Cna yuo raed tihs? i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rsceearh at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs rpsoet it.It doesn't always seem to follow the rule it mentions ("the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae"), and a missing apostrophe in a contraction makes one word hard to read, but still...
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Seomtihng to sohw sutdnets nxet smeseter
Got this (forwarded) from ERG:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
My brain hurts.
I've been thinking about writing my dissertation in that style...
Taht wlohe sduty is bihsllut. By slpmiy rnisreveg teh oedrr of erevy cetcarahr enidulcxg tsohe at teh bninnigeg adn edn of ecah wrod, you mkae tgnihs elemertxy dluciffit to unatsrednd.
That whole study is bullshit. By simply reversing the order of every character, excluding those at the beginning and end of each word, you make things extremely difficult to understand.
:)
To be honest (or maybe I should write, "to be hesont"), I'm not sure if an actual Cmabrigde Uinervtisy study exists about this. One thing is interesting, though--while the text that was forwarded to me was not particularly difficult for me to read, yours was, Mark. I wonder why? Might it be because you didn't arrange the letters randomly (and I'm using that adverb loosely) and the writer of the e-mail did?
Post a Comment