Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch 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.
Many of you, like me, have seen this before. I still find it fascinating. This also explains why we often read things incorrectly. Even more amazing is that someone typed this out and got all the right letters in there in the right "wrong" order.
Makes me want to try it:
Wilhe msot ppolee eojny hldoiay weeedkns, I fnid tehm olddy oagnre.
(I'm just wondering how much easier it is to read this jumbled stuff when it's predictable? Most writing is that way -- unpredictable words force us to alter our reading pace. Sometimes that is intentional and the thing we love about certain writers. But...I digress.)
oddly orange? :) good post. It was fun to read. I think i'm one of the 55. have I told you lately...you're awesome! :)
ReplyDeleteJanet did better than I could. I could not get "orange" until I read her post. So if it is not predictable its definitely harder, or ipsisblemo!
ReplyDeleteOh my gosh I could totally read that. Cool!!
ReplyDelete