|
 |
Can you read with the same fluency...? | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| nescafe Senior Member Japan Joined 5409 days ago 137 posts - 227 votes  | Message 33 of 61 25 March 2010 at 6:24am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Thanks, Numerodix, Bao and Pyx.
I googled to find something with my post, and found this page (in Japanese), by a professional copy writer. 広告コピーを考える http://www.massyhassy.com/2008/08/post-28.html I will translate it here. Chinese character is an idiogram processd in our brain like picture, and Hiragana and Katakana are phonograms processed as if they are sound. "送料無料" and "そうりょうむりょう" (both have same sound and mean "postage free") are processed in brain differently and there would also be difference in the processing speed. For copies of linked advertisements on the web, we have to make eye-catching phrases, and it is important to understand this (difference) and make up intuitively understandable messages. Japanese are used to use Kanji (characters) and Kana (alphabets) mixed in same text, and it is hard to recognize a phrase in Kana only or Kanji only. Here are two examples. ---------------------- サマークリアランスセール "summer clearance sale" Kana only, I have to "read" it. 夏のクリアランスセール better than the above: 夏の在庫一掃セール the best to see. understood at first glance. ---------------------- 夏期講習受付募集中 "You can register on the summer lecture series now", seems like Chinese. 夏期講習で差をつける &nb sp;needless to "read". 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Pyx Diglot Senior Member China Joined 5735 days ago 670 posts - 892 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: Mandarin | Message 34 of 61 25 March 2010 at 10:42am | IP Logged | ||||||||
That doesn't seem right to me. The conclusion is probably true, but the explanation not. He says himself "Japanese are used to use Kanji and Kana mixed in same text" - I believe this is why it seems awkward to read Kanji only or Kana only sentences. Or do you really have to sound out everything you see in Kana? I know I don't sound out things written in German or English. In fact, it happened more than once that I read a book, and then wanted to tell a friend about it, and only then realized that I had no idea how to pronounce the characters' names! I just never thought about that when reading, because I directly linked the letter combinations that were the characters' name to his person, and didn't take the route over the sound of the letters! 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Captain Haddock Diglot Senior Member Japan kanjicabinet.tumblr. Joined 6768 days ago 2282 posts - 2814 votes Speaks: English*, Japanese Studies: French, Korean, Ancient Greek | Message 35 of 61 25 March 2010 at 11:23am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Fluent, literate speakers of alphabetical languages definitely read word shapes rather than sounding words out
phonetically. I think the point is that Japanese, when written improperly with kana instead of kanji, catches the reader off guard and forces a slower phonetic analysis to take place, since the shape the reader is used to seeing is that of the kanji. It's also possible that kanji allow for more *efficient* word-shape reading and scanning than phonetic scripts do. Edited by Captain Haddock on 25 March 2010 at 11:23am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| vb Octoglot Senior Member Afghanistan Joined 6422 days ago 112 posts - 135 votes Speaks: English, Romanian, French, Polish, Dutch, German, Italian, Spanish Studies: Russian, Swedish | Message 36 of 61 25 March 2010 at 11:43am | IP Logged | ||||||||
There doesn't seem to be much evidence for this - apparently even readers who think they aren't subvocalising actually are (they still involuntarily perform corresponding muscle movements). That said, what is subvocalised may be retrieved from recognition of the whole word rather than reconstructed phonetically. Edited by vb on 25 March 2010 at 11:44am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Pyx Diglot Senior Member China Joined 5735 days ago 670 posts - 892 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: Mandarin | Message 37 of 61 25 March 2010 at 12:07pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Well, I'm perfectly able to sing along to a song I know well, while reading a text. That sounds like pretty good evidence for that to me ^^ 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| vb Octoglot Senior Member Afghanistan Joined 6422 days ago 112 posts - 135 votes Speaks: English, Romanian, French, Polish, Dutch, German, Italian, Spanish Studies: Russian, Swedish | Message 38 of 61 25 March 2010 at 12:19pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Good counter, but that assumes that vocalising the former wholly obstructs sub-vocalisation of the latter (with sub-vocalisation often not apparent even to the reader himself). The read material may be subvocalised through modulation of the vocalised sung material or this subvocalisation may occur in the gaps between vocalisation (the read text being stored in visual memory until it can be subvocalised and subsequently understood - with this process perhaps being below conscious awareness). In other words, you would have to have a very good idea of what is happening muscularly and mentally in order to make a definitive statement, and introspection cannot provide a clear enough picture. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of super-fast, non-sub-vocalised reading speeds, with good comprehension, being possible. The speeds from the world champs would seem to bear this out: an average of 800 effective wpm and high of 1500 effective wpm are both within the bounds of vocalisation. Perhaps a good test would be to have to sing a previously unseen song (which has no gaps of >0.3s for instance) whilst reading an unseen text and then answer comprehension questions on both. If subvocalisation is a pre-requisite for comprehension, then one might be doomed to score no more than 50% cumulatively (assuming that one can sing without processing for understanding). Edited by vb on 25 March 2010 at 12:37pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Pyx Diglot Senior Member China Joined 5735 days ago 670 posts - 892 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: Mandarin | Message 39 of 61 25 March 2010 at 4:00pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Then, if both statements are true, I suppose Chinese people read much much MUCH faster than this?
Just because I'm pretty sure I'm not moving muscles when reading, doesn't mean I can concentrate on two things at the same time! 1 person has voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Captain Haddock Diglot Senior Member Japan kanjicabinet.tumblr. Joined 6768 days ago 2282 posts - 2814 votes Speaks: English*, Japanese Studies: French, Korean, Ancient Greek | Message 40 of 61 25 March 2010 at 4:56pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
For what it's worth, I took speed-reading courses in high school and won an award for reaching the maximum speed of the machine (1800 wpm). You definitely cannot vocalize at that speed. What's more, typographers have well established that when we read, we don't focus on every word. We skip along, focusing on only a few points per line while our parafoveas (area of vision outside the central fovea) take in word shapes. 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
