Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.”Īt first glance, it seems amazing. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. “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. I’ve seen this paragraph a lot in the past week: Listeners would still understand what was being said. Saberi and Perrott of the California Institute of Technology broke spoken sentences into 50-millisecond segmentsĪnd found that if they reversed each segment and strung them all together in the order of the original sentence This fascinating observation and illustration subsequently did the rounds as an internet e-mail FW: favourite. We only need the first and last two letetrs to spot chganes in meniang. The resaon for this is suerly that idnetiyfing coentnt by paarllel prseocsing speeds up regnicoiton. Saberi's work sugsegts we may have some pofrweul palrlael MyĪnsaylis did not come to much beucase the thoery at the time was for shape and senqeuce retigcionon. Letetrs, keipeng the first two and last two the same, and reibadailty would hadrly be aftcfeed. In a puiltacibon of New Scnieitst you could ramdinose all the He demonstrated this with the following paragraphs in his letter: His research for a PhD at Nottingham University had shown that skilled readers could read and understandĮntire pages filled with text in which letters within words had been swapped around. Kourosh Saberi and David Perrott and illustrated how randomising letters in the middle of words has little In a letter to New Scientist in the issue Graham Rawlinson commented on research by
0 kommentar(er)
