quote:Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht 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.
Wlel, waht do you konw!
Kind of thought provoking isn't it?
(Knid of thugoht porkoving ins't it?)
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Wow, and here I was beginning to doubt Hatrack for a brief moment.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
(((Rbibat)))
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
*claws out own eyeballs*
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Sorry Hobbes, I was out of town last week. Sigh!!
What do you suppose the limits are to this result? How long can a word be, before scrambling the middle letters makes it unintelligble? How common does the work need to be? Does it work as well if you leave out letters or substitute incorrect letters?
[ September 22, 2003, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You can take credit for it. We'd never know the difference. Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
This is why both phonemic awareness and sight words (whole language) are crucial. Phonics alone doesn't cut it, but neither do sight words.
This little test only works if the words used are words that are already part of your visual memory as 'whole words' or 'sight words.'
Try these:
lasabatce
soucrrur
nitedrian
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Zalamosa, I can't get even one of your words, could you try using them in a sentence. I suspect that context is also extremely important.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
(Just so you know Papa Moose, I didn't link yours since Geoff's thread had a link to it via Ralphie. ).
Aren't rabbits supposed to be my natural prey? Well I guess techincally not since we don't occupy similar geographic locations so I guess the smilie doesn't represent me bitting you...
Hobbes Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
As I was trying to say on the third post when flood protection robbed me: Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Rabbit:
Those words aren't really fair because they're all rather obselete (and that's kind of my point -- I chose these because I figured no one would be likely to know them), but okay:
If they don't shore this wall up soon, it will lasabatce.
The general sent his soucrrur forth to spy on the enemy's camp.
The warm oceans here are abundant will all types of nitedrian.
NOTE: I can't vouch for my jumbles. They were done halisity and so there may be errors.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Are those jumbles done in the same manner as the email (i.e. first and last letter are correct)?
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Yep. But the words are either obsolete or very specialized.
I should have known that this was going to become a challenge. I'll confirm right answers -- as long as you all make sure that when you teach your kids or any other yunguns you influence to read, you teach them phonetics and at the same time work with them to develop sight words.
Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
So, I go and open up my e-mail and guess what's in the darn box!
quote: Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
It's going to live forever.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
I also noted while reading this thing that my reading rate dips slightly. This is because the eye has to glance at each word and decode it -- you can't take chunks of a sentence together [well except for when there's a two or three letter word i.e. in, at, etc.]. Or at least I couldn't the first time I read it.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
I know... I got one the day there were so many of these on the 'rack... Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
After looking at the original, I am quite confident that the spelling is not completely random, double consanants are fall together far more often than would be expected for random permutations.
[ September 22, 2003, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
IT'S NOT TRUE!!! It's NOT a real study, it's someone's misunderstanding of a study about HEARING published in Nature in 1999! And I'm not even gonna bother linking to snopes again!
*slightly calmer* And I have now seen this bloody thing TWENTY-TWO times!
I saw the thread title, and I hesitated. But I rather trusted that someone who is so aware of the necessity of scientific accuracy would have checked this with snopes or hoaxbusters or someone. *whimpers*
Make it stop. Please?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Havin onlee wone weigh to zpell a werd showz a lak of tru imaginashun.
Posted by Head Ditch Digger (Member # 5085) on :
Dan- that actually hurt to read.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Celia Dan meant to do that.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Those jumbles are driving me nuts.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
I don't know about Celia, but I am proud I was able to acheive that level of spelling mis-mastery.
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
My goodness, if I see that again, I'm gonna SCREAM! But thanks for sharing, Rabbit!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I was referring to HDD's pain. Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
The third one is doable albeit very specialized. The second one is possible albeit brutal because it's an alternate spelling of an obselete term -- but one that it's possible one of our learned Jatraqueros has read it (especially in the context of military history/royal history of medieval Europe or of classical Greece/Rome). The first one is so obselete as to be an exercise in endless frustration.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I give up. I probably wouldn't recognize those words even if they weren't all jumbled up.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm going to start using lasabatce in sentences.
lasabatce \las-uh-BOT-kee\ 1. to crumble, especially into water.
Venice shimmers with the ghosts of the centuries-dead, and I take a long, slow look from the bridge over the Grand Canal, dreading the day these buildings finally lasabatce to the sea.
[ September 22, 2003, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
1. labascate 2. scourrur 3. I give up
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*sigh* Or, I suppose I could use the real word.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
*laughs*
I think that's a lovely word kat. I would use it. EDIT: did you make the definition up or is it an actual Italian word? Because if you made it up, it's remarkably close to the actual definition.
And: I bow to the mighty furred one, although I thought that you'd get the third one and not the first one.
1. labascate -- verb = to begin to slide or tilt
2. What's 'scourrur'? The word I based it on is scurrour (alt. splg. = scurrier) -- noun = a scout
3. neritidan (alt. splg. = nerite) -- noun = a type of brightly-shelled gastropod found near warm water seas; a type of sea-snail.
Again: I didn't know these words -- well, except for scurrier, but I didn't know the alternate spelling. I simply plucked them at random from the dictionary to prove my point.
[ September 22, 2003, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: Zalmoxis ]
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
By the way, the answer to the question this thread asks is: I sure hope not!
Hobbes Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
scourrer is an alternative spelling of scourer -- one set out to reconnoitre.
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
Dang. I missed that one.
For those who are anal like me, here are the various spellings that I've seen so far [kudos to the mighty R for the 'scourer' permutations]:
This word may actually come in handy for a novel idea I have.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:*laughs*
I think that's a lovely word kat. I would use it. EDIT: did you make the definition up or is it an actual Italian word? Because if you made it up, it's remarkably close to the actual definition
*curtseys*
I made the defnition up, but took it from the context of your sentence. It had to mean something close to that, and I've been dreaming about Venice lately, so I wanted to include the ocean.
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)