If I just want to communicate that I’m familiar with the content, like I know how a James Bond film differs from the novel, I’ll say I read it. It’s just shorthand.
If the details of the media I used are relevant to the conversation, then I’ll specify that it was an audiobook.
People do, but I think you shouldn’t, because it adds confusion. The audiobook is a different experience, and I have no way of knowing which experience you had if you say “read” for both. Plus, as a pedant, it’s just not accurate.
Just say listened. There’s no shame, and it lets people know that they–for example–can discuss the quality of the narrator with you.
If you’re asking whether reading and listening are the same or whether listening “counts” as reading – no. This has been affirmed by multiple published scientific studies, most famously the 2000 study from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Congress had asked them to look at the most effective methods for teaching students and they concluded that reading tends to be superior to listening in terms of comprehension, long-term retention, and analysis.
If you’re asking whether it matters – it depends. Are you in a book club or a enthusiast group? If so, no one cares and it doesn’t matter, for all purposes saying you read something you listened to is fine. Are you in school, or a course where the professor explicitly tells you to read something and analyze and annotate it? If so, yes, listening is not analogous here.
I say you read it because you did. The only time I’d say you didn’t is if it were a play or movie but otherwise you get all the words written absorbed into your brain. you read it.
Think of it this way, if a blind person listened to an audiobook would you tell them they didn’t read it?
Yes. You are consuming the book via language processing, whether auditory or visual, (or by Braille) Visually impaired people use audiobooks, would we deny that they are reading?
To make the conversation shorter, I do say read. It takes an extra paragraph of talking to explain how you consume it. No one really wants to hear an unnecessary paragraph.
If they want me to elaborate I’ll explain about audio.
If you want to bro, like who cares. I often kindle/audible bundle for books so I that I can listen to audio books when I drive or are doing chores. As much as I like reading, it’s hard to read a book and fold laundry or read a book and sweep/mop my house.
If someone asked me, “Have you read Night Watch?” And I had listened to the book, I’d answer, “Oh, I had the audiobook and I loved it! I was shocked when blah blah, etc.”
I don’t think you need to hide it or emphasize it. You’re able to talk about the book, so great!”
If you pay attention then yes, if you don’t then no. I guess the same applies to reading a regular book, it’s just that it’s harder to go out of your way to look at every page in a book, at reading pace, without actually paying attention to the book.
You definitely do not process the information the same way. No; unfortunately it’s more or less the same thing as listening to a podcast. It’s not bad per se, but it’s not reading.
I don’t think so. Reading is reading. Listening is listening. I’d love to see a study on retention via reading V. listening. To me, the experience is just too different to equate the two
Technically, you didn’t “read” the book. However I’m not the one to judge bc some people need audiobooks for valid legitimate reasons. It’s making the book more accessible and the author of the book wouldn’t mind whatever format the reader consume it in.
You can if you want to. Unless you are a child still learning to read your brain doesn’t really care how you got that information/story. The only ones who are going to say otherwise are pedants and ableists
People have been going to book readings for a long, long time. I’d say I’d listened to it. Reading is an entirely different act using different senses and processed differently neurologically.
If you watched an entire play through of a video game, and essentially fully viewed the same exact content as the player who posted it, you wouldn’t say you played the game.
Yes. Saying otherwise would be exclusionary and inaccurate, i.e., visual and physical disabilities, learning and cognitive differences, and neurological and situational limitations. It’s not about the method but about engaging with and comprehending the content that is given through any method IMO.
The line for me is film or other adaptation vs reading or listening to the whole original story. So yes you read the book until it’s pertinent to the story (the conversation turns to paper or something).
I have tts read books to me all the time. I claim them. I have mild double vision that mostly affects reading and without tts, I’d probably just not read. Accessibility is a feature, not a competition.
I think for semantics you can agree you read it just to talk about the book. It’s basically saying “yes I have also consumed this media, let’s discuss”
My gripe with audiobook listeners is that they can be like “I read 400 books this year” and its like “that’s insane, how’d you find the time”
“oh I just put on audiobooks in the background at work”
That is 1000% not the same thing as reading 400 books and it grinds my gears when they say things like that.
Reading and listening are not the same thing. But I’m still going to say I read it. You shouldn’t give a shit about the semantics, and anyone that wants to take the time to argue otherwise isn’t worth talking to.
