I'm sure you've already seen this, but

[sisyphusshrugged]

it's so cool.

"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."

via metafilter

Comments

[temima.livejournal.com]

But is it cross-linguistic? Since English is known for orthography that doesn't match phonetics (ie, you don't spell words like you say them), the whole word approach is almost compensating.

If I have the time, I think I'll look up similar studies. When I did my senior-year paper for psycholinguistics, one paper I referenced talked about Swedish-speaking dyslexics reading English better than Swedish because of the 'whole word' comphrension.