James29 wrote: PeterMollenburg wrote:
Cavesa wrote:Extensive reading: let's say you read 40 pages per hour. Ok, 35, to not be called unrealistic (but 40 are realistic in a not too difficult language rather soon, from my experience).
Just for the record, and I think I’m a very slow reader
, I am reading fast if I make it through 20 pages in an hour!!
I also do not read that
fast in English. 20 to 28 pages might be normal (at a rough guess) for me in English. I think part of the issue is that I’ve never really read enough extensively (even in English) to begin to read what I’d call really fast in comparison to my current speed. Sure I’ve read quite a few books in English but absolutely NOTHING like what many people out there do read. Put it this way, were I to commit fully to the next Super Challenge in French, let’s say all of my French study time dedicated 50/50 to books and TV, I quite likely would surpass the number of books I’ve read in English in my lifetime somewhere within the duration of that hypothetical SC.
Anyway, we’re all different, that’s just me, just thought I’d note it, no real reason to discuss this in depth, but feel free to comment if you wish, otherwise, back to 2018.
I'm a slow reader too. Don't worry about being a "slow" reader. I have been able to determine that folks who read really fast simply miss more things than people who read slower. Sometime talk with a "fast" reader about a book they recently read. If it is something you have read you will note they somehow "forgot" a huge amount of the details. I think us "slow" readers come from much more deliberate and thinking backgrounds. You, like me, probably have read a decent amount of non-fiction in English (I'm just guessing here). People who whiz through books don't often take time to analyze and think through things.
I have now read FAR more novels in Spanish than I have in English. I think that is a pretty cool fact. I found it EXTREMELY helpful and think it is a great way to advance to advanced levels of a language.
And, about your comment about pissing people off... if you piss people off... too bad for them... people will choose to get pissed off or offended rather than engage and there is nothing you can do about that. Be yourself and be proud of who you are.
smallwhite wrote:while respecting forum rules.
I get the impression that people who read fast don't assimilate the grammar very well.
Faster reader -> poorer grammar
Slower reader -> better grammar
I am very far from saying being a faster reader is an extremely important thing or making me a more intelligent or better learner in general. But I think you are showing a bit of a prejudice here. Reading fast AND retaining lots of details is definitely possible. And grammar has been one of my stronger sides while being a fast reader. I am not "whizzing" through books. I simply process the written text faster than most people, and it has always been so, and I may have been forgetting it, when writing about extensive reading.
Really, I don't get it why many people like to turn any "talent" into something not that great and actually disadvantageous. I've been target to this since my early childhood. A typical example: what appears in any converstaion about higher IQ (and I am usually not the one starting any such discussion) "oh yes, but those people are usually bad at (and here comes any choice from a longer list)". And here "a fast reader is bad at ..." It is just as unfounded. Just like saying "beautiful people tend to be less intelligent". That is not the truth either, it depends on every single one of them.
I didn't criticise slow readers at all. I may have just chosen a not that common pace as the base for an illustration. But the speed and "quality" simply aren't connected much. Neither is the fast pace making learning much easier, nor it is making people "not assmilate grammar very well" or "miss more things". I find this "talent bashing" extremely unpleasant and not practical at all.I would say that a slow or fast pace is a relative and individual thing.
A learner should strive for slow reading or fast reading within their personal range. If someone manages to feel immersed and not have time for translation at the speed of 15 pages per hour, because that is fast for them, great. If someone reads 5 pages per hour intensives, because that is their slow pace, great! It is all about finding pace that works for each of us.
I was not trying to look down upon anyone, so I can see no reason why is faster reading pace being criticised so much. It is not a disadvantage, it is not anyone's fault, and it is not any attempt to criticise anyone at all.
But what I find extremely interesting, and what has been emerging here, is the consideration of reading speed in the context of "how much time do I need for the SC" planning. While I find the listening section much more time consuming, it is not so for everyone, no matter how "weird" such an idea feels to me. It is a very important fact for making the rules for the next SC challenge. Too few pages are simply not leading to much of a result. But at the same time, we cannot set the goal that would actually require people to, theoretically, spend all their free time reading.