How do YOU remember random words?

Random words - 5 and 15 mins - is my favourite competition event.

So, I’m curious as to how you do it.

Andi Bell used to associate word 1 to 2 and then word 2 to 3. It was an ingenious way to add an extra later and avoid having to go back and double-check the lists.

In 2001, I used that technique to match the then current world record. (Unfortunately, I didn’t compete!) However, with today’s targets, it is simply too time-consuming.

I’m guessing most people today use loci. Personally, I find placing two words per loci far more secure than just one.

I also imagine words differently if e.g nouns. And I see plurals differently to singulars.

What about you?

2 Likes

I’m currently using 2 words/locus. My best for 5 mins is only 56, though, less than half of what you can do! So I may try this linking method of Andi Bell’s. So far I’ve been trying hard to visualize the word literally, but I have a really hard time with some of the more intangible words. I probably need to work more on using “approximation” for some words, e.g., if the word is “belligerent”, visualize a bell to trigger the word, instead of trying to conjure up a man being angry and forceful. I also need to come up with a better way to handle the plural vs. singular issue, as I have had a lot of misses because of it.

LociintheSky and Parkouristix both gave me some great advice, and I think it is helping me. I need to get motivated to come up with some more memory palaces, though.

1 Like

Anybody who’s anybody uses 2 per locus.

1 Like

It’s hard for me to come up with an image as clear and versatile as my own preset images for random words on the spot. So I can’t memorize them the way I memorize digits or cards. I can’t memorize them well in fact, so I want to get in as many reviews as possible to stick the words with sheer repetition where mnemonics are weak.

So I will use the first image that comes to mind of course, you should always do this, though images don’t always come to mind. Sometimes there are images that come to mind that could be construed as representing plurality. If the word “grass” comes up, I’ll just imagine a lawn. Just a bunch of grass. Not just one blade of grass. That would be a better image for blade. It would work here, but that wouldn’t be the first thing to come to mind.

So how do I know that the word was not “grasses?” When I have plural words, I take the single image and duplicate it. There is an exact copy right next to the original image. The same angle, identical, just like double vision. That’s how I know a word is plural, and no matter how many images there are, if there isn’t a side-by-side perfect duplicate, I’ll know that even though I came up with an image with many things in it, it does NOT represent a plural word.

“ink” for “ing”

Initially, I move at a little slower than 1 word per second and I encode up to the target. I look at the two words at once and come up with an image to represent them. I do not come up with an image for the first word, then an image for the second word, and link them. Often I have only one image for the two words but both words are represented contextually. “jealous parachute.” I would just imagine a person parachuting and note that I am jealous of him. This is fine as long as your strategy is like mine. If you are a person who wants to encode everything well so that it should all be remembered and then review just to double-check, this won’t work well. There is no image of jealousy whatsoever, and “jealous parachute” looks identical to my image for “parachute.”

When I’ve encoded everything, I go back and quickly read the list of words. I interpolate words of my own to form phrases that are close to grammatically correct. I would start this chain by saying “jealous of the parachute that…” so on and so on. If you don’t use images at all and simply read through the target amount over and over very quickly while making as many phrases as you can, each as long as possible, you’ll remember the words very well. The problem is that when the first blank comes, you lose every single word after. Then if you peeked at the next word on the answer sheet, you’d be able to recall the next few words because of the phrase, then a blank, then a peek, ad infinitum.

Of course you can’t peek at an answer sheet during recall, so that is what the images in the loci are for - the images are essentially bookmarks.

