Wow

[jedimistress]

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny ipmortnat tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl 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.

[heathfield]

Tehy mhigt be rihgt Stlil no esuxce for bad spleinlg !

[jedimistress]

Or ptucuoantin.

[CLOWN TICKLE]

Read the hunting of the snark youll see what he means

[heathfield]

Or some posts on AB! ;-)

[jedimistress]

??

[kempie]

dj�� vu

[sixpence]

The first I had heard of that, jedimistress, and it was a while before I even realised that the words were messed up, I was reading it so easily.

[LeMarchand]

Even if true - and I'm sure there are instances where it wouldn't work - bad spelling and punctuation make the writer's original intent unclear (and sometimes unintelligible). People with poor spelling rarely have all the correct letters to a word, so even if they have the first and last letters in the correct place the others aren't there. As for those that use writing affectations like text speak (u kno wot i meen), they remind me of little Ali Gs desperate for some street cred.

[JamesEverton]

It's not quite the whole truth:

http://www.spring.org.uk/2005/08/aoccdrnig-to- rscheearch-at-cmabrigde.htm

[xmwahx]

thats wierd i had heard of that but i didnt know how easy it would be to read it i didnt even notice when i was reading the question