What's your vocabulary size? (Test)
30,000 words. Most likely below average which is to be expected from people like us.
It's over 9000!
24,200
14 200
I call myself batyote and I fight crime at night.
28,900. idk.
I am fine with this result. I know how to use a thesaurus and a dictionary.I have been trying to pay more attention to repeating some words over and over in all my posts. Especially "I guess", "like" and "though".
Your total vocabulary size is estimated to be:
26,600
words
To bookmark or share your result, use the following link:http://testyourvocab.com/result?user=6332635
Share this test
Invite your friends to take the test!
This is the estimated number of entries in a standard dictionary for which you know at least one definition.
Thanks for taking the test! Based on participations so far, we've already got some decent statistics. Most native English adult speakers who have taken the test fall in the range 20,000–35,000 words. Click here for a full breakdown by age (opens in new tab/window).
And for foreign learners of English, we've found that the most common vocabulary size is from 2,500–9,000 words. Click here for the full distribution (opens in new tab/window).
However, we still need more data for complete analysis by age or education level, especially for participants under 15.
Last edited by Aylen; 03-12-2016 at 02:46 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
i might've done this i think. I wasn't in the mood to pay careful attention.Originally Posted by lungs
Edit: what also makes these estimations hard is that i can't necessarily give a definition to any given word, but when i'm in the midst of conversation i find i can use words i had either forgotten or didn't realize i knew. It's more like my vocabulary is more contextual.
Edit2: retook it and paid more attention to whether i could give specific definitions or not and got 26,400 so... not that big of a difference. Whatever.
Same.
I call myself batyote and I fight crime at night.
31400 much smaller than I thought
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
norton road
Taking this initially compelled me to expand my vocabulary, but, outside of telling people my vocabulary count or passive aggressively belittling someone by using words that they aren't likely to know, I can't think of a practical reason to do so lol. If I don't know a word, it's probably because I have never heard it, which means it is unlikely that I will ever have a use for it lol
22500 lol
83% on contra's test.
Last edited by marooned; 03-12-2016 at 03:55 PM.
22,900
This test is kind of dumb because the harder words it asks about are words often used in fiction, especially older fiction, which I don't read. I prefer to read non-fiction anyway, and if I do read fiction it's never from the 19th century or before and tends to be very recent.
Knowing some antiquated words that are not used in conversation and are barely even used in academia is kinda pointless.
31.9k
Here is another test. It gives you a percent instead, which isn't as interesting.
http://vocabulary.ugent.be/
I got 77%
19900, I am impressed..
PS 73%
15.800
Probably why the last section asks about reading habits.
21,600...seems about right.
29,700
the last row was like it was just making up gibberish
(and 84% on the other one)
"You said yes to 89% of the existing words.
You said yes to 0% of the nonwords.
This gives you a corrected score of 89% - 0% = 89%."
Am I the only one that took this and thought, "wtf is with all the pirate words?" Lol
People with large active vocabularies are arguably better at colloquial communication, so it's not completely irrelevant. A lot of average and low verbal-IQ people get tongue-tied when trying to express relatively simple ideas in real time.
Last edited by suedehead; 03-12-2016 at 02:01 PM.
That's not really colloquial communication, as being further from the average impedes common communication. The other person has to know what you're saying as well. Being "good at communication" is about adaptation to the other party or parties involved.
And high IQ people are better equipped to adapt; it's easier to dumb yourself down than to emulate people that are above your level of intelligence. Even average IQ people are likely to have only a vague recollection of their milieu's linguistic palette, and hence stumble over some basic constructs when put on the spot, something which rarely happens to people with high verbal IQs that aren't on the autism spectrum.
Well, I would agree that intelligence relates to adaptability, but not necessarily I.Q.
