/lit/ - Literature

>>18415469
What album?

>>18415469
>Do you actually read the words out loud in your head when you read? It's apparently a very inefficient way to consume literature.
You practice it for a few weeks or months to calibrate your reading comprehension and after that you stop reading loud.

>>18415469
Yes.
If reading was about consuming information than it wouldn't be fun.

>>18415469
I just wanna bite the inside of those meaty thighs right next to her pussy gently but firmly enough to get her revved up before I start devouring that pussy on my knees, pussy juice pouring into my mouth.

I want to rape her

>>18415469
I do because it helps me concentrate and picture the “scenes” but I’m also retarded

>>18415469
Of course I do. I don't give the slightest fuck about "efficiency."

>>18415469
If it had a dick it would be so fucking good

Yes
T. Reading iliad

>>18415469
Yes for fiction because i enjoy prose
Yes for non fiction because I absurd more information that way

>>18415469
When i read alone i don't suffer from subvocalization no. But on the other hand i do read out loud especially for my girlfriend who likes to hear me before bed.

>>18415469
only for the first few sentences when I pick up the book again

>>18415682
>because I absurd more

>>18416707
>he doesn't absurd information from his books
I feel sorry for you

>>18415469
no, I don't subvocalise, unless I've found I've skipped a passage and need to get back into the groove. Then I subvocalise one or two sentances and I'm back.

I always walk while reading
classical music is great for reading
I read out loud if I want I don't give a shit

yes anon, that's what reading is

>>18416991
i also read out loud, and i only read in the library

>>18417063
Sir you are wrong, OP is referring to subvocalisation. Not everyone needs to do that when reading.
Some people on this board would argue the smarter you are the less you need to subvocalise, I doubt that and assume it has to do more with how that individuals brain works.

>>18415469
mmm that fat mound

>>18415469
I do that when I'm reading something with condensed complexity that I am trying to understand whilst I read it.
I did this during my last book Dante - Inferno, because he packs a lot of information in a single sentence that also includes words and format I'm unfamiliar with.
I'm unwinding by reading another novel by Desmond Bagley which is very easy and fast going. Last time I read Desmond Bagley - High Citadel in 2 days after work, that's too fast for an inner voice.
I also just started reading books this year if that matters

>>18417066
Based

What is life like for the average subvocalizer?

I like how words sound so yes I usually read "aloud" in my head. For textbooks I am more worried about comprehending the information.

>>18417920
I live with me mum.

>>18415522
I would marry her

>>18417069
> the smarter you are the less you need to subvocalise
>and assume it has to do more with how that individuals brain works.
What's the difference?

I naturally subvocalize but I can force myself not to, mostly by reading fast. But even then I usually do it to an extent.

>>18415469
i am not sure what is not subvocalization. the only similar think i can relate is when i read news tabloids extremely quickly, almost losing half of the words and only understanding it what i just read at the end of the oration, but still getting the retard "new" they are trying to communicate.