Timeline for Why can't we understand text without subvocalizating it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 23, 2022 at 13:58 | comment | added | Octopus | @SteinG.Strindhaug yeah, you're right. The title is stupid. My main thought was actually how do I get rid of the dumb subvocalizing becasue I feel like something was preventing me from running? You're saying you don't do this so maybe you have some secret recipe that would boost/free my reading skills? | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 11:18 | comment | added | Stein G. Strindhaug | Also, even if you don't believe my experience; anyone who is born deaf cannot possibly "hear" the words when they read; and sign languages use an entirely different grammar and word order so they cannot "see" the words as signs either because the's not a one to one relation between the languages. Or are you disputing that deaf people can read? | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 11:08 | comment | added | Stein G. Strindhaug | I tried to add this as an answer, but it was deleted because apparently it's anecdotal. But when the premise of the question is "X is always true", you need a LOT of evidence to prove this statement is true; but very few counter examples to prove it wrong. | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 10:57 | comment | added | Stein G. Strindhaug | So the premise of the question is false; it is possible to understand text without subvocalising because some people do. | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 10:55 | comment | added | Stein G. Strindhaug | Not everyone subvocalises. Unless you redefine "subvocalize" to mean understanding; it's entirely possible to read without "hearing" it and just get the meaning directly from the text. I don't think in words most of the time, so I don't read in words either. Reading while "voice acting" in my head; which I can chose to do; just slows me down and prevents me from understanding what I read. | |
| Oct 29, 2016 at 3:26 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCogSci/status/792205863972904960 | ||
| Oct 15, 2016 at 20:00 | comment | added | user9634 | Maybe we could try teaching someone to read before they are exposed to hearing spoken language and see how they can comprehend written words? Wait... Congenitally deaf people. Ask them! | |
| Oct 15, 2016 at 17:57 | comment | added | Eric Roper | I knew a girl that claimed to read both front and facing pages in novels at the same time. If true I think this rules out the need for subvocalization towards understanding. For me though, I cannot use new terminology unless I first figure how to pronounce it. | |
| Oct 14, 2016 at 14:42 | answer | added | user9634 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Oct 14, 2016 at 14:29 | comment | added | user9634 | @RobinKramer I suspect that the word 'subvocalize' is being used incorrectly in this question. Normally it refers to: someone moving their mouth and throat (even minutely) as if they were going to speak, but not actually making sound. But it seems that the question refers to the experience of 'hearing' words of text in one's mind while reading. | |
| Oct 13, 2016 at 23:32 | answer | added | socrateslopes | timeline score: 8 | |
| Oct 13, 2016 at 17:28 | comment | added | Octopus | Exactly, only if we name it but we don't have to name it to recognize or to understand it. You can move through the city or a forest with any speed and you instantly know what you see, you don't have to say oh, it's a tree I have to go around it but you cannot move as fast through text that has no meaning until converted into sound :-( | |
| Oct 13, 2016 at 15:10 | comment | added | user13957 | "we don't subvocalize/describe a forest, a street or anything" I guess we do. Because we categorize (or cognise) these things only if we named it. So categorisation (and, consequently, thinking) is probably impossible without language. And language, in turn, based on vocalization. However, I guess it tells about the current state of our approach in thinking, and not about fundamental impossibility. | |
| Oct 12, 2016 at 6:56 | comment | added | Octopus | @RobinKramer indeed subvoc slows you down because I can read only as fast as I can say the words in my mind and I can say them as fast as I can speak even if I only think I speak. I spoke to many people and even if they thought they wouldn't subvocalize they all confirmed that they were all speaking in their minds. Reading is not the only thing we subvocalize. Also when you think you do it too. If you are mad at something you don't just think you're mad and that's it, you say bad words to yourself even if no one can hear you - the same when you think of something you talk to yourself ;-/ | |
| Oct 12, 2016 at 6:49 | comment | added | Robin Kramer-ten Have | Do people always subvocalize? In fact, I heard that people who subvocalize texts read slower, and that faster readers do not subvocalize (or do it less often). | |
| Oct 11, 2016 at 22:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 29, 2016 at 3:06 | |||||
| Oct 11, 2016 at 20:02 | history | edited | Octopus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 210 characters in body
|
| Oct 11, 2016 at 19:55 | history | edited | Octopus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 210 characters in body
|
| Oct 11, 2016 at 19:49 | review | First posts | |||
| Oct 11, 2016 at 21:59 | |||||
| Oct 11, 2016 at 19:41 | history | asked | Octopus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |