User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 38

  1. #1
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default Learning to read and personality type

    When did you learn to read? I started pretty early, either in the late twos or early threes. Of course, I didn't start talking until only a few months before that, and wasn't elocuting correctly until I was five, so I guess that balances out.

    I'm trying to determine whether quickly learning to read is more of an N/S thing, or an P/J thing. The N/S thought is that N-users might notice the connection between written word and speech much more quickly, while S-users might require the connection to be more explicitly pointed out. Consequently, this might mean that the former don't necessarily sound words out in their head when reading, while the latter do, since there's much more of a concept of a written word representing a speech pattern, rather than both the writing and speech indicating a given concept.

    The P/J thought is that extraverted Sensing/intuiting will more likely pick up on the connection between language and writing, as there is a greater sense of familiarity with the outside world. For example, an Se user might learn to read easily when a written word is pointed out, and then told that it means a given spoken word. Ne will just put two and two together. Meanwhile, introverted Sensing/intuiting might have a harder time with this, given the introverted nature of their perceptive functions. Si will have had to internalize the rules for the connection between written words and speech, while Ni will struggle with there being any true connection between writing and speech (which of course, leads to a later fascination with language, particularly in the formation of artificial language)

    Your opinions?

  2. #2
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    My parents were shocked when I went to school (I think I started when I was still four, approaching five)... because they didn't realize I knew how to read.

    The teacher ended up telling them, since I surprised her.

    My parents had read to me a lot, and I guess I had been practicing on the sly. I don't have specific memories of reading alone, I just know I've always loved books and was always reading. I was reading on a high school level in elementary school and quickly went past that, and I lived in the library (or would have if I could).

    yes, I think pattern recognition is very useful for readers. I have always read quickly and while I can miss details because I go so fast, I usually had a really good big-picture overview of what I have read (I grasp the "essence" of it); slower linear readers seem to get lost or bored or frustrated more often.

    Obviously even the teachers are unsure on this sort of things. It's why we get people practicing phonics for a time, then going back to more pure memorization of individual letters or words themselves, on a case by case basis. i think both are useful, especially in regards to English (which is not quite an intuitive language, it's just a versatile one).

    One thing I noticed is that my NP and NJ kids used speech qualifiers ("actually," "honestly," "certainly," "possibly," "potentially," etc.) at early ages a lot more; my SP kid didn't care to be so specific, it just wasn't important to him.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  3. #3
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    My parents were shocked when I went to school (I think I started when I was still four, approaching five)... because they didn't realize I knew how to read.

    The teacher ended up telling them, since I surprised her.
    Hahaha, that's awesome. I was "found out" so to speak when my dad realized that I wasn't just looking at the pictures in the newspaper. I can't think of a time since I've been self-aware that I didn't know how to read.

    My parents had read to me a lot, and I guess I had been practicing on the sly. I don't have specific memories of reading alone, I just know I've always loved books and was always reading. I was reading on a high school level in elementary school and quickly went past that, and I lived in the library (or would have if I could).
    Yeah, I wasn't really reading upper-level material at that age, but I did read books about things most kids weren't interested in. I never could figure out why people liked those fictional books about sports, when sports history was much more entertaining.

    yes, I think pattern recognition is very useful for readers. I have always read quickly and while I can miss details because I go so fast, I usually had a really good big-picture overview of what I have read (I grasp the "essence" of it); slower linear readers seem to get lost or bored or frustrated more often.
    Same here. I always hated it in school when they asked what the "main idea" of a passage was - I couldn't understand what they were even asking for. Why ask me when you could just read it yourself? What made this a particularly important question - just ask me what the guy's trying to say.

    Obviously even the teachers are unsure on this sort of things. It's why we get people practicing phonics for a time, then going back to more pure memorization of individual letters or words themselves, on a case by case basis. i think both are useful, especially in regards to English (which is not quite an intuitive language, it's just a versatile one).
    I'm not a huge fan of phonics, but I understand with some it can be useful. To me, it's biggest flaw is conflating the information-transmission functions of both writing and speech, rather than making it clear that both serve distinct purposes, and how important body language and surrounding context are in speech, while they are completely unavailable in writing.

    In fact, I'd say that's a big problem of English education in general - completely neglecting the social information aspect of speech, which I'd argue is the more important part.

    You're right, though, it's not easy in English, since it's a weird hybrid of a synthetic and an analytical language, so you can't really teach any of the tricks of both of those without dumping a whole bunch of unnecessary context around.

    One thing I noticed is that my NP and NJ kids used speech qualifiers ("actually," "honestly," "certainly," "possibly," "potentially," etc.) at early ages a lot more; my SP kid didn't care to be so specific, it just wasn't important to him.
    I used to drive my parents nuts with this - I'd never fail to hedge my bets when making a statement. They always wanted to be able to hold me to something, and I'd never let them do it, since I'd want to keep my options open somewhat.

  4. #4
    Senior Member compulsiverambler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    446

    Default

    I think Se, Si and Ti are the main functions that enable learning to read, but other functions may act as motivators. Fe because text is a prominent form of communication, and in fact I wonder if that Fe motivation is why girls on average develop speech and literacy sooner than boys; Te because reading adequately is so important to achieving non-person centred goals as well; Ne because reading can feed the imagination.