Sorry, edit to add: Past a 5th grade reading level. Anyone still learning to read, or learning comprehension, should continue reading print books. Past a 5th grade level, reading becomes more about consumption, and audiobooks are just that.
I just felt like that was an important distinction in case anyone tried to give their first grader an audiobook and say it was reading.
You did not read the book. Just like how you wouldn’t say you flew the plane to your vacation destination. And how you wouldn’t say you cooked a meal that you ordered at a restaurant.
Personally, I’d say something along the lines of, “I just finished the audiobook!”
I do think there’s a minor distinction between reading and listening to books, mostly because a narrator’s vocal inflections might provide a different interpretation of a line of text, even unintentionally. Take the phrase, “I don’t think so,” for example. I might read that as, “I don’t think so,” but an audiobook narrator might vocalize it as, “I don’t think so.” The change in emphasis might seem small, but these small moments throughout a book can ultimately provide us with a reading experience that’s unique and more personal.
That being said, I don’t take offense when someone refers to audiobook listening as “reading.” They’re still taking in the book in the author’s original words, and to me, that’s what ultimately matters most. As long as they paid attention and it wasn’t just background noise, I’m fine with that being considered having “read” a book— hell, I’m honestly just excited to see people interested in books.
Comments
Yes
If I just want to communicate that I’m familiar with the content, like I know how a James Bond film differs from the novel, I’ll say I read it. It’s just shorthand.
If the details of the media I used are relevant to the conversation, then I’ll specify that it was an audiobook.
You comprehend the book just as well as someone who read it with their eyes. There’s no need to make some big distinction.
It’s not really reading… I vote no.
People do, but I think you shouldn’t, because it adds confusion. The audiobook is a different experience, and I have no way of knowing which experience you had if you say “read” for both. Plus, as a pedant, it’s just not accurate.
Just say listened. There’s no shame, and it lets people know that they–for example–can discuss the quality of the narrator with you.
Yes. Your brain processes audio books the same way as regular books. So I count it
This question has been asked many times before.
If you’re asking whether reading and listening are the same or whether listening “counts” as reading – no. This has been affirmed by multiple published scientific studies, most famously the 2000 study from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Congress had asked them to look at the most effective methods for teaching students and they concluded that reading tends to be superior to listening in terms of comprehension, long-term retention, and analysis.
If you’re asking whether it matters – it depends. Are you in a book club or a enthusiast group? If so, no one cares and it doesn’t matter, for all purposes saying you read something you listened to is fine. Are you in school, or a course where the professor explicitly tells you to read something and analyze and annotate it? If so, yes, listening is not analogous here.
You listened to the book being read.
If I read a story to a baby did the baby read the book?
I say ‘consumed’ the book but I really hate saying that. There isn’t a great way to state it.
I say no, cause you heard or listened to the book, no reading was involved
If you paid as much attention as you would while reading, sure
If you put it on as background noise, no.
I say you read it because you did. The only time I’d say you didn’t is if it were a play or movie but otherwise you get all the words written absorbed into your brain. you read it.
Think of it this way, if a blind person listened to an audiobook would you tell them they didn’t read it?
No, that’s not allowed
It was read to you, not by you
you listened to it. reading is an act that you’re not doing if you don’t… read it.
Yes. You are consuming the book via language processing, whether auditory or visual, (or by Braille) Visually impaired people use audiobooks, would we deny that they are reading?
Yes.
If I listen to a podcast, I don’t say I read the podcast. Or a baseball game on the radio etc
To make the conversation shorter, I do say read. It takes an extra paragraph of talking to explain how you consume it. No one really wants to hear an unnecessary paragraph.
If they want me to elaborate I’ll explain about audio.
I always say it’s an audiobook
If you want to bro, like who cares. I often kindle/audible bundle for books so I that I can listen to audio books when I drive or are doing chores. As much as I like reading, it’s hard to read a book and fold laundry or read a book and sweep/mop my house.
Who cares? Just say what you want.
If you can read a room, you can read an audio book
If someone asked me, “Have you read Night Watch?” And I had listened to the book, I’d answer, “Oh, I had the audiobook and I loved it! I was shocked when blah blah, etc.”
I don’t think you need to hide it or emphasize it. You’re able to talk about the book, so great!”
If you pay attention then yes, if you don’t then no. I guess the same applies to reading a regular book, it’s just that it’s harder to go out of your way to look at every page in a book, at reading pace, without actually paying attention to the book.
