careful though, because it can be distracting for others.

  • Cant Get RightCant Get Right Yearly + Live Member Sage ⭐ 🍌 7Sage Tutor
    27901 karma

    I subvocalize everything I read. I don't even comprehend how it would even work otherwise and don't understand why it is often framed as though it were somehow a remedial practice. It is unlikely coincidental that the overwhelming majority of human written languages are phonetic in nature. (I'm not familiar with one that is not.) Without the subvocal, mental translation, my reading comprehension is effectively 0.

  • J.Y. PingJ.Y. Ping Administrator Instructor
    edited July 2017 14225 karma

    OP and everyone else on this thread, please read this short but on point summary of a neuroscientist's work on language and reading. The summary focuses on debunking the speed reading myth.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-read-fast-and-well-ignore-the-rules-of-the-speed-reading-gurus/2017/01/27/bb77446a-d9e3-11e6-b8b2-cb5164beba6b_story.html?utm_term=.d3708d8bfa5f

    Edit: direct response to OP's question is that subvocalization is a good thing. Phonetics is an important neural pathway to meaning.

  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    edited July 2017 23929 karma

    @"J.Y. Ping" said:
    OP and everyone else on this thread, please read this short but on point summary of a neuroscientist's work on language and reading. The summary focuses on debunking the speed reading myth.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-read-fast-and-well-ignore-the-rules-of-the-speed-reading-gurus/2017/01/27/bb77446a-d9e3-11e6-b8b2-cb5164beba6b_story.html?utm_term=.d3708d8bfa5f

    Edit: direct response to OP's question is that subvocalization is a good thing. Phonetics is an important neural pathway to meaning.

    Interesting read! I remember reading tons of debunking myths of subvocalization vis-a-vis speed reading. Like I said in my comment above, I just think the important take away is that RC isn't necessarily about reading faster, but comprehending. Moreover, it seems like developing a good memory is the best way to do better on RC once you have the fundamentals down. That's why I truly think 7Sage's memory method for RC makes the most sense out of all the other techniques out there.

  • akistotleakistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌
    edited July 2017 9382 karma

    @"J.Y. Ping" said:
    OP and everyone else on this thread, please read this short but on point summary of a neuroscientist's work on language and reading. The summary focuses on debunking the speed reading myth.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-read-fast-and-well-ignore-the-rules-of-the-speed-reading-gurus/2017/01/27/bb77446a-d9e3-11e6-b8b2-cb5164beba6b_story.html?utm_term=.d3708d8bfa5f

    Edit: direct response to OP's question is that subvocalization is a good thing. Phonetics is an important neural pathway to meaning.

    @"J.Y. Ping" said:
    OP and everyone else on this thread, please read this short but on point summary of a neuroscientist's work on language and reading. The summary focuses on debunking the speed reading myth.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/want-to-read-fast-and-well-ignore-the-rules-of-the-speed-reading-gurus/2017/01/27/bb77446a-d9e3-11e6-b8b2-cb5164beba6b_story.html?utm_term=.d3708d8bfa5f

    Edit: direct response to OP's question is that subvocalization is a good thing. Phonetics is an important neural pathway to meaning.

    At one point, I devoted some time to speed reading apps (like Spreeder) and worked hard to reduce subvocalization because speed reading was advocated by a free LSAT email course (I won't mention the name)....

    But when I try to read faster, everything on the LSAT became alphabet soup.

    The Sad Truth About Speed-Reading: It Doesn’t Work (from New York Magazine)
    http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/04/the-sad-truth-about-speed-reading-it-doesnt-work.html
    "In the end, the only reliable way to become a faster reader, then, is to expand your vocabulary — and the best way to do that is to read more. There is no shortcut, in other words, to getting through the three towering stacks of unread books currently threatening to topple over and cause a literary avalanche on my desk. The only way to read faster is to read a lot."

    There is no shortcut. We have to read more.

  • 1000001910000019 Alum Member
    3279 karma

    Thanks for the replies. While I do agree that much of the speed reading market is filled with self-proclaimed gurus with a drink the kool-aid attitude, I do not believe all speed reading is a gimmick.

    Peter Kump, the author of Breakthrough Rapid Reading, dismisses the idea of completely removing subvocalisation. In short, his ideas are about learning how/where to place an emphasis and recognizing that you can't absorb 100% of the material in one read.

    I made this thread after reading a post by Graeme Blake that related to speed reading (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=213178&sid=227004426346741d9b03f2350bf0dc78&start=25#p6962521).

    The poll has me convinced though. I'm going to subvocalise every word.

  • AlexAlex Alum Member ⭐
    23929 karma

    @USER123456 said:
    Thanks for the replies. While I do agree that much of the speed reading market is filled with self-proclaimed gurus with a drink the kool-aid attitude, I do not believe all speed reading is a gimmick.

    Peter Kump, the author of Breakthrough Rapid Reading, dismisses the idea of completely removing subvocalisation. In short, his ideas are about learning how/where to place an emphasis and recognizing that you can't absorb 100% of the material in one read.

    I made this thread after reading a post by Graeme Blake that related to speed reading (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=213178&sid=227004426346741d9b03f2350bf0dc78&start=25#p6962521).

    The poll has me convinced though. I'm going to subvocalise every word.

    Yeah, I'm on the same page as you with now being convinced to just subvocalize.

  • Seeking PerfectionSeeking Perfection Alum Member
    4428 karma

    This is a little late, but I certainly don't subvocalize. I read a lot slower and more carefully on the LSAT than for fun or for school, but never considered slowing down enough to subvocalize.

    Even if it improves comprehension the time loss would be a concern to me. If you read the material two or three times slower just to subvocalize, then you have much less time to check your answers.

    Of course, I wouldn't recommend trying to read faster during the test. Just read at your natural pace. If you have done much reading for fun in your life, there is a good chance that you stopped subvocalizing out of eagerness to get to the next page. If you did, it's probably far too late to go back.

    As far as the OP goes, more power to you if you subvocalize while reading for pleasure. Don't change for the LSAT.

    If your ever on a roadtrip with a member of my family during one of our read aloud books though, be forewarned. You have to keep a careful watch out on the other people in the car or they will read ahead since we all read much faster silently than we can either subvocalizing or aloud. In fact the person doing the reading often gives away any dramatic turns with a gasp by reading ahead on the page as he or she reads it aloud. This can sometimes spoil the dramatic moments in the book, but often allows text to be read aloud with more appropriate emotion. I'd say its a net neutral for the listening driver.

    I miss the odd reading comprehension question (maybe one a test on average) but it is usually one that is just a little bit difficult and if I have enough time to think about it at the end I am more likely to get it right.

  • tanes256tanes256 Alum Member
    2573 karma

    I remember seeing a post about this some time ago and I meant to follow through with it, but yeah... So how exactly do you read without subvocalizing? It just seems so foreign to me. I've read plenty of stuff just because I had to but had no clue what I'd read because I was just hurrying along to say I'd read. I think Spreeder was recommended but I never got around to it. Seems like it would take lots of rewiring at this age to accomplish.

Sign In or Register to comment.