I have 150 or so images for Greek and Latin parts, prefixes and suffixes. I rarely ever use them, but when I do use them they can really save me. I ought to relearn these and get to know them very well. Long, abstract words will often have these roots. “Con” is a convict, with old-timey black and white stripes and a ball and chain around his ankle. So “conversation” may be a difficult one for you to visualize. You could see people talking, but that same image could be used for many things and this realization may slow you down. I am able to confidently place two convicts talking to each other and move on. Then I’ll know it’s something to do with human interaction that starts with “con.” “Companion” is a tricky word. It’s easy to get an image for it - all you need is two people standing next to each other. But again, that same image could be used for so many things. I’d have that image, but there is a computer in a pan as well. Making these up on the spot is not fast, so creating the images ahead of time is essential to get a good score IF you like this method. I only resort to breaking a word down and using monosyllabic presets if I know I won’t be able to come up with an image at all. It’s slower to make than a regular image, but faster than sitting there puzzling over the creation of a difficult image, which will likely not be memorable anyway.

For word forms, clear, clarity, clearance, clearing, clear, clearer, clears, cleared - all of these images will include a modifier. Remember all types of errors hurt your score equally, so if you don’t remember the word form, you may as well have not bothered to memorize it at all.

1 Like

I am currently making a system for prefixes and suffixes, like pro- (professor in lab coat), anti- (ant), -ing (ink), -er (dinosaur, from ‘era’), you name it. I have not yet made an image for every prefix and suffix, but I have a good feeling with it. The prefixes and suffixes then get added to the base of the word. pro-human would be a human being researched by a professor in a lab coat, drinking would be a drinking cup full of ink of which I take a sip.

Abstract words, I cut into pieces which I can work with. ‘Problem’ would be a professor (pro) wearing a huge sports emblem on the back of his lab coat.

But words are still in need of practice for me, so perhaps I’ll change the system over time.

1 Like
There is no image of jealousy whatsoever, and "jealous parachute" looks identical to my image for "parachute

I couldn’t agree more. Personally, I find remembering two words per loci FAR easier than one. It’s not just about using less loci, but - as you demonstrate - the interaction between the words.

I convert the words into an adjective and a noun, but have symbols as to what they actually are.

I’ve remembered dozens of images for prefixes, etc, but don’t find that they actually save all that much time.

3 Likes

I thought I’d revive this thread. (If it’s not clear, this event is something of an obsession of mine!)

It seems to me that there are 3 main approaches to this discipline:

  1. Peg words
  2. Linking
  3. Loci

I would guess that in the early days, peg words was the primary approach taken by most competitors. This is a natural approach, as the words are numbered. So, 1 can easily be connected to its peg word (e.g. tea or bun) and that word can then be associated with the random word to be recalled.

Then, Andi Bell spoke of the benefits of linking, though I’m not sure how widely it was adopted on a competitive basis. My suspicion is that it is not implemented anywhere near as well as it could be nowadays.

I would guess that loci is the main approach taken by most competitors these days. Thank you to the Greeks, Romans and Dominic O’Brien.

The thought that goes through my head is that this is an event that has not yet really seen the light of day. I came across one website that referred to it as the easiest event! I’d suggest that’s nonsense. It may be that it is like Draughts - seemingly easy to grasp, but mastered by very few.

When the 1-minute barrier was broken in cards, it wasn’t long before everyone was focussed on that event. Then Ben Pridmore and his hats arrived and we soon had the Ben system and numbers, binary and cards were seen in a whole new light.

I hope that the Words event(s) will one day have their ‘Ben system’ moment. I would guess it would take a merging of all 3 approaches above - and more.

