this has been going round the web for a wile i wondered if any of you had seen it yet, it is serprisingly far more readable than just my standered bad spelling

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. ceehiro.

now i can read that as about as well as anyother witing but other people i have met find it hard.

and this is copy pasted so i don't find it easier because i wote it.

It's true for many words, and many people, but not all words, and some people have trouble witht the messed up spelling. I can decipher the meaning well enough, but not as quickly as I could if it was spelled correctly.

Short words, and words that are spelled with different combinations of the same letters (Gary & Gray for example) make it more difficult.

Anyway, as far as spelling experiments go, I prefer this one:

A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
by Mark Twain

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli.

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

i find xava's words very easy to read, almost as easy as regular words. Beo's however presented somewhat of a problem

also see:

http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/8/5211
http://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/2/10168

I love that Twain bit:)

Beolach, that's hilarious... where did you come across that?

xava: Interesting, I found I could read the scrambled paragraph quite easily as well.

it dose suggest to me that the human brain takes a lot of shortcuts about things.

that it is about as easy to read as normal could mean that the brains subconscious works things diffrently to what we do consciously because with me at leased when i try to read it slowly looking at each word it becomes hard but when i scan it fast it is rather easy meaning as i see it that different parts of the brain cope with it better although this might be my dyslexia rearing it's head.

allso my light dyslexia dosent seem to affect it at all (enless in the form of the slow reading) witch even though i can read at a fair pace i thought whould afect it.

If I see another thread on this junk I'm going to explode. EXPLODE!!!!

Re: Phaserlight

I don't remember where I first saw it. For copy & pasting it here, I got it from the *nix fortune-cookie program (fortune) from the bsd-games package. fortune -m "Mark Twain"

Re: genka

It's just another post in this thread, not a new thread, but if you want, feel free to explode, anyway. :-P

Genka, if you do explode, please do so in a box or some such.

Can it be a ball? I like round things.

Sure, but be sure it is sealed off so we don't get blood everywhere. Very inconvenient.

But if it's sealed, how will I breathe?
You sense make lots not!

If that bit of Twain's supposed to be easy to read throughout, then it's further proof that my brain doesn't work the same as an average human's, since it becomes intelligible to me about halfway down the line. Of course, maybe it could be due to the fact that I'm a Grammar Nazi on the weekends.

Xava's bit I can read with no problem, though.

It's not intended to be easily readable. It's just something I'm reminded of when people mention "spelling experiments." However, if your reading comprehension is high enough that you can read, understand, and immediately begin applying the new rules, then it is readable. Few if any people have that high reading comprehension, though. Most people would have to either read it very slow, or reread it multiple times in order to make sense of it.

Actually, not only is it not intended to be easily readable, it IS intended to NOT be easily readable. One of Mark Twain's contemporaries is Melvil Dewey, who is best known for developing the Dewey Decimal Classification system for libraries. But Dewey was also an advocate of spelling reform, and was involved in founding the Spelling Reform Association, and he is responsible for many of the differences between American and British spellings (color vs colour, catalog vs. catalogue, etc.). Mark Twain didn't believe in spelling reform, and his "Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling" is a satirical joke on Dewey & the other proponents of spelling reform. And Twain was right, Dewey had very limited success with his spelling reform. His parents named him "Melville Louis Kossuth Dewey," which he tried to have changed to just "Melvil Dui", but how many of you call the library classification system the "Dui Desiml" system?

AAAYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEE, Beolach's makes so much more sense to me.

actualy i can read them both with relative eas, maybe that explains why i'm so bad at spelling.

I also hate homophones, i figure if they sound the same they should be spelled the same and meaning should be determined by context.

So, based on the context, what does "read" mean here, Lord Q?

I read books by J.R.R. Tolkien.

Except of course "read" (simple past tense) and "read" (simple present tense) are not homophones, so you'd say they should be spelled differently, right? So, if you spell the past tense form of "read" the way it's pronounced, what does this mean?

I have red books.