Read this

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]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

That'll confuse the splelchekcer

I know, too OT for OT but it is too good not to post and I could not find a suitable thread.

Edit: For Swedes:

Quote[/b] ]En vestenkalpig unsdernöking gjord vid ett untivseriet i Enlgand har visat att utfiall de tv? fösrta och de tv? sista botskevärna i alla orden i en text är ritkigt plecarade, spelar det liten roll i viklen orgnindslöfjd de övirga boskvätrena i orden kommer. Tetxen är fullt läbsar t.o.m. om de andra bokestävrna kommer hullorebmuller! Detta eftorsem vi inte läser varje enkisld botksav, utan ser bidlen av ordet som hehlet.

For Norwegians:

Quote[/b] ]

En visktenpaleig unsdelr?kese gjort ved et untivseriet i Enlgand har vist at desrom de to f?srte- og to siste botsvkeane i alle oredne i en tekst er ritkig plessart, spllier det liten rolle hvkilen ref?kkelge de ?virge boskvetane i oredne kommer. Tektsen er fullt lebsar selv om de andre bokeastvne kommer huilbtertlulter! Dette fordi vi ikke leser hver eneklt botksav, men ser bidlet av ordet som hehleet.

Inresastaent!

[WhoCares 0]

Two days ago I got this three times, but in german  

Quote[/b] ]Hllao!

Ncah eienr Stidue der Crmadbige Uinaervsitet, ist es eagl in wlehcer Reifehnogle die Bchustebaen in Woeretrn vokrmomen. Es ist nur withcig, dsas der ertse und lettze Bchusatbe an der ricthgien Stlele snid. Der Rset knan ttaol flacsh sien und man knan es onhe Porelbme leesn. Das ist, wiel das mnceshhilce Geihrn nciht jeedn Bchustbaen liset, srodnen das Wrot als gazens.

Krsas oedr?

Tüshcß!

[Gollum1 0]

The Swedish one was the least corrupted and easiest to read, IMO.

[denoir 0]

Two days ago I got this three times, but in german  

Here it is in French;

Quote[/b] ]Sleon une édtue de l'Uvinertisé de Cmabrigde, l'odrre des ltteers dnas un mtos n'a pas d'ipmrotncae, la suele coshe ipmrotnate est que la pmeir?re et la dren?ire soit ? la bnnoe pclae. Le rsete peut ?rte dnas un dsérorde ttoal et vuos puoevz tujoruos lrie snas porlbl?me. C'est prace que le creaveu hmauin ne lit pas chuaqe ltetre elle-mm?e, mias le mot cmome un tuot.

The Swedish one is very easy, I almost don't see the errors when I read through it fast. In English, I see the errors but have no problems reading it. In German I have to focus. And French I have to focus a bit less although my German is far better than my French. I suppose it's because my French spelling is like the one of a drunk monkey

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://www.snopes.com/language/apocryph/cambridge.asp

[Crazysheep 1]

Damn! I was just about to make a topic of this....

[ralphwiggum 6]

i'm wondering if this idea is realated to certain laguage groups only. english, french, swedish and other language are degeneartes of Latin, which is a phonetical language.

i wonder if this idea can be applied to chinese, which i doubt it will, since chinese is not a phonetic language.

[denoir 0]

While searching for the French version I found some comments saying that for languages where inflections at the end of the word are important (like Russian) this won't work.

As for Chinese and other languages where words are not constructed by atomic letters, I would not even dare to guess. The equivalent would probably be incomplete symbols.

[ralphwiggum 6]

While searching for the French version I found some comments saying that for languages where inflections at the end of the word are important (like Russian) this won't work.

russian doesn't count in Latin group.    just kidding. they do.

it's an important point IMO. not all languages are like, even within the lgaugnae group.

Quote[/b] ]As for Chinese and other languages where words are not constructed by atomic letters, I would not even dare to guess. The equivalent would probably be incomplete symbols.

chinese is not completely symbolic, it's combination of simpler ones. for example, back in Ch'ing dynasty one of the confiscated anti-gov't paper had a phrase that reads:

"absence of sun and moon is sad." the true meaning of that phrase was "absence of Ming dynasty is sad". if you put chinese word 'sun' and' moon' together, it becomes symbol for Ming dynasty.

[NurEinMensch 0]

Then why did I have to spend all those years trying to learn proper spelling!

grrrr waste of time! But beware the language police is coming upon us!