1 Like

Graham and all,
I’ve been playing around with trying to place 2,3,4 and 5 words at each loci to see what works for me. I liked the idea of placing 4 or 5 at a loci, as you then need less loci, and for shorter, speed events, I thought this would be beneficial. The prospect of being able to remember 50 words with just 10 loci certainly appeals. But placing 5 at a loci doesn’t seem to be working so well for me. I keep missing/forgetting one or even 2 at each loci. And I’m finding that in reality, I am actually just sub-dividing each loci and placing 1 + 2 + 2 words at each mini point within each loci. Having 5 words in one loci helps create further linkages between the words, but also slows me down. So, if the first loci is my living room in my house, and the first five words are purse, create, pendulum, air, sock, I would see myself opening a purse on my sofa in my living room, and then moving with this purse along the sofa to create a fabric pendulum, finishing on the floor next to the sofa, pumping air into the pendulum till it turns into a sock. Something like that. 4 at a loci works a bit better in that I can just do 2 +2. But I think I may be kidding myself, and that in reality I’m memorising 2 words per loci, its just that I’ve created three loci within my living room (all on my sofa, at very clear points along the sofa, which are the same each time). The additional links I’ve made between the first, second 2 and last 2 words at each stage don’t actually seem that important when I come to remember them.
I’m also trying with the more common approach of doing 2 words per loci, and whilst this is quite loci-heavy, even for a one minute event, it seems to work better for me. Alex Mullen has written about this too in his blog. I guess, one advantage of having 5 per loci, as he says, is that you might be able to memorise 3 words together, then 2, at a loci, if the particular words lend themselves to this when they come up. So pig, head, smoke, for example, could be memorised with an effective 3 part image quite easily. But for other combinations of 3 words, it might not be so easy - transparent, asynchronous, hitherto for example. As Lociinthesky notes, 2 per loci seems to be the preferred approach of many of the best competitors.
Trying all these different approaches is time consuming, but worth it, I think. And maybe trying with 5, then going back to 2 or 3 per stage may improve speed too. I’ve found my scores with 2 per loci have got better after I’ve been practicing with 4 or 5 per loci. Doing 2 per loci seems to be a bit easier after trying 4 or 5…or maybe its just practice/familiarity with the words

1 Like

Chris, I’ve changed my tune regarding number/locus to some extent. At this point, I’m using 2 per locus for every event I can, words included. Initially, my images weren’t as good as my 3/locus images, but that’s improved immensely with practice. I think that 2 per locus is the surest way to maintain a consistently fast pace (in any event, I’d argue). That is, I find that you’re much more likely to breeze through 2-word groups; strings of words like “pig head smoke” are great for 3/locus, but those strings are just too hard to come by. I also wrote before that 3/locus helped me to create a better narrative, but that has changed for me as well. After some practice, linking two words together often allowed me to create even stronger stories, since you can make simple, strong associations. Experimenting is always great of course, but I just thought I’d share my current outlook.

2 words per loci definitely works for me.

At each point, I have adjective-noun. E.g Furry Wall. Obviously I also need to include pointers to tell me what the actual make-up was. Adjective-noun, noun-noun, noun-adjective, adjective-adjective.

1 Like

That’s an interesting method, Graham. How do you handle getting a pair of intangible words, which I see all the time on Memocamp, like “magnificence” and “transparent”?

I would see a magnified transgender parent.

The method is not stable enough to give me reliable results in 15 minutes. But for 5 minutes I can usually manage not to confuse ‘magnified’ and ‘magnificence’.

Alex - thanks. I agree about the stronger associations with 2, and with more practice I suspect I’ll settle on this as well.

Graham - so the first word is always turned into a near adjective, and then you use a pointer to get you back to the actual word (with the adjective getting you close to the word, and the pointer giving you what you need to get the exact word)? Interesting method, as Tracym says. I can see that this would reduce one of the time consuming parts of memorising a pair of words - that struggle to connect quickly 2 nouns, or 2 adjectives, or one of each (in other words lots of different types of pairs), in a systematic way. I guess that some of the time, in the recall, you might not need the extra pointer, as you can skip from the adjective you’ve memorised to the actual word without having to use the pointer to help you.
cheers all
Chris

That’s it. I actually stumbled upon the method because it seemed to be what my brain was doing anyway. So, why fight it.

For me, the most memorable and natural way to memorise 2 words is as an adjective-noun. Although my method is unreliable and may have inherent weaknesses, I’m also convinced that something like this would provide the “Ben-system-moment” that the Words event needs.

1 Like

How did the system end up?

Hi. How is the ben system? My english is not good