/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11650750]

>tfw 24
>still subvocalize

[Anonymous No.11650781]

>>11650750
I'm an ESL-fag, so yeah.

[Anonymous No.11650800]

Good, you're supposed to.

See this book by Mark Seidenberg for a review of the science involved in reading. It pretty thoroughly debunks any sort of speed reading claims with empirical evidence.

[Anonymous No.11650805]

>>11650750
Obsessing over how you read instead of what you read is a sign you're not challenging yourself.

[Anonymous No.11650807]

How would you enjoy literature if don't?

[Anonymous No.11650824]

god, i remember this dude in /d2g/ (i have since quit dota for good) that would spam thomas pynchon's face and say

>filthy subvocalizers in my game
>tell them "go top"
>can hear their inner monologue instead of just following the command

he cracked me up

[Anonymous No.11650873]

>>11650800
(((Seidenberg)))

[Anonymous No.11650876]

>>11650750
Me too, but in the end I think it makes me a good close reader and a better reader of poetry. It evens out, I guess.

[Anonymous No.11650879]

>>11650750
>>11650800
From Seidenberg's book

"Most people have the sense that they are saying words to themselves (or hearing them) as they read. Speed-reading programs appeal to the intuition that this habit slows reading. People who subvocalize can only read at the slower rate at which we produce speech, it is argued. By eliminating subvocalization, reading can proceed on a faster, visual basis. Speed-reading programs exhort people to suppress subvocalization, providing exercises to promote the practice.

I said at the outset of the book that people’s intuitions about reading are limited and often misleading. I now present The Subvocalization Fallacy. The sensation that you use information related to the pronunciations of words while you read is not an illusion. However, it is not subvocalization, which is covert speech, as when you repeat something to yourself sotto voce to help to remember it. Skilled readers do something different: they mentally activate the phonological code that allows one to hear the differences between PERmit and perMIT in the mind’s ear. The fallacy in the argument against subvocalization is in equating phonology with speech. Using the phonological code doesn’t limit the reader to the rate at which speech can be produced because there’s no speaking involved."

People telling you to eliminate subvocalization are full of shit. They have no idea what's going on in their own brain.

[Anonymous No.11650884]

>>11650873
/pol/ is over there, dweeb

[Anonymous No.11650889]

>>11650879
Yeah I've always thought speed reading was bullshit. You can't teach someone to be a better or faster reader or to have better reading comprehension. It all comes down to brainpower.

[Anonymous No.11650900]

>>11650800
>>11650873
It is true jews allways subvocalize when reading their shitty books in the bus, tho

[Anonymous No.11650911]

>>11650900
Absolutely true. They openly read stalag and mumble past their enormous noses about the schmekels getting tortured. Sweaty, beady eyes, the works. Gross.

[Anonymous No.11650913]

>>11650911
kek

[Anonymous No.11650931]

>>11650750
this website is unusable

[Anonymous No.11650933]

>>11650931
?

[Anonymous No.11650935]

>tfw never was a subhuman subvocalizer

[Anonymous No.11650946]

>>11650824
what if i told you that was LITERALLY me anon

fucking subhuman subvocalizers never learn

[Anonymous No.11650949]

why is this board consumed with speed reading? shouldn't the appreciation of books be the focus?

is this analogous to speed running a video game? one of the most degenerate, soul consuming things you can do in that hobby?

[Anonymous No.11650956]

>>11650949
lmao it's just a shitpost u fuckin pseud get over yourself've

[Anonymous No.11650959]

>>11650949
if you always subvocalize you have a low bandwidth brain

[Anonymous No.11650963]

>>11650959
This, how many chromosomes do you have? May want to get that checked friend...

[Anonymous No.11650972]

>>11650959
but what difference does it make? does that mean if i read the same book as you in a slower period of time I'm not appreciating it on the same level?

>>11650956
It doesn't seem like a shitpost. These threads regularly get serious replies and your attempt to glaze over the subject with irony (surprise that you would resort to something so base) just reinforces my notion that its a cope mechanism, much like a speed runner uses getting a world record to say "I matter now"

[Anonymous No.11650978]

>>11650972
>but what difference does it make? does that mean if i read the same book as you in a slower period of time I'm not appreciating it on the same level?
it means that i can read things (be they good or bad, high quality or low) far faster than you can

[Anonymous No.11650981]

>>11650978
>i can beat this video game far faster than you can
ok that's what i thought then

[Anonymous No.11650994]

>>11650972
Yeah that image of Donald Duck committing assisted suicide with the help of a monkey, captioned with two words, a number, and an acronym, with a complete sentence nowhere to be found, is totally serious.

[Anonymous No.11650995]

>>11650978
>reads everything faster
>10 minutes later can’t remember any details
>1 hour later only a vague recollection of any ideas expressed
speed reading is a huge waste of time.

[Anonymous No.11650996]

>>11650889
and let's not be humble, you got plenty of that.

[Anonymous No.11651002]

>>11650995
>>11650981
sorry about your inferior brains
you do realize that we can subvocalize anytime we choose to, right?

