View Full Version : Can you read this?

09-20-2003, 03:55 AM
Aoccdrnig to 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 a porbelm Tihs is bcuseae the
huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig, huh?


09-20-2003, 06:09 AM
I'll be darned. That explains it. I thought the contributors to these forums were the lousiest spellers I had ever found and it turns out that you are all Cambridge graduates.

09-20-2003, 08:34 AM
You msispleld iprmoatnt.
Explains dislexia. You look at a word and expect it to be what it is. It also helps to explain why deaf people, like me, can understand someone when they know what they are talking about. Impressive thing, the human mind.

09-20-2003, 10:09 AM
benlaoy osioulvby smoe isntcanes are acnetittihal ot taht rcloiuiuds catozaitoipnuelcn

09-20-2003, 10:11 AM
Funny,the human mind still and always will be best taught by practice and not through edcutiocen http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif

My 92 years old grand mother spoke exactly ten words of english when she married my grandfather,she later taught her self to speak and read english by reading the french news in N.O., they used to print english on one side and french on the other.

The process for reading burns in images of how words "look"so the bulk of reading is actually remembering what a word looks like,even longer words are remembered and put together in that split second that it takes for you to see it and combine family groups,and then speak or type.

So ,here is a question,how do people born blind from birth whos vision is later corrected read the same way as you or I?My nieghbor down the road did,haven't heard a good explination as to how.

09-20-2003, 01:23 PM
Along that line Wierd is this effect. Even with half of the information missing you can still make it out.


09-20-2003, 02:24 PM

Please print yours in english, I have been trying to deciper it for an hour. I'm assuming you jumbled up the letters a little bit more. Also, maybe it is harder for longer words, since the brain probably tries to break them down into syillables.


09-20-2003, 05:23 PM
I argee!

09-20-2003, 08:34 PM
I think Oso's message says something about his rheumatoid or hemorrhoid, I'm not sure which.

09-20-2003, 10:09 PM
Been reading both ways, half there, and scrwed up letrs for yers now. I teach school, and work with the brightest, and those with reading and writing problems as well, as my minor is in "Reading", and I do this by choice.

The method of reading the "missing Letters" is a method called "sight reading", and was the major reading school of choice in the 1980's, and is a speed reading method taught in many schools.

The problem came in the idea that the "sight readers" could really go to town and comprehend and recall even the most complicated of passages, but when asked to write it out, they looked like the dumbest people on earth because the spelling skills were not there. The "dumbest people on earth" statement was NOT AT ALL TRUE because the rest of their work in everything was of exceptional quality as they could read what they needed, really comprehend it very well. But somehow, they would be labeled dyslexic and such, and would get the WRONG remediation for the problem when just basic phonics would do, and alas, the smart person taught right by sight reading, but lacking the "phonetic foundation", would never get the foundation, and would even get screwed up more by the wrong "changes". It was never a "dumb thing" the kids, and even adults could not spell in these situations, just the lack of the phonics. I identify this by many methods, and do on occassions teach adults to read. Yes, I also know how to teach remediation for dyslexia.

I know this. I teach both sight reading, and phonics reading. Sight reading is a necessity, but phonics gets one by the difficult passages and helps one communicate through the written word, not just to be communicated to. Both of my kids were screwed up by sight reading teachers who did not know a hoot about phonics, and it took me a couple of years to undo the problems.

Hooked on Phonics is a great program, combines both.

Just a long winded thing on why we do this, and how the mind works.

09-20-2003, 11:47 PM
baloney obviously some instances are antithetical to that ridiculous conceptualization

Yes, of course long words are worse, so I used the longest ones I could think of.

I deliberately screwed up and combined letters to get other sounds than the originals would have.

But I don't think I got outside the "rules" per the original. They didn't SAY you couldn't do that, the rest is clearly "a toatl mses", and you CAN'T "sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm"

Same as making up a good pun or joke. Can't be telegraphing the joke by having anything that could set off a connection in the mind of the listener before you hit them with it.

I don't think the theory of "toatl mses" works outside the limited vocabulary of the average tabloid newspaper....

[This message has been edited by Oso (edited 09-20-2003).]

09-21-2003, 01:09 AM
Maybe it is that because of all the miss-spellers out there we have learned all of the possible misspellings of all the common words. That might explain it.


09-21-2003, 02:56 AM
Wow...that was certainly easier to read than my longhand drafts. You learn something new every day (every day that you pay attention).

09-21-2003, 02:12 PM
Spope's explanation answered a bunch of questions that I had never even considered. Some valuable info in a few words. Gson is a real reader- reads things in 3rd grade that amaze me. He comprehends what he reads. Yet made a "d" in reading at school last grading period. Gotta think more on what Spope says- and may have questions.