    Se - enables you to first notice the characteristics of each letter and sound, to focus on the text in front of you and to develop the physical skills of reading, which shouldn't be underestimated. That means through practice making it an automatic and effortless process to move the eyes from left to right and top to bottom across text and to keep the eyes trained on it and proceeding steadily along. These skills do have to be learned and some struggle more than others, jumping around the page or reading slowly because of the conscious effort and thought it's requiring to keep their eyes where they should be at each moment. By the time we're adults the majority, who came to find it easy, seem to forget that it ever didn't come naturally.

    Si - enables you to remember what each word looks and sounds like and to notice recurring concrete patterns, i.e. combinations of letters representing particular sounds.

    Ti - enables you to categorise the elements of language and understand the rules of grammar.

    To some extent Te will help you understand the rules as well, by considering the possibility that sometimes rules which seem internally inconsistent or arbitrary merely serve to minimise ambiguity. The reasoning behind the apostrophe being used for possessive nouns but not possessive pronouns eluded me for a long time because I wasn't applying a Te perspective.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Saslou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    4,915

    Default

    So i just rang my mum because i was curious about this.

    I was read to from birth. You could have a proper conversation with me from the age of 2. I was reading books myself at 3.5-4 yrs. Although i could read, i struggled with colours. Just couldn't get it.

    Hmmm, lol.
    “I made you take time to look at what I saw and when you took time to really notice my flower, you hung all your associations with flowers on my flower and you write about my flower as if I think and see what you think and see—and I don't.”
    ― Georgia O'Keeffe

  6. #6
    triple nerd score poppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    intj
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    The P/J thought is that extraverted Sensing/intuiting will more likely pick up on the connection between language and writing, as there is a greater sense of familiarity with the outside world. For example, an Se user might learn to read easily when a written word is pointed out, and then told that it means a given spoken word. Ne will just put two and two together. Meanwhile, introverted Sensing/intuiting might have a harder time with this, given the introverted nature of their perceptive functions. Si will have had to internalize the rules for the connection between written words and speech, while Ni will struggle with there being any true connection between writing and speech (which of course, leads to a later fascination with language, particularly in the formation of artificial language)

    Your opinions?
    That's kind of interesting to me. I don't know when my parents started encouraging me to read, probably fairly early, but I guess I had no interest in it for a while (apparently they hoped that I would be an athlete because I was so not inclined to read ). I guess at some point I must have made the connection because I went pretty quickly from being totally apathetic towards reading to doing it voraciously.
    "There's no need to be embarrassed about it, Mr. Spock. It happens to the birds and the bees!"

  7. #7
    #005645 phthalocyanine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    681

    Default

    my parents say i started with books at 3 and i could read at 4. i was read to a lot and owned books with words in them before i could read them, so i think i was pretty well encouraged.

    i remember i used to follow people around with my dr. seuss books hoping they'd let me read to them. i think there was some regret on my parents' parts for so much encouragement because i was really obsessed with reading for a good year, and it drove everyone nuts.


    "wanna hear a story?"

    -"NO."

    "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.."
    -Oscar Wilde



  8. #8
    Senior Member compulsiverambler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Si will have had to internalize the rules for the connection between written words and speech
    You can't learn to read fluently without doing a lot of that. As long as what was initially learned is correct, a strong Si preference is going to be a huge advantage because deviations from the internalised norms will produce stronger gut reactions. These will be the people who can most easily spot that a spelling "just doesn't look right".

  9. #9
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    5,908

    Default

    Around early 3. Around 5 I was reading a lot, 5-6 books a week, I really loved to read when I was a kid. Now I also do, but school and work take time away. I remember asking my mother to teach me to write when I was 4, because I wanted to know, although I didn't become a "good" writer until elementary school. But I already knew the basics, and this was maddening to some teachers since I had acquired my own way of doing some of the stuff.

    I don't think connecting this to functions makes any sense, to be honest.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  10. #10
    brainheart
    Guest

    Default

    I don't think I learned to read earlier than what is usual- kindergarten, age 5. But once I learned, I took off. I was a contextual reader, absolutely. I might not have known what all the words meant, but I figured it out in the context- using what I already knew to make inferences about what I didn't fully understand. Based on my ability (and eagerness) to do this, I was able to read junior high level books by second grade. I've noticed that I do the same thing when I am learning a foreign language.

    I notice my second grade son (for sure an IXXP, not going to try and determine anything else at this moment) doing the same thing when he reads as I did; my daughter in fourth grade (my guess EXFJ) doesn't seem to. For this reason, he is almost at the same reading level as her. It's possible that being a perceiver does make one more willing to wander into unknown territory and feel around/fake it while one figures it out/masters it. And if that perceiver happens to be interested in the written word (or what one discovers by reading it), I think they may be more likely to progress quickly. But also, it's possible that the cognitive functions don't matter in this process. It's possible that as long as you have the interest, you are going to use your own approach to figure it out. It's also possible that introverts in general are more likely to advance quickly because it is a safe way of interacting with the outside world on one's own terms.

Similar Threads

  1. "24" and Personality Type
    By Mondo in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-10-2016, 11:05 AM
  2. Do nationalities tend to have a Personality Type? nationality and mbti
    By curiousel in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-21-2011, 02:51 AM
  3. Question Related To Alcohol And Personality..
    By Mondo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 12:48 AM
  4. Why do people learn to read?
    By Lateralus in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 09-26-2008, 04:42 AM
  5. Correlation between Longetivity and Personality Type
    By JustDave in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-21-2008, 01:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO