Can we get efficiency if we do word memorisation with this system? Or would it be too complicated? Actually, we just memorise 182 images. That’s a lot less than the two-digit PAO.
If I remember correctly, you have developed the paao (pa-adjective-o) system. I find your ideas on this subject very valuable. If we code any word in this way, will it be too complicated? I think this system will save us a lot of trouble while memorising words.
I think it would be better to make images for syllables, and only if you couldn’t find any other way to memorize the word via sound associations or other conceptual image that made a connection with what you are trying to memorize.
I think it would be too complicated remembering all seven images for every letter, and it would be too many images in one single locus. Some would definitely fade away, and even though you could probably remember the words without needing to remember all the images/letters, it would be a waste of time to make them in the first place. I have three categories, I think that is more feasible, and they are all very concrete (Person, Object, Car/animal that can be mounted upon). Perhaps I could make one for males and other for females too. This way I can get six letter with three images that are very concrete and connected: a person holding a object mounted or driving a specific thing. It’s a more organic image, I think. Anyway, just some hints. Adapt it to your use.
Are you trying to memorize exact spelling or just cue you to the word so you can say it?
While the multiple category system can work, it requires a LOT of intentional elements to remember in their exact order within an image or a scene. And using it for letters its still a one-to-one compression ratio, which isn’t great. (It conveys an advantage in numbers if you can get 2 for 1, but 1 to 1 is kinda meh.)
If you do want to go this route, I’d maybe recommend using multiple adjectives, maybe one action to keep your scene as sensible as possible.
Angry
Billy
Attacks
Neon
Dan
(With an)
Oaken
Nunchuck
But honestly if exact spelling isn’t what you’re after, syllables and soundalikes would be my first choice.
Abandon.
A Band On.
A marching band pushes up against a huge light switch, which clicks a massive spotlight onto them.
This is just basically two important “intentional” elements to remember. A band and an on switch.
Compare that with 7 intentional elements with the PAAO or other combined structures. Just less to manage.
(Also, just to clarify… I definitely didn’t develop the use of Adjectives within a PAO, I think that idea has been around long before I started messing around with mnemonics!)
I’m not trying to memorise the exact spelling of the word. There are words that we have difficulty in reading a text. It is tiring to constantly look at the dictionary for these. I am thinking of creating a series to minimise this. Let the categories create a creature for us. Let it be a creature whose face is Albert Einstein but whose body is a dinosaur and whose profession is an operator. If the target word is a verb, let’s replace it with the action category. If it is an adjective, replace it with the adjective category. The idea of memorising by sound similarity is very good, but it may be blocked at some point, we may not think of an equivalent word. Yes, this system is complex, it has the aspect of slowing us down, but I think it will never leave us halfway. Maybe I should test it for efficiency. There have been many systems that I have dreamed of in this way and abandoned. Maybe this is one of them. Thank you for your answer. Greetings.
Hi! To be honest from my point of view I think it is way too complicated for lower results. Why would I use 7 images to remember the word abandon when I can just memorise a poor dog that got abandoned by his family?
A very strong memory athlete can memorize 50 words under a minute. With your approach he wouldn’t need 50 images to remember de 50 words but probably at least 250. I do think it just makes things harder from my point of view
Not sure if it’s exactly the same than what you’re doing here, but I tried out something like that for Hebrew because it’s unlike any language I learnt before and I had a really hard time in the beginning.
Most words being three letters (consonants) I have Person (man or woman depending on the genus of the word) – Place – Pet/Helper.
Depending on which vowel the consonants are carrying, the people are using a Tool/weapon/accessory, they are in a certain Location in the place and the Pet has a certain state.
So have Letter/Syllable 1: Person-accessory, letter/syllable 2 : place-location, letter/syllable 3 : pet-state.
Example: אֹזֶן (ear) aleph-holam (Arwen with a soccer ball), zayin-segol (Zanzib bazar, at the artist’s booth), nun (Nemo the fish, in no particular state because nun carries no vowel). The image is: Arwen (feminine) posing to be painted at the artist’s booth in Zanzib, holding a soccer ball in one hand and a fish bowl with Nemo in the other hand. The artist is fascinated with her elvish pointy ears.
My conclusions :
It’s definitely useful when you have a word that is completely foreign, and you don’t even know how to start to remember it because you don’t know what to link it to.
It’s useful for spelling (is the e in ozen a segol or a shva? Segol because she’s at the artist’s booth and not Hakim’s emporium)
It’s useful for gender (is ozen masculine or feminine? Feminine because it’s Arwen and not Aragorn)
You definitely become more fluent with time and it can be quite quick because the word often comes back to you when you just think about the image instead of having to visualize all the details (ear? Something with Arwen getting her portrait done… oh yeah “ozen”)
BUT it’s still very slow to encode/decode. You get quicker with time but frankly if you can find sound-mnemonics it’s much better. I use it only on the most difficult words, that I always get wrong because it gives me a starting point.
Was it worth the time I spend developing it? I tend to say no, but I like experimenting so I’m glad I tried it, it was kind of fun.
If I were to start again? I would keep it much more simple, with only a list of people for the first syllable/letter (because it gives you the beginning of the word which often means the rest comes more easily and because it gives me the grammatical gender).
So for my example it would be Arwen (feminine) with her super elvish ears can hear the ozone layer breaking but she stays zen about it : ozone-zen>ozen.
If spelling is hard you can always add details later. In my example, segol is always something artistic and shva always something magic/religious (because of the places they are stored in the memory palace I used to learn the alphabet). So ozen with segol is because she’s listening to the music of the winds in the atmosphere. Written with shva it would be her praying the ozone depletion doesn’t get worse, etc.
So I think it’s probably too unwieldy a system to be very efficient, but that shouldn’t stop you have fun experienting
Yes, I agree that it is an unnecessary system for words that are not difficult. There is no need to memorise 7 pictures for the word Abandon. Because I can break the word into meaningful parts like “a band on”. Or it can be very easy when I find similar words. But sometimes this means hours for a single word. At least this is the case for me. Since I am not a memory athlete, I do not try to memorise words in a short time. At least spending 2 or 3 minutes on 1 word will not be a problem for me. Long-term memory is my primary goal. I try to make it fun, to make it like solving a puzzle and to make it a little bit faster.
I think the same as you. This system is not necessary for every word. I like to try to make it fun and try new things. Thanks for the examples you give, you may be giving me new ideas. Greetings
