Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemurion
To me it comes down to this:
You have two people together in a room. One person is reading a book out loud to the other.
I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that both people gain the same benefit from the book. I'm simply stating that they are doing different things. One is reading, the other is listening.
|
It's a flaw in our language. There is no equally specific verb for consuming an audiobook. If we zoom out and look at it objectively, insisting 'listening' is the appropriate verb for an audiobook would be similar to insisting 'looking' is the appropriate verb for a visual text. Can any of you imagine feeling made to say, 'Did you look at the new Stephen King yet?'. Or, 'I've looked at 50 books so far this year.' Or, 'I looked at Pride and Prejudice last night.' It's not nearly as specific nor does it give the same higher connotation as 'reading'.
I think, for us curmudgeons who care about this sort of thing, it comes down to those who think it can be disingenuous to call listening reading versus those who think it can be condescending to insist that listening to an unabridged audiobook isn't more or less the same as reading a visual text.
The biggest point of contention I think is in using 'reading' as a verb for books one has completed or for what one is currently consuming, e.g. 'I read 10 books this month' or 'I'm reading three different books at the moment.' In my opinion, it can be needlessly pedantic to insist that people who listen to audiobooks use special clarifiers in all situations as god forbid anyone thinks one actually read a visual text instead of listened to it. 'Reading' in these very prevalent situations is more a code-word for consuming the book and so I think it's just as appropriate to use it for all books consumed regardless of method.