¡ï¡ï¡ï an interesting research ¡ï¡ï¡ï
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. The rset can be
a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the
wrod as a wlohe.
Isn't it funny. 
| osbits wrote: |
¡ï¡ï¡ï an interesting research ¡ï¡ï¡ï
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. The rset can be
a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the
wrod as a wlohe.
Isn't it funny. |
Taht is taltoly cazry man, I did not konw we did taht in our mnid sub-cnosioucsly.
But my fnierd has adelray dpiseovrd tihs fninidg to me.I've heard of this before and it is a nice property of our mind. It only shows how much we are able to adapt to some particular tasks, which is one of the main differences with the animals' brains. I do wonder however if a young child that just learned to read would also be able to do this exercise, and if not, around what age one begins to be able to do so...
Yeah, this used to really really amaze me lol :X
I know, this research is really funny, but you have to admit that they use extremely short and easy words...
this is how people can read complete pages in just seconds, instead of complete words they read complete sentences, and even bigger pieces of text at once.
| Coclus wrote: |
| I know, this research is really funny, but you have to admit that they use extremely short and easy words... |
I don't know about that. In the topic starter, we have the following:
| Quote: |
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy |
I wouldnt call those extremely short words, and being the start of a topic, you don't have contextual clues. Looks pretty valid to me. You might be able to concoct a less readable sentence, but there seems to be something to it.Wow, I am really surprised at how wasy it is to read that way. I know about the phenomenon, but it is truly intriguing.
Not really. No. Why did you post this? Old news. Show me something cool.
I remember reading somewhere that if people are suspended upside down their brain re-adjusts and presents the picture the correct way up.
Not entirely sure of the details but its a similar effect I think - the brain takes something and converts it to what we know so we can undestand it better.
David.
English is an interesting language Tihs is relaly cool, but I had arelady hread aoubt it. Amazing the way that our brains work though isn't it.
| Quote: |
| English is an interesting language |
This property of written text is not exclusive of english lenguage. In spanish lenguage it works equally fine. Does someone know of a lenguage in which this property does not hold? | ptolomeo wrote: |
| Quote: | | English is an interesting language |
This property of written text is not exclusive of english lenguage. In spanish lenguage it works equally fine. Does someone know of a lenguage in which this property does not hold? |
Chinese. (heh)I think that we should consider the topic of overdetermination of the written lenguage. The fact that ´everyone´ can interpret the same text independently of how letters are positioned means that there is more information than needed in a text. So one may think that a lenguage (say chinesse) where this property does not hold must be a more compact and intelligent way of writing than the way american or latin people do.
Psychologists have documented a mental heuristic used to speed up knowledge acquisition called "schemas". What happens is when you show someone a picture and say memorize it, (most) people don't necessarily encode the actual image. Instead, they encode a sort of "script" that they can use to reconstruct the image on recall.
For example, if you show me a picture of a blue apple, i will construct a script something like this: "picture of apple - strange thing about it: it's blue". Then when you ask me what the picture was later, i will be able to reconstruct it in my mind as a picture of a blue apple. But if you ask something that i didn't bother to encode - like "which way was the stem leaning, left or right" - i will probably just go "buh" and make a blind guess.
They have also demonstrated that when presented with a list (such as a string of letters), we tend to encode the first few and the last few elements of that list better than the rest - this is the "primacy" and "recency effect".
So what's probably happening is we're seeing a list, using the head and tail of that list for processing - because it's faster than using the whole list - and applying schema for words we know. We see "lanugage", parse the "la" and the "ge" and the general size, observe that "language" is a common word that fits that pattern and the semantics, and do one final check to see if it fits by seeing if the key letters (the "n" and "g" and "u", for example) are there. It all works, so we read "lanugage" as "language".
Our minds do lots of tricks to speed up processing that can be exploited by tricks like tihs.
It also works with spoken language. In some circumstances the brain actually generates missing parts of speech and you hear them.
If the speech follows a predictable pattern you can loose up to 75% of the signal and still understand it. Below is an example I recorded quickly to demonstrate this - the sound file has 65 percent of the signal taken out (silence). You should still be able to make out what I am saying
http://bikerman.info/resources/mywork/audioredundancy/65percent.mp3 I had seen this before, but it is still cool. I wish I knew how this worked...our minds are so fast at this. Think of how nice OCR (optical character recognition) would be if the computer used some of the same tricks.
There are also things like this:
This is
is cool
If you look too quickly you miss the second "is".
Cool stuff.
| JBotAlan wrote: |
| I had seen this before, but it is still cool. I wish I knew how this worked...our minds are so fast at this. Think of how nice OCR (optical character recognition) would be if the computer used some of the same tricks. |
That depends on how you define nice. ^_^; It would work most of the time, but sometimes would be tricked.Gosh... as for me and my knowledge of English reading of that text is real torture=)
But I can believe that for native languague of every human that rule can be right.
*add* yes! I've tried Russian with that metodic and it worked!
i'm actually kind of curious to know if it would work for a pictographic language like Chinese. i suppose it would depend on the structure of the written sentence.
i know Japanese, but not natively, and i can't see how you can rearrange the kanji/kana in this sentence (coloured by word): 「素早い褐色の狐は犬を飛び越えた。」 and still be able to determine the meaning. If you were to write the whole thing phoenetically: 「すばやいかっしょくのきつねはいぬをとびこえた。」 and keep the participles in place... maybe? Are there any native speakers of pictographic languages like Chinese, Japanese or Korean here? What about script languages like Arabic or Punjabi?
Latin and Cyrillic based languages i can see working because of the spaces to break up the word groups. But for pictographic and script based langauges there's no such delimiter, really. Can it still work?
