>tfw can't stop subvocalizing
pleb
>>7968251
What is this meme that subvocalizing is bad?
>>7968264
slows you down m8.
When I read a book, I always pretend there's a child-version of myself in the room and I'm reading out loud to him
sometimes I even actually just read out loud
Ive been meaning to ask the board; is this recognized as something bad?
>>7968251
>tfw can't stop savoring the prose I'm reading and hearing the aural effect in my head instead of just blowing on through it and missing all that
>>7968314
I don't see why it would be. Unless your goal is to consume books at a fast pace without retaining the substance. At least, I don't see how you actually read without sub vocalizing- isn't it just hearing the words in your head like you're saying them?
>>7968327
thats what it is yeah, the issue is people claim that how you speak and how much youre capable of perceiving written word is a huge difference in pace.
>>7968328
How would one go about not sub vocalizing? How does one comprehend what is written without recognizing and seeing it in your mind? What is the alternative here, dear anon?
>>7968251
Being able to subvocalize poetry but speed-read prose is the true state of literary gnosis.
Joke's on you, I only read in languages I can't pronounce.
>>7968348
>speed-read prose
Why
>>7968348
good prose is closer to poetry than prose.
I would characterize poetry as the transcendence of prose, and the greatest prose has begun its metamorphosis.
>>7968384
>I would characterize poetry as the transcendence of prose, and the greatest prose has begun its metamorphosis.
That's some stupid shit, anon
>>7968335
you can use imagery instead, instead of focusing on just the words u focuse on the connections you have with their meaning.
>>7968335
You can understand let's say a nominal phrase in a split second without having to subvocalize every word which takes longer
>>7968412
prose = operating strictly within the laws of grammar and syntax
poetry = freely breaking these laws to provide an aesthetic
good prose = staying within the rules without losing any aesthetic value, i.e. the delivery sounds closer to poetry.
>>7968430
>prose = operating strictly within the laws of grammar and syntax to provide an aesthetic
Fixed that for you. You can't define your way into being right, silly man. Who are you? St. Anselm?
>>7968335
Do you actually sub-vocalize when you're reading comments on 4chan?
Fuck.
I never sub-vocalized in my whole life while reading. It's awesome. thanks
>>7968441
I subvocalize every single thing i read.
I like it that way
>>7968441
YES. I. ACTUALLY. SUBVOCALIZE. WHEN. I'M. READING. COMMENTS. ON. FOURCHAN.
>>7968264
It is just another way to make people feel bad. That is what 4chan thrives at; if there is a way to make someone feel bad, they'll achieve it.
>>7968271
It's not a race, friend.
>>7968441
If I actually care about the thread and it's contents, yes I sub-vocalize.
>>7968483
this is more than a /thread
this is a
/4chan
I subvocalize with different voices in my head for different characters + a narrator. Is this pleb level shit?
>OP is literally hearing this post in his head
HAHAHAHAHAA!!!
>>7969178
It'scute.
pffffffffffffajahahahahahhhahahha
>books
Where did this meme come from? Is it just retarded STEMfags? Merely scanning words for meaning is pleb shit for those alienated from language as art. It is how one reads a technical
Subvocalizing is required for literally all poetry, plays, and prose-centric fiction. How can a board who so loves the likes of Joyce, Pynchon, Faulkner, and Shakespeare try to criticize those who don't subvocalize?
>ctrl + f scream internally
>0 results
I'm disappointed
>>7969248
STEMfags trying to justify the fact that they can't read for shit.
>>7968441
That snarky tone in your voice is really pissing me off mate.
>>7969248
^ lmao another subbie chimes in
>>7970816
underrated
I don't subvocalizing until people mention subvocalizing.
Sorta like how people do the 'you're reading this in morgan freemans's voice' etc.
>>7969248
>he needs to subvocalize to read the quality of prose and poetry
Word is the mind made material, you simply have to make it immaterial.
>>7968281
That's just regular old schizophrenia
