Knowledge of language expands through exposure to structures we do not already know. Developing this elaborate linguistic network requires exposure to a large sample of texts. At a subconscious level our brains automatically register information about the structure of language the next chapter is all about this. At a conscious level we read a text for its content: because it is a story or a textbook or a joke. Every time we read we update our knowledge of language. We acquire this information in the act of reading itself-not by training our eyes to rotate in opposite directions, playing brain exercise games, or breathing diaphragmatically. They also have greater “background knowledge,” familiarity with the structure and content of what is being read. Skilled readers know more about language, including many words and structures that occur in print but not in speech. Reading skill depends on knowledge acquired from reading. The serious way to improve reading-how well we comprehend a text and, yes, speed and efficiency-is this (apologies, Michael Pollan): The Shortest Answer is Doing the Thing If reading at megaspeeds is not feasible, does that mean reading can’t be improved? Not at all. With longer texts, the RSVP reading experience is monotonous and exhausting. Alas, the experiments also found that subjects could only sustain reading at high speeds with good comprehension for short bursts. In laboratory studies, college students could read with RSVP at up to 700 words per minute with good comprehension, about triple their normal speeds. The experience feels like stalking the text rather than reading it. The reader loses control over the rate of transmission and, with it, the ability to allocate reading time intelligently. Every word, whether door or morrow, is displayed for the same amount of time. Was the “Raven” video encouraging? The text is presented at about 278 words per minute, within the skilled reading range, yet requires extra effort to understand. We have ways to eliminate them, but they won’t make you a more efficient reader. The efficient coping strategy-the one that skilled readers discover-incorporates intermittent regressions as one component. Sentences unfold in a linear sequence, but the messages they convey often do not. Some looking back is also inevitable because of the nature of language. They don’t only occur because a text has been misread they also allow readers to enhance their understanding beyond what could be obtained on the first pass. But, like phonology, regressive eye movements serve a useful function, and eliminating them makes it harder to read, not easier. Method 3: Eliminate Regressive Eye Movements Read it right the first time. Speed-reading schemes would improve reading by eliminating one of the main sources of reading skill. These what-ifs are indeed the case, as established by several decades of research. What if the inability to use phonological information efficiently is one of the main characteristics of reading impairments? What if skilled readers cannot prevent themselves from activating phonological information because it is so deeply integrated with spelling and meaning in writing systems and in the neural circuits that support reading? Using the phonological code doesn’t limit the reader to the rate at which speech can be produced because there’s no speaking involved. The fallacy in the argument against subvocalization is in equating phonology with speech. However, skilled readers do something different: they mentally activate the phonological code that allows one to hear the differences between PERmit and perMIT in the mind’s ear. The sensation that you use information related to the pronunciations of words while you read is not an illusion. 1,680 letters/6 (five letters per word plus a space) = 280 words per minute.240 fixations × 7 letters per fixation = 1,680 letters per minute. 4 fixations per second = 240 fixations per minute
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |