如何提高阅读速度（二：朗读的重要与必要）

被称之为“恶习”的所谓“唇读”，实际上就是小声的“朗读”。从来都没有人认为、也不会有人同意“朗读是恶习”——可是为什么“小声朗读”就成了恶习呢？把“小声朗读”当作“恶习”明显是再荒谬不过的。

对于任何人都一样：阅读内容难度与阅读理解速度成反比，即，正在阅读的内容难度越高，阅读者的理解速度越低。而我们正在使用的输入手段（“扫读”、“默读”、与“唇读”）必然会配合理解速度；于是，一旦阅读者开始使用“唇读”的时候，就说明此时正在阅读的内容难度已经达到一定程度，而在这样的难度之下，阅读者的“理解速度”已经小于等于“唇读”速度——如果理解速度再差一些的话，阅读者还可能需要“反复阅读”若干次，甚至要返回之前的某一点（前一句、前一段、甚至前一页）才可能找到能让他迷途知返的线索。

文字本身就是有声音的，大多数人既不是聋子也不是哑巴，于是在理解文字的时候是不可能回避声音的。不妨自我审视一下自己的所谓“扫读”过程，就会发现脑子里的那个声音其实一直存在。本质上来看，“扫读”的时候那个声音之所以有时“断断续续”，其实只不过是因为在阅读的过程中“跳”过了一些“即便不全读也能正确推测到的内容”；而那个声音只在“读”那些“必须读到才不至于影响理解”的内容——也可能是句子、也可能是只言片语。再进一步，一个人但凡正常，那么他“顶多可以刻意回避‘唇读’，但根本无法回避‘默读’。” ^[1]

小学低年级的时候，大多数学生做不到随便拿来一篇文章就能做到“流利地朗读出来”。事实上，很多成年人也一样做不到——即便是专业播音员，朗读任何材料之前也要首先花点时间熟悉一下内容，才能做到基本不出错地朗读出来。

“朗读”是一种能力，也就当然需要通过锻炼才能掌握^[2] 。尽管不是每个人都需要做到极致（最终成为播音员或者演员的人除外），但是如果连这都不及格，那么很可能因此导致“理解能力”低下，乃至于各个科目都可能受到影响。读者不妨回想一下自己的成长过程，每个班级里都至少有那么一两个因朗读糟糕而被老师或者同学耻笑的学生^[3]，大抵上他们其他科目的成绩不大可能理想的——因为学习任何学科都需要阅读文本，需要理解能力，但这些孩子连流利朗读都掌握不了，理解能力自然就差出许多，于是在各个科目都可能因此落后于他人。

事实上，朗读是提高“理解能力”的最基本方法。因为当一个人可以流利地朗读一个句子的时候，即意味着说他正在完成对这个句子的“拆解”与“重组”的过程——这是个复杂的系统工程，信息通过眼睛输入，经过大脑识别、理解、处理之后又运用口腔的种种器官形成正确的声音，而后又通过耳朵反馈回大脑；而与此同时，大脑在一刻不停闲进行各种处理过程：句子成分都有哪些、哪几个字词构成什么样的成分、这些成分各自是什么意思、成分之间的关系究竟是什么、这些成分组合起来又构成怎样的含义，等等。

反过来也一样，如果阅读者面对一个语法正确、逻辑严谨的句子竟然不能够把它流利地朗读出来，就说明阅读者“拆解”有误或者“重组”有误。重新把句子结构与成分意义以及它们之间的关系都搞清楚之后，句意也就自然明朗了，读起来自然就“顺”了；而后再把句子多读几遍——其实就是“通过重复练习理解过程、巩固理解能力”了。

所以，为了提高阅读理解能力，一定要花费一定的时间把“朗读”的基本功补齐。对学外语的人来说，我觉得起码要坚持一年的晨读（每天一小时）才能算是基本过关。我的经验是，岁数越小在这方面越容易进步（比如，高中生在这方面的进步就比大学生快）。刚开始做不到“独立朗读”（毕竟是外语，很多人害怕读错）的话，那么就“跟读”（可以参照《新托福听说训练（系列，共12篇）》）。

补充材料（一）：

Facts About Reading Aloud

[http://www.rif.org/parents/articles/Fact_readingAloud.mspx]

Source: Family Reading. NCES Fast Facts. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

Reading to young children promotes language acquisition and literacy development and, later on, achievement in reading comprehension and overall success in school. The percentage of young children read aloud to daily by a family member is one indicator of how well young children are prepared for school. In particular, a mother’s education is consistently related to whether or not children are read to by a family member.

• In 1999, 53 percent of children ages 3 to 5 were read to daily by a family member, the same as in 1993 after increasing to 57 percent in 1996.
• As a mother’s education increases, so does the likelihood that her child is read to every day. In 1999, 70 percent of children whose mothers were college graduates were read aloud to every day. In comparison, daily reading aloud occurred for 53 percent of children whose mothers had some postsecondary education, 44 percent whose mothers had completed high school but had no education beyond that, and 38 percent whose mothers had not completed high school.
• White, non-Hispanic children are more likely to be read aloud to every day than either black, non-Hispanic or Hispanic children. Sixty-one percent of white, non-Hispanic children, 41 percent of black, non-Hispanic children, and 33 percent of Hispanic children were read to every day.
• Children in families with incomes below the poverty line are less likely to be read aloud to every day than are children in families with incomes at or above the poverty line. Thirty-eight percent of children in families in poverty were read to every day in 1999, down from 46 percent in 1996, compared with 58 percent of children in families at or above the poverty line, which is down from 61 percent in 1996.

补充材料（二）：

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocalization]

Advocates of speed reading generally claim that subvocalization “places extra burden on the cognitive resources, thus, slowing the reading down.” These claims are currently backed only by controversial, sometimes non-existent scientific research; in some cases, concepts are drawn from pseudoscience and urban myths about the brain. Speedreading courses often prescribe lengthy practices to eliminate subvocalizing when reading. Normal reading instructors often simply apply remedial teaching to a reader who subvocalizes to the degree that they make visible movements on the lips, jaw, or throat.[2]

There is no evidence that normal non-observable subvocalizing will negatively affect any reading process [1] At the more powerful rates (memorizing, learning, and reading for comprehension), subvocalizing is very detectable by the reader. At the less powerful, faster rates of reading, (skimming, and scanning) subvocalization is less detectable. For competent readers, subvocalizing to some extent even at scanning rates is normal.[2]

It may be impossible to totally eliminate subvocalization because people learn to read by associating the sight of words with their spoken sounds. Sound associations for words are indelibly imprinted on the nervous system—even of deaf people, since they will have associated the word with the mechanism for causing the sound or a sign in a particular sign language. Subvocalizing is an inherent part of reading and understanding a word, and micro-muscle tests suggest that subvocalizing is impossible to eliminate. Attempting to stop subvocalizing is potentially harmful to comprehension, learning, and memory. At the more powerful reading rates (100-300 words per minute), subvocalizing can be used to improve comprehension.

Footnotes:

1. 我一直对所有的“快速阅读”理论心存狐疑——原因很简单，没有正常人可以脱离声音阅读文字。 [↩]
2. 关于“口吃”是另外一个话题，与我们正在讨论的话题无关。 [↩]
3. 他们只不过是不幸——实际上是非常地不幸——没人关注他们处于此种窘境的真正原因，也没有人愿意提供恰当的帮助，他们就这样莫名其妙地“落伍”直至从大多数人身边“消失不见”。 [↩]