[Anonymous No.11651012]

When people talk about subvocalizing on here do they mean noticeably mouthing the words or what? Apparently we all “subvocalize” to some degree, although the muscle movements are not very noticeable.

[Anonymous No.11651020]

>>11650750
everyone subvocalizes
not everyone realizes that they do

[Anonymous No.11651021]

holy shit, subbies have a bigger inferiority complex than fucking manlets do

[Anonymous No.11651026]

>>11650996
nah I'm a brainlet but I just like reading and hearing big brains

[Anonymous No.11651028]

>>11651002
Why would you ever not subvocalise? Is there any situation where it’s better to read at 50% comprehension than to get it higher? The only time I can think of is either a deadline or pseud-points for number of books read.

[Anonymous No.11651029]

>>11651012
>Apparently we all “subvocalize” to some degree, although the muscle movements are not very noticeable.
wrong
>>11651020
>everyone subvocalizes
>not everyone realizes that they do
wrong

sorry you're inferior lads

[Anonymous No.11651033]

>>11651021
>subbies

[Anonymous No.11651042]

>>11650824
>>11650946
holy shit lmao i remember him too, sup bros

[Anonymous No.11651045]

>>11651028
>subvocalizing worthless cunts shitposting on the four chins
lmfao i literally have the highest degree of pity for you subbies. Jesus you actually have to read every worthless niggerpost out loud in your head? i would never in a billion years give the worthless subhumans on this worthless shit website one single fucking mental syllable

[Anonymous No.11651064]

By subvocalize do you mean just mouth words silently/read barely audibly or do you also mean simply saying the words in your mind (lips remaining still)? If it is the former only, that is funny because as a Catholic there is this trad priest I frequently listen to who insists mental prayer is superior and a higher form of audible prayer.

[Anonymous No.11651067]

>facebros on /lit/
absolutely based

[Anonymous No.11651090]

>>11651045
I subvocalised this post and it was very funny. Thanks anon

[Anonymous No.11651100]

>>11651067
I'd start posting my console war wojaks but the jannies would actually flip their shit and ban me

[Anonymous No.11651108]

>>11651064
as someone who has never subvocalized except when i force myself to, it's neither.

i look at words
my brain recognizes and processes the words
there is absolutely no vocalization of any kind involved.

I read at something close to 1000 wpm without even trying

i have lost track of how many times i've been unable to pronounce words which i've read and typed thousands or tens of thousands of times.

anytime i watch anything with subtitles i'm always feeling like i'm a lifetime ahead of anyone else watching

it's really something special and i really do pity those of you who cannot escape the mental chains of subvocalization

[Anonymous No.11651111]

>>11650911
Anybody ever had any luck finding Stalag books on #bookz? asking for a friend haha

[Anonymous No.11651125]

>>11651108
i see. i savor the meme but i savor comprehension much more.

[Anonymous No.11651128]

>>11650889
Yeah, its just skimming, nothing more. The claims they make are purely anecdotal and based on zero evidence. It's surprising that people ever took it seriously.

Research has shown that the functioning of the human eye puts on upper limit on how fast one can read. Because of the limited high resolution space on the retina, and the nature of fixations and saccades, the claims of speed reading just cannot possibly true. When they claim to read some large number N words per minute, they are counting words that they skim over and don't actually read (ie, can't have physically even perceived and resolved with the eye).

[Anonymous No.11651136]

>>11651125
It's not a meme. It's like a cheat code for life - like being over 6'1.

It's ironic that subbies, who claim to have such forced comprehension, always miss the fact that we can at any time stoop to your infantile level and subvocalize content which deserves it.

[Anonymous No.11651141]

>>11651128
This is probably actually harmful to reading comprehension because not only are you not actually reading the words, but your brain will fill in the blanks with whatever it wants. If you actually didn't read it, you wouldn't assume what was in it, but if you speed """""read""""" you're prone to just make shit up about what you read.

[Anonymous No.11651145]

>>11651136
it seems like another e-peen stroking, empty victory. i will continue on in my life of beauty while you worry yourself about your ego.

[Anonymous No.11651150]

>>11651145
>I can't possible conceive of people who aren't cucked by subvocalization, so i'll deny it's possible

Do you think everyone in the world is stuck being a wageslave too?

[Anonymous No.11651153]

>>11651108
obvious shitpost, but it isn't even possible for the human eye to see 1000 wpm (and by see I mean with enough detail to actually identify the word, ie not peripheral vision), in case anyone thought he was serious

[Anonymous No.11651163]

>>11651090
>baiting non-subbies into making seething posts that sound funny to subbies
genius

[Anonymous No.11651165]

>>11651153
>he isn't even aware that knowledge of preceding words, sentences and other factors reduce the possibility space of the words that come after by orders of magnitude
my god i'm talking to people who are brainlets on more levels than just reading speed aren't i

[Anonymous No.11651169]

>>11651150
that is not what i said, you are just fixated on the aspect of it that fuels your pride. typical tryhard /lit/ poster whose eyes are closed off to the fullness of beauty, which requires humility

[Anonymous No.11651178]

>>11651169
i don't feel any pride in not subvocalizing. i was blessed with it since birth. i did nothing to deserve it

i only want to drive home the point of how amazing it is. i imagine only being born into massive wealth could come close.

