Quote:
Originally Posted by meeera
"Read" has multiple meanings. One, a very narrow one, is restricted to visually perceiving linguistic symbols and mentally translating them to meaning. A much broader one involves interpreting the meaning of any text (and 'text' can be considered narrowly or broadly also). We also read lips; we read music; people reading Braille are reading; etc etc etc.
I don't believe that staking out a tiny margin around one particular kind of reading, and declaring that to be the one and only true meaning, serves much in the way of useful purpose.
|
For me, the fundamental question to ask is "who is actually performing the activity?". When someone reads a book, they are doing the reading. When someone reads Braille, once again they are doing the reading. But when I listen to an audiobook, I'm not doing the reading; the narrator is. In the same way, if I listen to a CD of a violin concerto, I'm not playing the concerto myself, but listening to someone else play it.
Of course, anyone else is free to use any definition of "reading" that appeals to them. I'm just saying what my own definition is and why, as an avid listener to audiobooks, I don't personally consider what I'm doing to be reading.