Well, it interested me, anyway....
Sep. 12th, 2003 03:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ventaJust received this in a bit of junk email:
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is
taht the frist and lsat ltteer is 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 it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
Ceehiro
Anyone got any thoughts?
(No, I don't really imagine it's the result of serious research anywhere)
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is
taht the frist and lsat ltteer is 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 it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
Ceehiro
Anyone got any thoughts?
(No, I don't really imagine it's the result of serious research anywhere)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-09-15 02:40 pm (UTC)ow oes hat ffect omprehension?
The interesting thing (I found) about the rearrangement of letters was that I could skim-read it perfectly well without actually analysing what was going on. This wasn't the case for the missing vowels or the backward words - in both cases there were words in the sentence that I could only recover by consciously applying the rule to the letters I could see.
It's a bit debateable in the case of the missing first letter, since "I" was the only word it applied to.