[Anonymous No.11651185]

How did you get past the captcha robot detector?

[Anonymous No.11651186]

>he can't differentiate between being egotistical and merely pretending to be in order to make other people on 4chan feel bad so they get angry (and maybe even kill themselves if you're lucky)
fucking redditors have no idea what this website is all about

[Anonymous No.11651187]

>>11651165
>tfw you meet a guy who thinks he's special
>tfw he doesn't read in a zigzag pattern in reverse and play mental tetris and watch a video playing out every thematic representation in the background while listening in the author's voice, as he would to his beloved son in his comfy bed every night

[Anonymous No.11651188]

i dont subvocalize but i do incredibly autistic things like attempt described facial expressions or hold my breath when characters do. that being said, when i'm alone i tend to think aloud

[Anonymous No.11651192]

>>11651188
>attempt described facial expressions
literally me

[Anonymous No.11651197]

If you are reading prose fiction you have no reason not to subvocalize. You wouldn't read poetry and try to skim it would you?

[Anonymous No.11651201]

>>11650750
>>11650800
>>11650879
It's more subtle than either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocalization

Advocates of speed reading generally claim that subvocalization places extra burden on the cognitive resources, thus, slowing the reading down.[28] Speedreading courses often prescribe lengthy practices to eliminate subvocalizing when reading. Normal reading instructors often simply apply remedial teaching to a reader who subvocalizes to the degree that they make visible movements on the lips, jaw, or throat.[29]

Furthermore, fMRI studies comparing fast and slow readers (during a reading task) indicate that between the two groups there are significant differences in the brain areas being activated. In particular, it was found that rapid readers show lower activation in the brain regions associated with speech, which indicates that the higher speeds were attained, in part, by the reduction in subvocalization.[30]

At the slower rates (memorizing, learning, and reading for comprehension), subvocalizing by the reader is very detectable. At the faster rates of reading (skimming and scanning), subvocalization is less detectable. For competent readers, subvocalizing to some extent even at scanning rates is normal.[29]

Typically, subvocalizing is an inherent part of reading and understanding a word. Micro-muscle tests suggest that full and permanent elimination of subvocalizing is impossible. This may originate in the way people learn to read by associating the sight of words with their spoken sounds. Sound associations for words are indelibly imprinted on the nervous system—even of deaf people, since they will have associated the word with the mechanism for causing the sound or a sign in a particular sign language.[citation needed]

At the slower reading rates (100-300 words per minute), subvocalizing may improve comprehension.[3] Subvocalizing or actual vocalizing can indeed be of great help when one wants to learn a passage verbatim. This is because the person is repeating the information in an auditory way, as well as seeing the piece on the paper.

[Anonymous No.11651204]

>>11651108
>there is absolutely no vocalization of any kind involved.
Wrong. It is impossible to eliminate completely.

[Anonymous No.11651205]

>>11651204
Empirically incorrect.
Cite your sources

[Anonymous No.11651409]

Why should I speed read when I can subvocalize just as fast?

[Anonymous No.11651727]

>>11651111
I too would like these quads answered

[Anonymous No.11651767]

>>11650750
Subvocalization improves memory retention.

[Anonymous No.11651779]

>>11650750
>subvocalize
It's great. You should actually go full voalization. It's even better.

[Anonymous No.11652054]

>>11651021
>subbies

Nice one, Punchy.

[Anonymous No.11652059]

test

[Anonymous No.11652248]

I had no idea I did this or that it it's considered a bad thing until now. This is how I do all my thinking, I know no way to think other than this. I even do it as I type this, thinking the words as I write them. Am I retarded?

[Anonymous No.11652263]

>>11652248
No. Only phaggots who don't into thinking try to get rid of subvocalization in order to read faster.

Literature is written to be pronounced and philosophy is written to be read carefully - so avoiding subvocalisation is only useful if you are dealing with bureaucracy.

[Anonymous No.11652270]

>>11651169
>you are just fixated on the aspect of it that fuels your pride

what do you think this board is for

[Anonymous No.11652311]

>>11651108
>i have lost track of how many times i've been unable to pronounce words which i've read and typed thousands or tens of thousands of times.
literally me.
sometimes i read a book so fast i absolutey cannot remember anything i've read, feels amazing.

[Anonymous No.11652318]

>>11652263
Oh hey thank goodness. I did more thinking and realized I guess some of my thinking doesn't rely on words, but I generally have words for anything beyond instant reaction to input. For example I see something sliding and know instantly it is sliding because what it is resting on is angled and wet without using words, but I mentally think STOP as I reach to grab it before it falls. It almost frightens be to think more than this is given to wordless thought in some people, I would imagine this makes them more impulsive? It almost feels like letting your subconscious / background routines run the show.

[Anonymous No.11652326]

I subvocalize when I read books and dont when reading things like this shithole website