Yes, I know Google is my friend, but I'd rather ask you.

[CezeN]

Does anyone here actually read blocks of texts at a time, instead of word by word?

[Petrie]

"Man, that's not how I imagined X sounded at all!"

This is what I hear when I read, but removed or at a distance if that makes sense. I hear my voice, the way it sounds to me when I'm speaking out loud, but it is not so strong/close. I can't imagine it not being there.


I also read tragically slow.

[Luet]

I actually have a slightly different voice for each of you.

I joke and call it a narrator, but it's not like it's an individual voice.

Well, I guess I can see how you would hear people's posts in different voices. Although, I don't think I hear posts in any specific voice. I connect the words with the person writing it but I don't hear any internal voice.

[Young Val]

Does anyone here actually read blocks of texts at a time, instead of word by word?

:::raises hand:::

[mr_thebrain]

I hear my voice, the way it sounds to me when I'm speaking out loud, but it is not so strong/close. I can't imagine it not being there.

that's how it is for me too. though right now i'm trying to not read with a internal narrative just to see if i can but apparently i can't do it.

i just realized i'm doing it while i'm typing too.

[CezeN]

Does anyone here actually read blocks of texts at a time, instead of word by word?

:::raises hand:::

I forget, are you also one of the ones without the internal narrator?

You and Luet are giving me enough hope that this speedreading thing is actual possible for me to get down, which might inspire me to spend more time on it.

However, I'm trying to decide whether I should focus more on the reading in blocks of texts way OR by losing my inner narrator, which is currently impossible for me to do.

[powerfulcheese04]

I've been thinking about this since I read it. I have such a hard time figuring it out, honestly! I'm pretty sure I do not have an internal narrator and that I read blocks of text instead of word-by-word. I read and process so quickly that it's difficult for me to stop and analyze what I'm doing.

[CezeN]

Lol give it another try.

When you read in blocks of text, how exactly do you do it?

Like, for example, when I read I put my eyes on a word, scan it, and move onto the next. When you read, you put your eyes where? About how many words do you take in at a time? You're equally aware of all the words in a given area, despite where ever your eyes are actually focused on - and despite words being on different lines?

I can't even concieve of being able to do it how I think ou guys do it. I think you're all freaks! (jk)

[Luet]

Based on the last book I read, I think I read about 100 pages an hour as well. It was 530 pages and I read it in a little over 5 hours. I think I'm a fast reader but not superfast or anything.

I definitely don't read each word at a time but I don't read whole paragraphs either. I kind of scan sentences or parts of sentences. It's hard to explain but it almost feels like my eyes get wider to focus on more. Like when you are looking at one of those magic eye puzzles? I'm not explaining this well because it's not like my eyes bug out or anything, it's just a slight feeling.

You've probably seen this meme that was being passed around awhile ago. But if you can read this without thinking, then you probably don't *really* read one word at a time.

Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

[Syphon the Sun]

But if you can read this without thinking, then you probably don't *really* read one word at a time.

I don't think that's true. I subvocalize my reading and, the first time that was chain-forwarded to me, I only noticed a few errors.

Also: this (the last two sections are the interesting ones).

[Young Val]

Does anyone here actually read blocks of texts at a time, instead of word by word?

:::raises hand:::

I forget, are you also one of the ones without the internal narrator?

You and Luet are giving me enough hope that this speedreading thing is actual possible for me to get down, which might inspire me to spend more time on it.

However, I'm trying to decide whether I should focus more on the reading in blocks of texts way OR by losing my inner narrator, which is currently impossible for me to do.

I read blocks of text at a time AND I have an internal narrator. And each character has a voice. When reading fiction, I also "see" what's happening in my mind while I'm also reading the actual words on the page (I never, ever, ever use movie versions of characters in my mind. I create them completely from imagination). When I read I really do feel more or less transported. Intellectually I know that I'm reading, physically, I don't feel like I'm READING. It's like I split off in two: the part reading the words, and the part immersed in the story.

(Ditto to what Jeff said. Everyone on Pweb has a "voice" in my mind, and I specifically did NOT listen to the recordings of everyone's voices in the one thread, because I didn't want my "mind voices" for all of you to be altered).


Speed reading is different and I never, ever do it for fiction.

[Petrie]

And each character has a voice.

To show the extent to which I can't/don't do this, if I'm reading a book featuring non-American characters -Harry Potter, for instance- I read them in American accents, make it some ways and then stop to remind myself they're British and have one of the coolest accents on earth, readjust my mental/narrator accent, make it about a page, and then, without realizing it, slip back into my regular narrator voice.

(Ditto to what Jeff said. Everyone on Pweb has a "voice" in my mind, and I specifically did NOT listen to the recordings of everyone's voices in the one thread, because I didn't want my "mind voices" for all of you to be altered).

I don't hear voices for Pwebbers, despite either hearing all those recordings or having spoken with a good chunk of them on the phone. I "hear" their "voice," as in am familiar with and recognize their personality in their posts, but I can't/don't read it and change my narrator's voice to hear it how it would sound actually coming from them.




Also, since you guys are mentioning about how many pages you can make it through in an hour, I'll go ahead and admit mine, to show there was no exaggeration on the "tragically slow" part. I can do, depending on the level of the book, 40-60 pages an hour.

I don't know what to attribute that to; I sometimes think maybe I have some sort of reading comprehension issue or some minor attention issue, because reading can be likened to surfing Wikipedia or Tv Tropes. I'll be merrily reading along, I'll hit a certain word, nothing special, just a word that will trigger a tangent in my head, and I'll get stuck going down that tangent and before I know it, I've just spent 5 minutes thinking about something entirely unrelated to the story. Even with books I really enjoy.

