An interesting bit about reading

  • #1
quartodeciman
372
0
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are. The olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by istlef but ecah wrod as a wlohe.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Artman
1,509
31
I dno't bielelve it. Taht sudnos lkie nsesone to me.:smile:

Aulactly, he smees to be rghit.
 
  • #3
FZ+
1,599
3
Snouds lkie the old infroamtoin tehory "reunddnacy" ieda cmonig bcak...
 
  • #4
Gale
676
2
wow. that was amazing. truly. i read all of that without even thinking twice. who spends money on that kind of research?
 
  • #5
Hmm...that does seem to be somewhat true.
 
  • #6
Integral
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,253
63
Is this an English only phenomena? Does it extend to other languages?
 
  • #7
hypnagogue
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,277
2
Ptaetrn rncgetoioin.

(Actually that last word looks a little tricky don't it?)
 
  • #8
quartodeciman
372
0
A former work chum forwarded that to me; so I don't know the actual research described.

It doesn't seem like redundancy; in fact tweaking redundancy could make it much harder.

I think splitting or enjoining medial diphthongs (double unrepeated vowels), which disturbs the presumed syllable count, makes some words harder.

Who funds research like this? Ha! Grant-providers and grant-seekers: that's a whole branch of cultural anthropology of its own! :smile:
 
  • #9
Dissident Dan
237
2
Originally posted by hypnagogue
Ptaetrn rncgetoioin.

(Actually that last word looks a little tricky don't it?)

Well, i found it a little tricky, but I think that it's because "rn" looks like "m".
 
  • #10
Iltnsegnetiry I'm sdutynig tihs crsrootaivnel pnoheenmon at the Dptmnearet of Liuniigctss at Absytrytewh Uivsreitny and my exartrnairdoy doisiervecs waleoetderhlhy cndairotct the picsbeliud fdnngiis rrgdinaeg the rtlvaeie dfuictlify of ialtnstny ttalrisanng steennces. My rsceeerhars deplveeod a cnionevent ctnoiaptorn at hnasoa/tw.nartswdbvweos/utrtep:k./il taht dosnatterems that the hhpsteyios uuiqelny wrtaarns criieltidby if the aoussmpitn that the prreoecandpne of your wrods is not eendetxd is uueniqtolnabse. Aoilegpos for aidnoptg a cdocianorttry vwpiienot but, ttoheliacrley spkeaing, lgitehnneng the words can mnartafucue an iocnuurgons samenttet that is vlrtiauly isbpilechmoenrne.

Or, if you prefer...

Interestingly I'm studying this controversial phenomenon at the Department of Linguistics at Aberystwyth University and my extraordinary discoveries wholeheartedly contradict the publicised findings regarding the relative difficulty of instantly translating sentences. My researchers developed a convenient contraption at http://www.aardvarkbusiness.net/tool that demonstrates that the hypothesis uniquely warrants credibility if the assumption that the preponderance of your words is not extended is unquestionable. Apologies for adopting a contradictory viewpoint but, theoretically speaking, lengthening the words can manufacture an incongruous statement that is virtually incomprehensible. :)
 
  • #11
quartodeciman
372
0
Thanks for the sesquipedalian defeater!
 

Suggested for: An interesting bit about reading

  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
538
Replies
1
Views
277
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
630
  • Last Post
Replies
25
Views
898
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
737
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
409
  • Last Post
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
802
Top