reading with or without "words" (was a question about formal writing & unschooling
[email protected]
In a message dated 9/15/04 4:55:39 PM, sondracarr@... writes:
<< Oooh - that's interesting. Was this limited to English? >>
We were just unschoolers talking about our own reading experiences and
oddities.
I did hear a story and don't know the real source (if anyone knows I'd love
to know) that a Roman-legionnaire writer in some early century of the
occupation of England noted in a diary or a letter home that the locals could read
without moving their lips. That would seem to indicate that Latin was vocalized
back into language. Or not. <g> Maybe that guy just always moved his own lips
and had only been around people who did.
-=-Can you give other examples in our language, from what you
heard in the workshop?-=-
People talked about reading visually, and names being seen without being
pronounced. I do that. I don't always know the names of characters in books I'm
reading. While I'm reading I do, but it's as though the name is the picture
of the character (not in a pictorial way, just in an identification way) but if
asked later "What's his sister's name?" I don't know. I'm reading Nicholas
Nickleby, which has TONS of characters, and some I couldn't name to you, but if
I pick it up and start reading I will know all about each characters history
and interrelationships.
When I read music I don't think in note-names anymore. Sometimes I need to
for a moment, if I'm playing a C recorder (soprano or tenor) because I read for
F (alto). But for piano, if I'm playing I just see the music and my fingers
know what to do, without it passing through my conscious note-naming,
muttering part of my mind. And stories from books can be that way too.
Recipes can't. I have to think pictures of measuring cups and ingredients
for recipes to make sense to me. I read aloud to myself when I'm making
something from scratch. I mutter sometimes. Because I get distracted, I think, and
because I don't remember numbers well, I will say "1/2 cup of flour" and then
I remember what I just said.
Fiction and non-fiction can go straight to brain.
Sandra
<< Oooh - that's interesting. Was this limited to English? >>
We were just unschoolers talking about our own reading experiences and
oddities.
I did hear a story and don't know the real source (if anyone knows I'd love
to know) that a Roman-legionnaire writer in some early century of the
occupation of England noted in a diary or a letter home that the locals could read
without moving their lips. That would seem to indicate that Latin was vocalized
back into language. Or not. <g> Maybe that guy just always moved his own lips
and had only been around people who did.
-=-Can you give other examples in our language, from what you
heard in the workshop?-=-
People talked about reading visually, and names being seen without being
pronounced. I do that. I don't always know the names of characters in books I'm
reading. While I'm reading I do, but it's as though the name is the picture
of the character (not in a pictorial way, just in an identification way) but if
asked later "What's his sister's name?" I don't know. I'm reading Nicholas
Nickleby, which has TONS of characters, and some I couldn't name to you, but if
I pick it up and start reading I will know all about each characters history
and interrelationships.
When I read music I don't think in note-names anymore. Sometimes I need to
for a moment, if I'm playing a C recorder (soprano or tenor) because I read for
F (alto). But for piano, if I'm playing I just see the music and my fingers
know what to do, without it passing through my conscious note-naming,
muttering part of my mind. And stories from books can be that way too.
Recipes can't. I have to think pictures of measuring cups and ingredients
for recipes to make sense to me. I read aloud to myself when I'm making
something from scratch. I mutter sometimes. Because I get distracted, I think, and
because I don't remember numbers well, I will say "1/2 cup of flour" and then
I remember what I just said.
Fiction and non-fiction can go straight to brain.
Sandra
pam sorooshian
On Sep 16, 2004, at 6:27 AM, SandraDodd@... wrote:
actually reading them from a book and a different way if you are just
having a conversation.
For example, the word for "rain" is: "baran." The first "a" is
pronounced like the "a" in "mall." The second "a" is pronounced the
same way if you're reading, like in "mall." So the word is "ba-ran"
with both vowels sounding like the "a" in "mall."
But if you are just talking, the second "a" is pronounced like the "u"
in "tune" - ba-roon - sounds like balloon.
Lots of words follow that pattern. Nan - bread - rhymes with lawn if
you're reading and it is "noon" if you're talking.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
> << Oooh - that's interesting. Was this limited to English? >>In Farsi, there are many words that are pronounced one way if you are
>
> We were just unschoolers talking about our own reading experiences and
> oddities.
>
actually reading them from a book and a different way if you are just
having a conversation.
For example, the word for "rain" is: "baran." The first "a" is
pronounced like the "a" in "mall." The second "a" is pronounced the
same way if you're reading, like in "mall." So the word is "ba-ran"
with both vowels sounding like the "a" in "mall."
But if you are just talking, the second "a" is pronounced like the "u"
in "tune" - ba-roon - sounds like balloon.
Lots of words follow that pattern. Nan - bread - rhymes with lawn if
you're reading and it is "noon" if you're talking.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
[email protected]
http://www.stanford.edu/class/history34q/readings/Manguel/Silent_Readers.html
Someone who is shy to post on the list maybe sent me that link, and we've had
a little exchange on the side. It doesn't specifically mention any early
Briton reading silently, but there are LOTS of clues to why that would be
remarkable and worth writing home about!
MAYBE, if English has long been a read-silently language, then it's a
distinct and important advantage that we have all those weird spellings, because we
will read the words as themselves instead of worrying about their
pronunciations. IF that is true (and I'm just throwing an early guess that I never ever
considered before yesterday), then it's an advantage that we have too, to and
two and similar oddities. If English were made more phonetic, reading
silently might be more difficult. And reading aloud "cold" might be more difficult.
Another thing some people were discussing on the side at the conference in
Chicago was the idea of what "reading" is. If "reading" were *ONLY* causing
sounds to come out into the air again (phonetic read-aloud) then I myself could
read French and Spanish, no problem. I could read aloud pretty well (I'd
botch some verb tenses in Spanish, no doubt). Problem is, I would only the
slightest idea what I was reading. I know all the phonetic rules for reading
Spanish and French, but I'm competent in neither. So the answer to whether I would
be reading (as opposed to "sounding out") can help me think about what I
think "reading" really is in young native-English-speaking "readers."
Sandra
Someone who is shy to post on the list maybe sent me that link, and we've had
a little exchange on the side. It doesn't specifically mention any early
Briton reading silently, but there are LOTS of clues to why that would be
remarkable and worth writing home about!
MAYBE, if English has long been a read-silently language, then it's a
distinct and important advantage that we have all those weird spellings, because we
will read the words as themselves instead of worrying about their
pronunciations. IF that is true (and I'm just throwing an early guess that I never ever
considered before yesterday), then it's an advantage that we have too, to and
two and similar oddities. If English were made more phonetic, reading
silently might be more difficult. And reading aloud "cold" might be more difficult.
Another thing some people were discussing on the side at the conference in
Chicago was the idea of what "reading" is. If "reading" were *ONLY* causing
sounds to come out into the air again (phonetic read-aloud) then I myself could
read French and Spanish, no problem. I could read aloud pretty well (I'd
botch some verb tenses in Spanish, no doubt). Problem is, I would only the
slightest idea what I was reading. I know all the phonetic rules for reading
Spanish and French, but I'm competent in neither. So the answer to whether I would
be reading (as opposed to "sounding out") can help me think about what I
think "reading" really is in young native-English-speaking "readers."
Sandra