Anyhow, that speed, or lack thereof, really made reading a struggle for me before and I have to admit, it can make it frustrating now, but I'm too lazy and don't care enough to spend time trying to improve my speed. I'm slow, it doesn't make me stupid, I've accepted this.

[Wil]

Does anyone here have any G+ invites?

[Young Val]

I'm slow, it doesn't make me stupid, I've accepted this.

So true. David is one of the slowest readers I've ever met in my life. He's also one of the most intelligent people I know. And his lack of speed does not indicate a lack of enjoyment. He adores books and loves to read.

[LilBee91]

I think I'm a medium-speed reader, and it depends a lot on the difficulty of the book. I can read YA a lot faster--I haven't timed myself but it's probably 80-100 pages in an hour. On the other hand, I read Austen much slower, and my attempts at Faulkner are painfully slow--I'd be surprised if I can read 30 pages an hour from Absalom, Absalom. Something about his complete lack of paragraph and sentence breaks and whole chapters being in italics just slows me down.

I also read all characters in an American accent. But they all have a unique face and tone that is almost never like movie versions. Actually, my Harry Potter has changed to look more Dan Radcliffe a la PoA, but I think they looked pretty similar to begin with.

Speed reading would be handy for school, but I have no idea how people do it. I'm okay at skimming and picking out what's important, but actual speed reading...not a chance.

[VelvetElvis]

Does anyone here actually read blocks of texts at a time, instead of word by word?

I think I do.

[ender1]

Stupid Google. I get invited but you haven't opened Google+ to the new invitees yet. *shakes fist*

[Eaquae Legit]

I have no idea how I read, because as soon as I make a conscious attempt to notice what I'm doing, what I'm doing inevitably changes.

[Wil]

I now have Google+! Suck it!

[VelvetElvis]

Stupid Google. I get invited but you haven't opened Google+ to the new invitees yet. *shakes fist*

What is Google+?

[ender1]

Google's answer to Facebook.

[VelvetElvis]

Is it fun?

[Rei]

My bigger concern is how adaptable it is, especially in the areas of privacy controls.

[zeroguy]

You've probably seen this meme that was being passed around awhile ago. But if you can read this without thinking, then you probably don't *really* read one word at a time.

I'm not srue if Cgdirbmae Utisreviny rllaey did taht sduty but I saw a cplmaxeretnuoe ocne wrehe it semeed elemertxy lses rlbadaee if you cletelpmoy rsrevee all of the lrettes epecxt for the fsrit and lsat oens. Uletanutrofny, I cna't fnid the lnik, so I'm kdnia inisivorpmg and hnipog tihs wkros. It plbabory is better detartsnomed wtih legnor wdros, olsuoivby. Fegeungrevrhan. [Edit: My topys aslo plbabory dno't hlep. Fikaern hlel.]

Also, for reading, I can read like what I assume that "scanning in groups" is, and it's much faster, but it involves more concentration than I usually care to give, so I usually read much more slowly.

[Luet]

Yes, that was much harder. I skipped some words that I didn't know but once I got to the end and figured out how you were typing them, I went back and it was much easier to read them.

[LilBee91]

Why is it that fish is okay in a vegetarian diet?

[Luet]

As far as I know, full-on vegetarians do not eat fish. There are pescetarians that do eat fish; or "flexitarians".

[Eaquae Legit]

Basically, that. People who call themselves vegetarian but still eat flesh (of whatever sort) are participating in some degree of self-delusion. (Guilty!)

[starlooker]

It also depends on the reasons for becoming vegetarian. There are people who do it more for health reasons than because of concerns about animals, or who do not object to eating meat in itself but object to the way commercial livestock is raised. That sort of thing.

[Eaquae Legit]

Yep! The delusion is not the same for everyone. (Nor do I intend any inherently negative judgement when I say "delusion".)

It's also a good way to get people to shut up and stop pestering you to eat meat. "I'm a vegetarian" shuts down arguments much faster than "Well, sometimes I eat meat, depending on what type and what the conditions are, etc..."

[zeroguy]

It's also a good way to get people to shut up and stop pestering you to eat meat. "I'm a vegetarian" shuts down arguments much faster than "Well, sometimes I eat meat, depending on what type and what the conditions are, etc..."

"Vegetarian" can be quite a broad term because of this. I've seen people who self-describe as vegetarian vary as widely as between those who do eat chicken, to those that do eat fish, to those that don't eat eggs, to those that don't eat garlic. Since there are so many variants (many of which most people don't even think about; or if they do they don't care) "vegetarian" has just become whatever-speak for "I don't eat some things for probably moral/nutritional/whatever reasons, and one of those things is red meat".

[LilBee91]

Okay, that makes more sense. Thanks all!

[starlooker]

Nor do I intend any inherently negative judgement when I say "delusion".

Hee. Thanks for clarifying. Although, I must say, it's really hard for me to read the word "delusion" as non-judgmental, given that to me it implies an incredibly difficult-to-treat break with reality.

(Also, if you know you're kidding yourself, you aren't delusional. Okay. I'm trying to move on, but the use of the word is really sort of bugging me. Ack. Sorry. One of those things.)

[Eaquae Legit]

Fair enough! I'm pretty tongue-in-cheek about it, since I'm one of those "vegetarians" who actually eat meat (Wee Brontosaurus is a protein fan), but only sometimes, and only on my own terms. It's a poke at myself as much as anything.

[megxers]

I'm a confused vegetarian. I eat pretty much everything local/organic/etc and I suppose I could do so with meat & that would probably be okay from my moral standpoint, but at this point, I've been one so long I can't even tolerate the smell. Especially red meat. I wish the same would happen with wheat gluten, as I'm intolerant but oh, its so yummy. (And chocolate. And soda).