Yes
You definitely do not process the information the same way. No; unfortunately it’s more or less the same thing as listening to a podcast. It’s not bad per se, but it’s not reading.
I don’t think so. Reading is reading. Listening is listening. I’d love to see a study on retention via reading V. listening. To me, the experience is just too different to equate the two
Technically, you didn’t “read” the book. However I’m not the one to judge bc some people need audiobooks for valid legitimate reasons. It’s making the book more accessible and the author of the book wouldn’t mind whatever format the reader consume it in.
You can if you want to. Unless you are a child still learning to read your brain doesn’t really care how you got that information/story. The only ones who are going to say otherwise are pedants and ableists
Technically no, if you wanna be a nerd “i listened to it”. But in general, yes
i mean i think it’s kind of different, but i’d at least consider it experiencing the book ig
I’d say you “listened to a book” not read it but may have gotten the same out of it-
I say “listened”. I don’t think it really matters much word you use though.
NST – Do audiobooks count as reading ?
If it’s just the tip does it still count?
When you find the answer to that you will find the answer to your question.
People have been going to book readings for a long, long time. I’d say I’d listened to it. Reading is an entirely different act using different senses and processed differently neurologically.
In the same way a child ‘reads’ a book by having mom read it at bedtime.
Excellent question, thank you for asking.
I say yes. You’re consuming the book and the info inside.
If you watched an entire play through of a video game, and essentially fully viewed the same exact content as the player who posted it, you wouldn’t say you played the game.
Yes. A bunch of people in the comments have a hard time with that, but they’re overthinking it.
With a book, you only need to understand the words, doesn’t matter if they’re read to you or you read them.
No, reading is done visually, by seeing words on a page. Or feeling the words with braille.
But with an audiobook, you listen to the audiobook. It’s a different type of thing. Both are totally fine, but let’s not confuse them with each other.
Yes. Saying otherwise would be exclusionary and inaccurate, i.e., visual and physical disabilities, learning and cognitive differences, and neurological and situational limitations. It’s not about the method but about engaging with and comprehending the content that is given through any method IMO.
Yes. Same difference
Yea. Anyone who gives you shit about it is an elitist asshole
I think they are different experiences but in practical terms it really doesn’t matter.
The line for me is film or other adaptation vs reading or listening to the whole original story. So yes you read the book until it’s pertinent to the story (the conversation turns to paper or something).
I wouldn’t
I have tts read books to me all the time. I claim them. I have mild double vision that mostly affects reading and without tts, I’d probably just not read. Accessibility is a feature, not a competition.
I think for semantics you can agree you read it just to talk about the book. It’s basically saying “yes I have also consumed this media, let’s discuss”
My gripe with audiobook listeners is that they can be like “I read 400 books this year” and its like “that’s insane, how’d you find the time”
“oh I just put on audiobooks in the background at work”
That is 1000% not the same thing as reading 400 books and it grinds my gears when they say things like that.
Reading and listening are not the same thing. But I’m still going to say I read it. You shouldn’t give a shit about the semantics, and anyone that wants to take the time to argue otherwise isn’t worth talking to.
Yes.
Sorry, edit to add: Past a 5th grade reading level. Anyone still learning to read, or learning comprehension, should continue reading print books. Past a 5th grade level, reading becomes more about consumption, and audiobooks are just that.
I just felt like that was an important distinction in case anyone tried to give their first grader an audiobook and say it was reading.
You did not read the book. Just like how you wouldn’t say you flew the plane to your vacation destination. And how you wouldn’t say you cooked a meal that you ordered at a restaurant.
It’s so weird to me that people have strong opinions about this
Depends on what feels best to you. I tend to say I read an audiobook. My friends and family understand.
Personally, I’d say something along the lines of, “I just finished the audiobook!”
I do think there’s a minor distinction between reading and listening to books, mostly because a narrator’s vocal inflections might provide a different interpretation of a line of text, even unintentionally. Take the phrase, “I don’t think so,” for example. I might read that as, “I don’t think so,” but an audiobook narrator might vocalize it as, “I don’t think so.” The change in emphasis might seem small, but these small moments throughout a book can ultimately provide us with a reading experience that’s unique and more personal.
That being said, I don’t take offense when someone refers to audiobook listening as “reading.” They’re still taking in the book in the author’s original words, and to me, that’s what ultimately matters most. As long as they paid attention and it wasn’t just background noise, I’m fine with that being considered having “read” a book— hell, I’m honestly just excited to see people interested in books.