From: Greg Jordan (jordan@chuma.cas.usf.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 18 2003 - 10:56:01 MST
I wonder if subvocalization is really a problem for speed. I know a blind
guy who listens to the Web & email via a machine reader - and he has the
speed turned up so fast I couldn't even make out it was speech. It's
marvelous - he can process speech at a much faster rate than anyone can
speak in natural language. It seems then one could subvocalize also at a
high rate of speed...
gej
resourcesoftheworld.org
jordan@chum.cas.usf.edu
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Dickey, Michael F wrote:
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 10:58:25 -0500
> From: "Dickey, Michael F" <michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com>
> Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
> To: "'extropians@extropy.org'" <extropians@extropy.org>
> Subject: RE: Increasing Reading speed, Please reply
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gts [mailto:gts_2000@yahoo.com]
>
> Nate wrote:
>
> > What are the best ways to increase reading speed. Does increasing
> > speed have drawbacks. Do the computer programs give you results, if
> > so how much are they exaggerating the results they advertize.
> > Let me know thanks, Nate
>
> "The trick to speed reading is learning how not to "sound out" the words in
> one's mind as one reads. But as above it pleases me to sound out the words
> in my mind as I read, and so I lost interest in speed reading. "
>
> Nate, I second gts's comments, I read often and have read a lot about speed
> reading but was quite skeptical of it. The other day I gave it a shot while
> reading something I didn't particular enjoy but needed to read. You have to
> concentrate on not subvocalizing as you read (I understand some people do
> not, and I wonder if deaf from birth people read faster) because reading in
> that manner limits your speed to the subvocalization speed. As I understand
> it, the process is something like
>
> 1) brain recognizes word through pattern recognition
> 2) word is subvocalized
> 3) word entered into memory (kind of)
>
> When looking at it like that, its hard to understand what the
> subvocalization is for, since part of recognizing a word necessarily entails
> recognizing that word! So anyway, I tried it the other day and made a
> concentrated effort to not subvocalize but I lead my eyes in the reading
> with a finger (another tactic often suggested) After each sentence I would
> stop and attempt to repeat the sentence, to my astonishment I found I often
> could repeat it word for word, with more accuracy than if I had
> subvocalized. The retentioned seemed to be better than the conventional
> type of reading, but it is very difficult to get used to reading without
> subvocalization, its like soaking up information without your upper level of
> conciousness being aware of it. I think that might be the role
> subvocalization plays, your super fast pattern recognition and information
> processing capable brain telling your relatively dimwitted serial process
> simulated 'conciousness' that you are in fact reading.
>
> I need to practice more, but I keep tending back to subvocalized reading as
> gts mentions, because it seems more enjoyable?
>
> Michael Dickey.
>
>
>
>
>
> LEGAL NOTICE
> Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 18 2003 - 10:58:56 MST