Portions of I.Q. tests use Ne/Ti, which are the most common stereotypes of I.Q. and I.Q. test questions. You have portions that are Visual-Spatial, which is most likely Si/Te. The Verbal portions, if present, are most likely Fi/Ne, or at least I am inclined to think that communication skills are Fi/Ne. The verbal intelligence tests are spoken by administrators. From what I can recall, my Verbal was the lowest on my original I.Q. test, but I was partially deaf at the time (test actually lead to hearing/speech treatments) and had to use visual/emotional cues to attempt to comprehend what was being asked when I couldn't hear. Later on my behaviors inversed once hearing was corrected.
I don't think I've ever met an intelligent person who seemed like they would score low on an IQ test, although that judgment is likely colored by confirmation bias. But theoretically, assuming no legitimate extenuating circumstances, how can someone with a severely limited vocabulary and capacity for abstract reasoning, poor long-term memory, poor spatial skills and meager fluid intelligence be considered objectively intelligent?
I think I'm good at identifying savants; e.g. Kanye West is musically talented and occasionally says things that are 'deep' and 'insightful', but I consider him to be of average intelligence at best. High IQ people rarely chimp out the way he does.
Last edited by suedehead; 03-12-2016 at 03:38 PM.
Well did you read my Guilford's post I made yesterday and look into it a bit?
No, link?
You can google Guilford's Structure of Intellect. Lots of pics too.
Size of my vocabulary depends on wich English-Russian vocabulary application i'm using in this moment.
I thought so.Size of my vocabulary depends on wich English-Russian vocabulary application i'm using in this moment.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
20,900
A few of the words I could have used in a sentence with ease, but honestly wouldn't have known what I was saying.
My level of English is close to middle school where we studed one foreign language. This is basic level with <1000 of common words.I thought so.
Lmao. That's what I think as well.
This guy's pretty prolix @Starfall
His IQ is probably 140+.
IQ Scores & RatingsHis IQ is probably 140+.
What is a good IQ score? What is a high IQ score? What is a low IQ score? These are common questions, particularly after someone finds out their score from an IQ test.
Lewis Terman (1916) developed the original notion of IQ and proposed this scale for classifying IQ scores:
- Over 140 - Genius or near genius
- 120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence
- 110 - 119 - Superior intelligence
- 90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence
- 80 - 89 - Dullness
- 70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency
- Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness
Normal Distribution & IQ Scores
The properties of the normal distribution apply to IQ scores:
- 50% of IQ scores fall between 90 and 110
- 70% of IQ scores fall between 85 and 115
- 95% of IQ scores fall between 70 and 130
- 99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140
Low IQ & Mental Retardation
5% of people have an IQ under 70 and this is generally considered as the benchmark for "mental retardation", a condition of limited mental ability in that it produces difficulty in adapting to the demands of life.
Severity of mental retardation can be broken into 4 levels:
- 50-70 - Mild mental retardation (85%)
- 35-50 - Moderate mental retardation (10%)
- 20-35 - Severe mental retardation (4%)
- IQ < 20 - Profound mental retardation (1%)
High IQ & Genius IQ
Genius IQ is generally considered to begin around 140 to 145, representing ~.25% of the population (1 in 400). Here's a rough guide:
- 115-124 - Above average (e.g., university students)
- 125-134 - Gifted (e.g., post-graduate students)
- 135-144 - Highly gifted (e.g., intellectuals)
- 145-154 - Genius (e.g., professors)
- 155-164 - Genius (e.g., Nobel Prize winners)
- 165-179 - High genius
- 180-200 - Highest genius
- >200 - "Unmeasurable genius"
More notes on High IQ and Genius IQ:
- Einstein was considered to "only" have an IQ of about 160.
- Mensa is a society for people with high IQ, in the top 2% (1 in 50).
- In 1926, psychologist Catherine Morris Cox published a study "of the most eminent men and women" who had lived between 1450 and 1850 to estimate what their IQs might have been.
- Go to Estimated IQs of the Greatest Geniuses.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
The 120-135 range would be ideal for me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
