3 ms·

Curious. I don't read "out loud, but silently" (if you see what I mean). I don't hear the words in my head as I read. I trained myself at age 8 or 9 to read

Curious. I don't read "out loud, but silently" (if you see what I mean). I don't hear the words in my head as I read. I trained myself at age 8 or 9 to read very, very fast by not "sounding out" things in my head. Net result is that I get confused quickly by misspellings. Then I need to backtrack and read things "out loud" while trying not to see what's there. Which is tricky.

pbhjpbhj 16y ago
It's not sounding out as if I read aloud it's definitely much faster but it's also a phonic process to some extent. Scanning is less phonic in that no single words get sounded but somewhere there is a subconscious process still make phonic analysis I think - I can scan your comment for example and tell someone it's meaning but not the words you used. Were you an early reader? I read at age 11 when I was 6 (although formal reading ages weren't assigned then).
- RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
  I don't really know how old I was when I learned to read - certainly I was reading by age 4, and probably reading at a standard of age 10 when I entered school at age 5. But that's a guess. And it seems to me that I have two modes of reading: fast and "normal." In both I have trouble with misspellings that create alternate or near alternate parses, and yet in "normal" I do "hear the voices in my head." So it's not just that. At this point I'm reminded of the tennis player who was losing a match, and during the change-over he said admiringly to his oppenent: "Your serve is the most fluid, flowing and graceful serve I've ever seen." "Thank you" replied his opponent. At the next change of ends he asked: "On the ball toss, do you breathe in or out?" His opponent didn't reply, but did lose his next 6 service games as he wondered. I probably won't think too much more about exactly what happens when I read. Besides, I've heard that double-blind experiments in psychology and linguistics often produce results contrary to those produced by introspection. I think I'll stick to math and hacking.
  - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
    Lol, thanks for your thoughts.

pbhjpbhj 16y ago

It's not sounding out as if I read aloud it's definitely much faster but it's also a phonic process to some extent. Scanning is less phonic in that no single words get sounded but somewhere there is a subconscious process still make phonic analysis I think - I can scan your comment for example and tell someone it's meaning but not the words you used. Were you an early reader? I read at age 11 when I was 6 (although formal reading ages weren't assigned then).

RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
I don't really know how old I was when I learned to read - certainly I was reading by age 4, and probably reading at a standard of age 10 when I entered school at age 5. But that's a guess. And it seems to me that I have two modes of reading: fast and "normal." In both I have trouble with misspellings that create alternate or near alternate parses, and yet in "normal" I do "hear the voices in my head." So it's not just that. At this point I'm reminded of the tennis player who was losing a match, and during the change-over he said admiringly to his oppenent: "Your serve is the most fluid, flowing and graceful serve I've ever seen." "Thank you" replied his opponent. At the next change of ends he asked: "On the ball toss, do you breathe in or out?" His opponent didn't reply, but did lose his next 6 service games as he wondered. I probably won't think too much more about exactly what happens when I read. Besides, I've heard that double-blind experiments in psychology and linguistics often produce results contrary to those produced by introspection. I think I'll stick to math and hacking.
- pbhjpbhj 16y ago
  Lol, thanks for your thoughts.