Guest naysayer Brian thoughtfully submitted the following:

Iltnsegnetiry I’m sdutynig tihs crsrootaivnel pnoheenmon at the Dptmnearet

of Liuniigctss at Absytrytewh Uivsreitny and my exartrnairdoy doisiervecs

waleoetderhlhy cndairotct the picsbeliud fdnngiis rrgdinaeg the rtlvaeie

dfuictlify of ialtnstny ttalrisanng sentences. My rsceeerhars deplveeod a

cnionevent ctnoiaptorn at hnasoa/tw.nartswdbvweos/utrtek:p./il taht

dosnatterems that the hhpsteyios uuiqelny wrtaarns criieltidby if the

aoussmpitn that the prreoecandpne of your wrods is not eendetxd is

uueniqtolnabse. Aoilegpos for aidnoptg a cdocianorttry vwpiienot but,

ttoheliacrley spkeaing, lgitehnneng the words can mnartafucue an iocnuurgons

samenttet that is vlrtiauly isbpilechmoenrne.

Or, if you prefer…

Interestingly I’m studying this controversial phenomenon at the Department

of Linguistics at Aberystwyth University and my extraordinary discoveries

wholeheartedly contradict the publicised findings regarding the relative

difficulty of instantly translating sentences. My researchers developed a

convenient contraption at http://www.aardvarkbusiness.net/tool that

demonstrates that the hypothesis uniquely warrants credibility if the

assumption that the preponderance of your words is not extended is

unquestionable. Apologies for adopting a contradictory viewpoint but,

theoretically speaking, lengthening the words can manufacture an incongruous

statement that is virtually incomprehensible. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *