Only great minds can read this !

Originally posted by NotSmilingAtYou
I ddint fnid tihs hrad at all, i msut be a gnieus.

Woah.

It's crazy because I read this statement so fast that I actually believed nothing was wrong with it but "gnieus" at first, and as I went back over it to revise it was if the words were turning into being misspelled.

reply to post by DumbTopSecretWriters


Star & Flag.

You and those who find the topic of this thread interesting may find a recent thread of mine of interest, as it is relevant to this conversation....

www.abovetopsecret.com...



Truly the English I tout is telling you the truth.


John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God".

Aznimag!!!!! I bet that took awhile

I've seen these things on the internet a lot for years. Honestly, I've never met anyone who couldn't read it.

Wow, I've never seen that before!! It actually freaked me out because I was able to read it without slowing down! It was a weird feeling, like suddenly being able to understand and alien language. So cool!

reply to post by DumbTopSecretWriters


HAHA!!!
I read it and I'm not the smartest tool in teh shed!!

I couldn't read it. OMG, am I stupid now?! I have no idea what the OP was saying. I feel worthless just like the 55% of other people who couldn't read it, and are not geniuses. Oh drat, I need another shot of bobuorn.

reply to post by DumbTopSecretWriters


1f y0u c4n r34d 7h15 y0u n33d 70 g37 l41d.

Seriously I've seen these things for ages,it doesn't make us special.
Hell fewer people are multilingual now than generations ago by % if anything we are getting lazier.

True language evolves, the use of text messaging has caused a new short hand to develop.
Texting has caused the ellipsis (...) to replace the comma (,) to represent a brief pause in conversation.
Things change.

I also question your statistics you say 55% can read this, but then say studies say it doesn't matter the order.
Which is it, the order doesn't matter or only 55% can read it?

I read that easily too. As a kid I was very dyslexic. Could that be a benefit?

Originally posted by GreenEyedVixen

Originally posted by NotSmilingAtYou
I ddint fnid tihs hrad at all, i msut be a gnieus.

Woah.

It's crazy because I read this statement so fast that I actually believed nothing was wrong with it but "gnieus" at first, and as I went back over it to revise it was if the words were turning into being misspelled.

Yeah I heard about this YEARS ago when learning how to speed read. Me and my friend used to use this mothord but put the first and last letter around the opposite way as well and nobody knew how to decipher it...we thought we were so smooth

Everyone who can read, can read that stuff. You're not special, sorry lol.

This must mean I can read through all the bullspit some people write

Interesting though, how the mind can bring order out of simple chaos.

Fun, thanks OP

reply to post by operation mindcrime


I am sorry for bringing this up again and I'll probably come across as stupid but this is kind of important for me...

Is it:

the only important thing is that the first and last letter be in the right place.

or

the only important thing is that the first and last letter are in the right place.

Help me out here because Google is letting me down in a big way with understanding the English grammar.but "be" just doesn't seem logical.in this sentence.

Thanks....

reply to post by operation mindcrime


Generally "be" is used for living things.
Bears need to be in their caves by late (insert month) if they hope to hibernate.

"Are" can be used for inanimate objects or living things, depending on context.

Though grammar in general is going down the toilet these days.

reply to post by Pigraphia

Thank you for taking the time to explain the English grammar to me.

Although I'm still having problems with understanding wether the structure of that sentence is merely a choice or just plain incorrect. I can understand:

the only important thing is that the first and last letter are in the right place.

the only important thing, for the first and last letter, is to be in the right place.

For the first and the last letter, being is the right place is the only important thing.

etc etc...

but this...

the only important thing is that the first and last letter be in the right place

feels like it's incorrect or is it a matter of preference and could it be considered correct spelling??

Peace

(Sorry for the off-topic but I'm learning something here...)

Binary

010010010010011101101101001000000110111001101111011101000010000001100100011101010110110101100010001000000100100100100000011010100111010101110011011101 000010000001101000011000010111011001100101001000000110000100100000011011000110111101110100001000000110111101100110001000000111010101110011011001010110 1100011001010111001101110011001011100010111000101110001000000110100101101110011001100110111101110010011011010110000101110100011010010110111101101110

edit on 13-3-2012 by DumbTopSecretWriters because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

Thank you for taking the time to explain the English grammar to me.

Although I'm still having problems with understanding wether the structure of that sentence is merely a choice or just plain incorrect. I can understand:

the only important thing is that the first and last letter are in the right place.

the only important thing, for the first and last letter, is to be in the right place.

For the first and the last letter, being is the right place is the only important thing.

etc etc...
but this...

the only important thing is that the first and last letter be in the right place

feels like it's incorrect or is it a matter of preference and could it be considered correct spelling??
Peace
(Sorry for the off-topic but I'm learning something here...)

Of the three quotes you have at the top of your post the first is the closest to being correct.
The original material should say " in the correct place" instead of "in the right place".
I wish I could remember the rule but in English you should use "correct" instead of "right" as "right" is a colloquial word and while grammatically correct, it is considered poor English.
I just can't remember why though...

The reason the last one feels incorrect is because "be" normally referees to animate objects like a cat or dog, or human.
Grammatically it is correct, but it's considered "lazy" or "poor" English.

English is full of tons of weird rules where there are two correct options, but one is a better choice or more correct than the other.

On a tangent for weird English rules:
The rule that a double negative is improper is a fallacy.
It was invented by an English priest(I think Church of England) who loved math but couldn't get his papers published because they were rubbish or just reworks of other papers.
So he decided to apply the math principle of a negative number times a negative number is a positive.
In doing so he said having two negatives in an English sentence they negate each other and make the sentence logically false.
This itself is wrong because not all sentences are logical statements therefore they are additive not multiplicative.
Basically the no using double negatives in sentences was invented by someone with an ego and wanted to be remembered.
Other languages use double negatives.
So saying "I can’t get no respect" is actually fine as long as you aren't going up against a grammar nazi who doesn't know the history of grammar.

I'm willing to bet all of the weird English grammar rules that just seem wrong were invited by some quack who wanted to be remembered.

I hope this clears some things up, but I doubt it will as English is more of an "obey the rules" language instead of a "what makes sense" language.

reply to post by jerryznv


I'm a past government engineer whom worked on E4 and Q class projects and LWBR projects. When I passed the Civil Service Exam out of 175 people whom particapted, I was # one. The testing took all day. They called me the genius. I was the only one who was able to find the correct formula for a 99%+ THD which added another 5+ more years life to a LWBR reactor and a 65-75% breeder ceramic fuel.