He doesn't subvocalize

>He doesn't subvocalize
>He doesn't read poetry aloud

Who started this meme?

Subvocalization is essential in reading.
How else are you going to feel or appreciate the prose?

Blame those faggot monks reading quietly to not disturb others.

If you give a single shit about reading comprehension then you subvocalize

I was actually thinking more about the 'speed reading' faggots who claim to increase reading comprehension if you just kid yourself into the idea that you can somehow stop mental subvocalization whilst reading.

Oh shit what have I been missing lads

Grab a copy of Hamlet and start reading it aloud.
You'll find out then.

But some works are so facile they can be read without subvocalization. Anything worth reading necessitates subvocalization, though. Speed reading is only useful where you know you're going to be reading loads of nonsense.

>skipped the slave dialogue in gone with the wind
fight me

>Read aloud
>End up not understanding anything I read because I put all my mental energy into pronouncing the words without thinking about what the words mean

>Not reading stuff that was made to be read.

How words are pronounced is a large part of their meaning.

Makes more sense. I agree tbqh. Helping kids read faster is pretty good but taking your time and saying things allowed isn't a bad thing.

Subvocalizing actually makes me understand the text more

Literally 0% of their meaning

What the fuck are you even smoking

Fuck you for making this thread OP now I'm subvocalizing everything I read and I can hardly even focus.

>What is onomatopoeia

OP here.
I actually obsess a lot over subvocalizing or not subvocalizing when I am reading. Sometimes to the point of getting a headache. But, I do think it's better to subvocalize. It's usually more fun.
Just wanted to hear how other readers usually do.

>reading quietly
>general noise level around me increases
>begin subvocalizing at a quiet level, can concentrate again
>becomes much louder and even annoying around me
>subvocalize screaming
>can somehow still read and understand the text only because of the screaming
the human brain is fucking retarded

Take your reply for example. The tone of you trying to denounce my answer as foolish is much more important to its meaning than the words you chose to do so with. You could have asked me what I'm smoking, whether I was dropped on my head as a child, or if I'm simply just trolling and the meaning of your sentence wouldn't change significantly. I would subvocalize any of those potential replies with a very similar tone of voice that carries the emotion I interpret your reply as conveying.

i'm constantly subvocalizing. Even when not reading

>'Believing' in vocalisation or a present speaking subject as the guise or disguise of language which technically (no pun intended) belongs instead to, or is best described by, writing.

>other readers
you came to the wrong board

"And so, from hour to hour, we ripe and ripe,
And then, from hour to hour, we rot and rot"
Unless you pronounce this as Shakespeare would have, you won't get the dirty joke, pleb.