Why words set ablaze, mystical readings and anagrams aren’t a joke!
#1 Latin - Latin is read from right to left and is broken down into prefixes and suffixes and to know the true meaning of a word you must trace the origin and find the original meaning of it. #2 English - is a Germanic language with Latin rules! #3 Our brain is a funny, funny thing! University of Paris Professor Emile Javal 1878) found "reading was not done by smoothly scanning a line of text but was a matter of JUMPING from one fixation point to another…(as in an anagram). These jumps are known as saccades. Reading or gathering in of textual material, took place at the fixation point not during the saccades (Solso, 2008, p. 83). This is a graduate level cognivite psychology book I just quoted from.
What does that mean? It means FIXATED WORD----rote----rote----rote—rote and arrive at another fixated point! Is this to say there is nothing of value in the saccade? No, it saying that a brain will take in a message and the comprehension of a story or reading based on those fixated memories and reasoning of it in the cortical area. This my dear man/woman is a anagram!
You mean like being read right to left? Technically, while English has Germanic roots, it is amalgamated with Latin and Greek, so that’s why it has Latin rules.
Your quoting skills need work. It’s not entirely clear where the quote ends, or if the “(as in an anagram)” part was his quote or your commentary.
I’m not sure I correlate how saccades are like an anagram. Could you elaborate?
I suggest you look up the definition of the word anagram. I can’t follow what you think you are saying.
Wasn’t Latin written in both directions, in different eras? And what does it matter (for your point) which direction it was?
Also, how is the rest of your claim specific to Latin? In order to know what a word of ancient Hebrew means, or meant, I would have to go “find” its meaning, as I am not a native speaker of ancient Hebrew.
More accurately, English is a Germanic language with some borrowed Latin-esque vocabulary (much of it imported from Old French), and with Latin grammar concepts nailed onto it, centuries ago, by English scholars who thought Latin was the naturally more prestigious language.
Also, I’m not sure how many Latin rules would be left in modern English, even if that were where they came from. English has lost its genders and nearly all of its inflections, for example, which seem pretty important to Latin grammar.
Well, no argument there.
I’m not sure what you’re saying here, or how it supports your “words set ablaze” claim above. (And I’m not quite sure what your claim is, really.)
So fine, our brains, our adult brains, don’t pause to check every word we read. When we’re young children just learning, we might read very slowly and carefully, but after years and years of practice we tend to just skim over common words and phrases. In fact we get so used to skimming that we often don’t notice when words are misspelled (they are “anagrams”?), or even when entire words are duplicated or omitted.
That just seems like the usual behavior of someone who’s done something a million times, whatever the activity is, and it wouldn’t imply anything special about language or words. It’s just our brain taking shortcuts.
This is going to be a little vague, but I’m sure someone knows the proper terminology.
Have you ever gotten the sense that you knew what a passage said BEFORE you were consciously aware of it? If this actually happens it would be completely different from the phenomenon in the OP, but this seems like a good place to see if it is a) possible and b) if so, thread-worthy.
As you may or may not know, visual information gets processed many different ways, but there seem to be 2 main routes. One is the conscious route we all know and love. The other is one that bypasses our consciousness completely as a necessary sacrifice to minimize response time.
For example, if someone tosses you something and this was unexpected, you will not consciously formulate what actions you will take in order to intercept the object. Instead, you will react instinctively, and only after you have responded will you have a conscious awareness of your action. Were it otherwise, we would never catch the object before it hit.
This is also, IIRC, how a person with hysterical blindness can avoid obstructions without any conscious awareness that an obstruction is there.
So what I was wondering is, could you train yourself to use this faster and perhaps more “primitive” route to mainline one’s reading material - or at least a part of it - rather than necessarily processing every word, phrase and concept through our consciousness?