ANother funny mind thing- I am left handed, never went to school a full year nor even in a single state. Never saw a left handed desk any where. Some teachers let me write left handed, some wanted me to convert. Each that wanted me to convert insisted that i hold pen/pencil in their manner. I wound up, to this day, with writing that changes with how i hold pencil. Looks like a different person wrote it, but many strokes are clearly mine and I cannot disguise them nor change them- secretary claimed she could tell my mood by how a rough draft looked. It is easy for me to write "up side down and backward" or mirror write. Problem is that when I do so it is HARD to write in normal right to left fashion after wards. The problem is worse as I age so I seldom do it anymore. Left handed threads still feel "correct" and if I do them several times, i actually have concentrate for the next few right handed threads. But I never have the problem unless I have been playing with left handed threads.
Tying knots? easy until I try to teach some one- then wife (a right handed sewing addict who teaches others) told method she teaches Lefty's to watch her in a mirror. It works.
Mind is a funny, poorly understood thing-of-a-ma jig. Rather play with machines than people.
I have "be-briefed" a bunch of men after "exciting things happened". Talk to them right afterward and hear what they say and you get strange stories that you know cold not be true. Give them time and the mind fills in the gaps and a more logical story develops. Let them exchange stories and something else develops. Point is, at no point did they "lie" the mind just cannot accept holes in events.

One of my most vivid "memories" was when I wrecked a airplane. I remember throwing on power, rising to about 125 feet and losing flying speed, pushing the nose down to recover and brother in law fighting me to keep the nose up. The air base owner swears the nose went down, max power came on, prop was puling ,but that wind shifted to behind me and I just fell out of the sky. I can still feel my brother in law pushing. I remember telling him to turn lose. Whose memory is correct? I doubt mine because the airplane had only a single wheel that could be thrown from side to side to change pilots. So we could not fight over the wheel. The plane was totaled, we were both injured pretty bad,so I never saw the interior again. Took me years to think of the single wheel- by that time it was part of my mind and knowledge won't get rid of the memories.

09-21-2003, 09:40 PM
I was in a speed reading course in Grade 6 - I think the principal just wanted to keep an eye on me.( http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//biggrin.gif I am not a stinker...OK maybe I was) I did peak at 4k+words/min with full comprehension. The library hated me - 12 books a day. Now I am lucky if I can read one page a day - don't have the concentration anymore.

Shed Machinist
09-21-2003, 11:00 PM
i was tleilng my mom aotut taht, and wtihin the fsirt setnecne she swoehd me the smae tnihg, olny her bsos snet it to her.

Shed Machinist
09-21-2003, 11:00 PM
i was tleilng my mom aotut taht, and wtihin the fsirt setnecne she swoehd me the smae tnihg, olny her bsos snet it to her.

09-22-2003, 12:09 AM
Steve, Beaver?

09-22-2003, 12:27 AM
Steve, Or Beech?

[This message has been edited by Sprocket (edited 09-21-2003).]

09-22-2003, 12:46 PM
In the meteorological world (at least in the old teletype days) all weather reports and text messages relied heavily on the use of contractions. A dictionary of accepted contractions existed for clarification when needed. But in almost all cases the contraction was simply the word with all, or most, of the consonants removed. When read in context, the mind can easily fill in the consonants.

09-23-2003, 12:32 AM
The plane was war surplus. The civilain version was the stinson reliant(likethe SR10, pretty near but not plumb). Mine was Ex-Navy used in WWll for instrument flying some place way up North. Beautiful plane, slow (about 130 K), radial, would carry all the lead washers you could pack in- I just lied about the washers http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net//smile.gif. Made runs to Swan Island in Carribean several times in 1961/62.

09-23-2003, 01:16 PM
Now I have question: How did Lynn's post get ahead of mine? Mine has the earlier date/time group. I keep wondering about the clock used.

On the old Stinson:

49' 11" tip to tip on wing, needed a small step ladder to reach the tie down fittings, Built like a bridge- cloth covered (mostly) over metal- no wood. Interior was supposedly larger than a 1939 Lincoln Limosine. A tail dragger that had to be "S" turned to guess where you were going until tail came up. Flaps like barn doors, engine was rated 435HP if memory serves. Could hang on the prop and do about 35 Miles per hour. a very slow lander (if you tried stall landing), like grease most times when wheel landing were made. Only other SEL plane I ever flew and liked better was a cessna 195.

09-23-2003, 01:33 PM

I flew a Stinson 108 from Edmonton to Shellbooke Sask and back once. It had the IO-360 conversion. Solid aircraft, built like a truck.

I don't have a lot of flying experience but I did fly about 15 different types, all light. My favorite was my Cessna 140 taildragger. Sweet little plane. I recovered the wings and in the process the old AME who supervised suggested we put some washout in the wings. As the 140 had fabric wings and twin wing struts this was simple to do and adjustable just by turning the bolts at the outboard end of the struts. This worked great. The plane was completely unspinnable. Also, you could fly the thing in full stall with full control as it would stall progressively from the roots out. I could at get about 25k forward and about 200fpm down with engine at idle. Pretty safe way to put it down in the trees if needed.

First plane I flew was Fleet Canuck with 0-200 conversion. We called them Fleeterschmidts. Full areobatic with Vne of 180. On my second lesson the instructor did a snap roll demonstrating what can happen when you cross control. Good lesson.