Subvocalization and reading

 

Do you know what you are subvocalizating about?

In courses and in speed reading books, subvocalization is a frequent topic. This is when we say the words to ourselves while reading. Since reading is in the service of language and since we learned to read by pronouncing letters and words, it is logical that subvocalization, as part of the phonetic network, is an inevitable element of understanding what is written.

Some courses and speed reading books strongly emphasize eliminating or reducing subvocalization. Because what do we need? It consumes a lot of resources and limits our reading speed by the speed of pronunciation: for pronunciation, additional centers in the brain need to be engaged and the maximum speed of pronunciation is up to 400 words per minute. Fast readers far exceed this speed.

Therefore, in some courses, all the effort went into devising somewhat ridiculous exercises - hold the pencil with your teeth while you read; keep water in your mouth while reading; repeat: "1,2,3,1,2,3" while reading; etc., hum. I'm the same way... and it works to some extent.

I have a couple of problems with this. Most people have been using both networks synergistically for years, and turning off (whatever that means to them) one is like losing the entire reading. Also, such exercises for the abolition of subv. they still send resources to the phonetic network.

Blinded from flying

Other courses take the opposite approach. They try to overcome subvocalization with speed - to fly over the text so fast that it is impossible to say anything, or very few words at all. At the same time, the semantic web would get all the attention.

My impression is that this often works with children because some of them quickly develop high reading speeds. I would connect this with the fact that the phonetic and semantic networks do not yet work synchronously enough, so the typical reading abilities of an adult literate person have not yet been developed. Whereby we would hypothetically distinguish between two groups, where in one group phonetic is more dominant in reading, while in the other semantic is more dominant.

I have a hunch that children who quickly master speed reading (already after a couple of days above average) can be recognized before training by the fact that they often mix up words when reading aloud, but have good comprehension. I assume that children for whom the phonetic network is more dominant, master speed reading more slowly (and probably have less motivation).

It is therefore a slightly better approach, but then the question is whether the semantic network is at least minimally strong enough to independently extract meaning. Also, it is difficult to find and maintain the right speed (at least mine) for exercise. Can it be read quickly without my eyes falling out?

Desynchronization

On the other hand, I'm not naive because both approaches make sense. But, I would rely more on laying the foundations in the facts that a) we cannot abolish subvocalization and that b) the phonetic network should interfere less with the semantic one.

So I decided to make it smaller - with exercises I desynchronize the work of these two networks during reading!

The simplest way for me is the exercise: "say-recognize-say-recognize". I simply say one word and then recognize the words until I get the need to say the next word. Here is an example where I marked what is said in red and what is recognized is left Usually:

- I usually try to say as short words as possible or the beginning of longer ones, and I recognize longer words. Because the phonetic is slower, sometimes it seems like they are working at the same time.

So try every second or third word to just recognize it without saying it? It doesn't make sense at first, but then you realize it increases understanding. In the text River perception >> I explained what word recognition means, if it is not completely clear to you.

Sometimes it is necessary to say the word deliberately, otherwise the concentration falls, and so does the understanding. And maybe even sync returns, but in a quieter form. Indicator, memory and understanding starter. Finally, let's take subvocalization as an indicator that both networks are active during reading, and directly tying subvocalization abrogation is a waste of time. From personal experience, at first I only understood the text if I spoke and listened to each word (subvocalization) and when I tried to remove the subvocalization, I didn't understand anything. 

Often when I read and don't understand anything, reading turns to subvocalization for me, as an attempt to extract the meaning at least aurally. But cry. Saying is saying, and understanding is understanding. Only when I read some really difficult texts that the speed is so slow that it simply boils down to analyzing sentences, not reading, then subvocalization helps a lot. A good example are professional books with a lot of new concepts and instructions. In addition to these indications about reading, subvocalization serves as a reading starter for me because for many years I have formed the habit that reading starts with pronunciation. And from time to time, in the middle of reading, if necessary, I say a word on purpose; although less and less.