[joltan 0]

I think that you quickly get into problems once you use combined words (like in german where you can stack words together as long as you want). Or would you decipher "Dumfnaküsasrofpätstindhachifztampe" (="Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmütze") - even when doing it word by word ("Dnaoudapmfsfichfhratskaätipnsmztüe") is still absolutely ilegible. As long as you keep to short non-combined (or at least easy) words, it's no problem. The german text above was an easy read.

[waffendennis 0]

Tihs is jsut an csae of bda sepliling am i rgiht or waht?

[toadlife 3]

vrey ture. the egnlish one was vrey esay to raed for me.

[der bastler 0]

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmütze"

(= cap of a captain of a steamboat on the Danube)

That was a popular game back in school. Can you create a longer word?

How about

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmützenhersteller"?

(=manufacturer of caps of captains of steamboats on the Danube)

Or

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmützenherstellungsprozeß"?

(=process of the fabrication of caps of captains of steamboats on the Danube)

But such long words are rare. And as mentioned the trick only works with well-known words, because the brain does some kind of image interpolation to speed up reading. Therefore texts with special technical terms should be unreadable if written "mixed-up"...

[denoir 0]

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmützenherstellungsprozeß"?

(=process of the fabrication of caps of captains of steamboats on the Danube)

Same with Swedish:

Donaufartygskaptensmösstilverkningsprocess

[iNeo 0]

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmützenhersteller"?

(=manufacturer of caps of captains of steamboats on the Danube)

Danube-angbatskaptenhattstillverkare

"Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitänsmützenherstellungsprozeß"?

(=process of the fabrication of caps of captains of steamboats on the Danube)

Danube-angbatskaptenhattstillverkningsprocess

[BoonieRat 0]

Wow!, that's wierd! ...

I don't think it'd got 'owt to do with phonetics as it's a purely visual thing, purely visual regoctinion...

PS, don't forget Chinese is written/read backwards, from right to left and bottom to top, and is purely pictorial in it's original form. It would'nt work with pictorial language as one 'character' often denotes the whole word, you'd be jumbling the sentance not the word ...

[Tamme 0]

The english version sure was easy to read. Interesting research.

You really think your words are long? Think again

kumarreksituteskenteleentuvaisehkollaismaisekkuudellisenneskenteluttelemattomammuuksissans

akkaankopahan

[NurEinMensch 0]

It's not like we couldn't beat it if we want to.

[Gollum1 0]

kumarreksituteskenteleentuvaisehkollaismaisekkuudellisenneskenteluttelemattomammuuksissans

akkaankopahan

Aah, Finnish is such a beautiful and complicated language. While other languages just combine words and use endings to sow them together, each word in there had its own part to play. It´s...hard to explain in English.

[EiZei 0]

It's not like we couldn't beat it if we want to.  

Want to bet on it?

To quote E2:

Quote[/b] ]

However, Finnish also has a method of generating infinitely long non-compound words through a peculiar recursive verb construction. Here's an example, using the verb tehdä ("to do"):

N  Verb          Meaning

0  tehdä         to do

1  teettää       to have someone do

2  teetättää     to have someone have someone do

3  teetätättää   to have someone have someone have someone do

  ...

N  tee(tä)Nttää  to (have someone)N do

The N=2 form is occasionally used even in real life, but forms beyond that aren't spotted too often. Still, they are grammatically perfectly valid Finnish, and thus the N=? form is and shall remain the longest word in the world.

[Skul 0]

kumarreksituteskenteleentuvaisehkollaismaisekkuudellisenneskenteluttelemattomammuuksissans

akkaankopahan

What da smeg does that mean?!

[Gareth Gates must die]

[denoir 0]

It's not like we couldn't beat it if we want to.  

Want to bet on it?

Could be used as a pickup-line.

Quote[/b] ]

Baby, my verb is longer than his.

[NurEinMensch 0]

It's not like we couldn't beat it if we want to.  

Want to bet on it?

Ok maybe that is unique.

On the other hand I'm no expert and maybe someone will find a way to beat this, since we all know how word lenght is related to...

[Gollum1 0]

kumarreksituteskenteleentuvaisehkollaismaisekkuudellisenneskenteluttelemattomammuuksissans

akkaankopahan

What da smeg does that mean?!

I guess it means something if you study it for 5 minutes, otherwise it´s just gibberish...