Aoccdrnig to rscheearch by the Lngiusiitc Dptanmeret 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.
But tihs sudesppoly postrugeiis drentmapet apareps ircorcent. If tehy had ctreaed a denefrift eplamxe, praphes tehy wunld'ot be dinwarg teshe dvicpetee cosinuncols so qclukiy. Tehy aslo clitenonenvy redeeorrd tiehr leetrts to be eeasir to dipecher, mkiang an eelgenicdxy wrslehots slpame wrose. The Lusingitic Drapementt at Cigarmdbe Useitvinry nedes steamrr rrccheeserahs.
Here's the original mixed up text I had here, before it was improved by the first comment:
But tihs sspduepoly pteosruigis drampeentt aaerpps icceonrrt. If tehy had ceeatrd a dneerifft emplaxe, ppaerhs tehy wlund'ot be dinwarg teshe dviteepce coouinnclss so qlkiucy. Tehy aslo clitoeennnvy rrroeeedd tiehr lrttees to be eeiasr to dpceehir, mniakg an eeeilcndgxy wrslehots slpame wrose. The Ltiiusingc Daeemnrptt at Cigmradbe Usiintevry nedes steamrr rrrcchheeeass.
Here's the actual unscrambled text:
But this supposedly prestigious department appears incorrect. If they had created a different example, perhaps they wouldn't be drawing false conclusions so quickly. They also conveniently reordered their letters to be easier to decipher, making an exceedingly worthless sample worse. The Linguistic Department at Cambridge University needs smarter researchers.
As you can see, there is some difficulty reading it -- a far cry from "reading it without problem"! There are event some words that are indecipherable without much thought. If this example really is from Cambridge University, well then, there goes the neighborhood.