I was low-key imagining you speaking German like Rammstein and then Japanese like Baby Metal.
My inner comedian not withstanding, that sounds awesome! _
Shoshannah Tekofsky
Karma: 778
oh huh … It hadn’t occurred to me to use it for memorization. I should try that, considering I think I have subpar memory for non-narrative/non-logical information like strings of numbers. Good point!
Conversely, I think I have above average memory for narrative and logically coherent information like how things work or events that happened in the past. It feels like that type of information has a ton of “hooks” such that I can use one of a dozen of them to recall the entire package, while a string of numbers has no hooks. It’s like someone is asking me to repeat white noise. But phone numbers and codes and what not are that. Let alone trying to keep track of numbers on something like a graphics card or processor (I gave up).
These are quizzes you make yourself. Did OKC ever have those? It’s not for a matching percentage.
A quiz in paiq is 6 questions, 3 multiple choice and 3 open. If someone gets the right answer on the multiple choice, then you get to see their open question answers as a match request, and you can accept or reject the match based in that. I think it’s really great.
You can also browse other people’s tests and see if you want to take any. The tests seem more descriptive of someone than most written profiles I’ve read cause it’s much harder to misrepresent personal traits in a quiz then in a self-declared profile
I discovered the Netherlands actually has a good dating app that doesn’t exist outside of it… I’m rather baffled. I have no idea how they started. I’ve messaged them asking if they will localize and expand and they thanked me for the compliment so… Dunno?
It’s called Paiq and has a ton of features I’ve never seen before, like speed dating, picture hiding by default, quizzes you make for people that they can try to pass to get a match with you, photography contacts that involve taking pictures of stuff around and getting matched on that, and a few other things… It’s just this grab bag of every way to match people that is not your picture or a blurb. It’s really good!
That sounds great! I have to admit that I still get a far richer experience from reading out loud than subvocalizing, and my subvocalizing can’t go faster than my speech. So it sounds like you have an upgraded form with more speed and richness, which is great!
Thanks! :D
Attention is a big part of it for me as well, yes. I feel it’s very easy to notice when I skip words when reading out loud, and getting the cadence of a sentence right only works if you have a sense of how it relates to the previous and next one.
Yeah, that’s my understanding as well.
Oh interesting! Maybe I’m wrong. I’m more curious about something like a survey on the topic now.
This is really good! Thank you for sharing _ competition drive and wanting to achieve certain things are great motivations, and I think in any learning process the motivation one can tap into is at least as important as the actual learning technique. I’m glad you had access to that.
I tend to feel a little confused about the concept of “intelligence”, as I guess my post already illustrated, haha. I think the word as we use it is very imprecise for cases like this. I’d roughly expect people with higher general intelligence to be much faster and successful at finding workarounds for their language processing issues, but I’d also expect the variance in this to be so high as to make plotting your general intelligence against “how quickly did you tame your dyslexia” to not make super much sense.
Then again, I do agree with a comment somewhere else here that Typical Minding is a thing, and my intuitions here may be wrong cause I’m failing to understand what it’s like for other minds and I might have overcorrected due to 25 years of incorrectly concluding I was kind of dumb. Lol.
Interesting! Thank you for sharing! I’d love to know the answer as well.
Anecdotally, I can say that I did try to learn Japanese a little, and I found Kanji far easier to learn than words in hiragana or katakana, cause relating a “picture” to a word seemed far easier for me to parse and remember than to remember “random phonetic encodings”. I’m using quotation marks to indicate my internal experience, cause I’m a little mistrustful by now if I’m even understanding how other people parse words and language.
Either way, that anecdote would point to my pictoral->meaning wiring being stronger than my phoneme-encoding->meaning wiring. Which might explain why processing language as drawings helped me. I really have no idea how much this would generalize. But I agree people must run in to this when learning new alphabets.
[mind blown]
Minds are so interesting! Thank you for sharing!
Yeah, that sounds about right. Dutch culture has additionally strong reinforcement of typical mind fallacy cause being “different” in any direction is considered uncomfortable or unsocial, and everyone is encouraged to conform to the norm. There is a lot of reference to how all humans are essentially the same, and you shouldn’t think you are somehow different or special. I think I absorbed these values quite a bit, and then applied some motivated cognition to not notice the differences in how I was processing information compared to my peers.
Thank you! I appreciate you sharing that _
My mother is/was very aware of historical practices and I think she often normalized my reading out loud with these types of references as well :)
I’m now going to admit your question made me realize I’m not sure “subvocalize” refers to the same thing for everyone … I could always read in my head, but the error rate was huge. Only in my early 20s did I switch to a way of reading in my head that also does cadence and voices etc. The latter is what I mean by subvocalizing: The entire richness of an audiobook, generated by my own voice, but just so softly no one else can hear. It’s a gradient from normal speech volume, to whisper, to whispering so softly no one can hear, to moving my lips and no sound coming out, to entire subvocalization.
Anyway, my prediction is that non-dyslectics do not subvocalize—it’s much too slow. You can’t read faster than you speak in that case.
Thank you for sharing!
Would it be correct to say that the therapy gave you the tools to read and write correctly with effort, and that the bullet point list shows motivations you experienced to actually apply that effort?
Cause my problem was mostly that I didn’t know how to even notice the errors I was making, let alone correct for them. Once I knew how to notice them, I was, apparently, highly motivated to do so.
aaaaw thank you for saying that! _ I appreciate it!
Dyslucksia
Oh, that does help to know, thank you!
Oh wow, I love this! Thank you for looking in to this and sharing!
It lines up with my intuitions and experience trying to learn Japanese. I found all of it as baffling as any new language I tried to learn except kanji. I noticed I found learning kanji far easier than learning any words in hiragana or katakana (both phonetic instead of pictorial), and also that I found learning kanji easier than most non-dyslectic English speakers I ran in to (I didn’t run in to many Dutch speakers)