4 ms·

> The example that has stuck with me is when St. Augustine marvels in his Confessions that Bishop Ambrose of Milan could read without moving his lips, suggestin

> The example that has stuck with me is when St. Augustine marvels in his Confessions that Bishop Ambrose of Milan could read without moving his lips, suggesting that at one time all thought was subvocalized speech I would not read too much into that. That could also be the way he was taught to read. Also my wife said she had that same issue. She learned to read by reading out loud and having people read to her. She then could not contextualize anything unless she read it out loud. But she taught herself to read silently. Then add to that some people do not have an inner monolog. But function perfectly fine with everyone else. So trying to form fit a history onto that may not be a good idea.

lou1306 5y ago
Furthermore, books were much harder to read back in Ambrose's time. I think I would have a hard time dealing with handwriting on parchment without reading out loud.
- KMag 5y ago
  ... don't forget a lack of standardized spelling, sometimes requiring phonetic processing of the characters in order to figure out what is being spelled.
Joker_vD 5y ago
Then again, there are experiments conducted on silent-reading/fast-reading people (yes, those people being university students) that show that if they're asked to read aloud, they actually comprehend less of what they've just read than when they read silently. Being a fast reader and a generally quite person myself, I can confirm that: in my case it happens, I believe, because my attention shifts to speaking.
- wpietri 5y ago
  This resonates for me. Reading for me started as a visual process; I could make it through entire novels without thinking about how to say the character's names out loud. Or quite a lot of other words. It let me read much faster than others, but it had downsides. E.g., I'd miss puns and wordplay. Poetry meant nothing to me, and even now I find it much easier to appreciate it when read out loud.
nescioquid 5y ago
I don't know when people quit vocalizing as they read to themselves, but I suspect it may have had a lot to do with the Carolingian renaissance that gave us spaces between words. I recall an experience trying to read through a Latin text without spaces and punctuation. It was very slow going. But I decided to try just reading aloud, and OMG, how much easier it became to understand! It was a little disorienting because even though I was reading and speaking the sounds I saw on the page, I had no interpretation of it until I heard my own voice speaking the text. I hadn't considered that there is probably also a conditioning component to silent/aloud reading until you described what your wife went through.
- astrange 5y ago
  Well, many people on Earth do still read languages without space between words. (Chinese for instance) Their languages are adapted to it; Japanese is okay to read without spaces with kanji, but when written for children without kanji it typically uses spaces or else it is very hard to follow without reading aloud.

lou1306 5y ago

Furthermore, books were much harder to read back in Ambrose's time. I think I would have a hard time dealing with handwriting on parchment without reading out loud.

KMag 5y ago
... don't forget a lack of standardized spelling, sometimes requiring phonetic processing of the characters in order to figure out what is being spelled.

Joker_vD 5y ago

Then again, there are experiments conducted on silent-reading/fast-reading people (yes, those people being university students) that show that if they're asked to read aloud, they actually comprehend less of what they've just read than when they read silently. Being a fast reader and a generally quite person myself, I can confirm that: in my case it happens, I believe, because my attention shifts to speaking.

wpietri 5y ago
This resonates for me. Reading for me started as a visual process; I could make it through entire novels without thinking about how to say the character's names out loud. Or quite a lot of other words. It let me read much faster than others, but it had downsides. E.g., I'd miss puns and wordplay. Poetry meant nothing to me, and even now I find it much easier to appreciate it when read out loud.

nescioquid 5y ago

I don't know when people quit vocalizing as they read to themselves, but I suspect it may have had a lot to do with the Carolingian renaissance that gave us spaces between words. I recall an experience trying to read through a Latin text without spaces and punctuation. It was very slow going. But I decided to try just reading aloud, and OMG, how much easier it became to understand! It was a little disorienting because even though I was reading and speaking the sounds I saw on the page, I had no interpretation of it until I heard my own voice speaking the text. I hadn't considered that there is probably also a conditioning component to silent/aloud reading until you described what your wife went through.

astrange 5y ago
Well, many people on Earth do still read languages without space between words. (Chinese for instance) Their languages are adapted to it; Japanese is okay to read without spaces with kanji, but when written for children without kanji it typically uses spaces or else it is very hard to follow without reading aloud.