EVERY now and then, somebody in the Echo's editorial team spells a word wrong.

That misspelling then does everything it can to slip through a series of safety nets that generally - but not always - catches the little blighters before the paper goes to press.

Sadly, there have been occasions when human error results in a story - or God forbid, a headline - containing one of these pesky mistakes.

It is galling, it is irritating and while we take the collective blame for all mistakes, it is my desk displaying the many forehead-shaped marks that bear testimony to my personal frustration.

Spelling is a big deal in a newspaper and we take it seriously, especially when it comes to words (and there are enough to cause rancour in the ranks) that even the best-known dictionaries can't agree on.

The bedrock of my own education was my spelling and my way with words, a talent that some readers may believe has taken its leave in recent years.

I was brought up with spelling tests and I am fiercely critical of an education system - a society even - that appears to be abandoning the beautiful English language for some bastardisation that removes all the vowels and even then doesn't care too much where the remaining letters land.

Now an English university lecturer has come up with the really bright idea of having a spelling amnesty' and allowing students who spell common words wrong not to be penalised for being, well, a bit thick really.

It seems Dr Ken Smith is so fed up with having to correct his undergraduates' errors that he's asking colleagues to turn a blind eye. And his reason?

"University teachers should simply accept as variant spellings those words our students most commonly misspell."

Words like Febuary instead of February, opertunity in place of opportunity, thier for their, nieghbour for neighbour or foriegn for foreign.

Yes, English can be a complex language at time (just think of the many different ways ough' can be pronounced), but God forbid that Dr Smith should ever take up a career in journalism with his so-called variants.

Of course, he blames the education system for failing to teach the relevant rules of grammar and spelling.

What a pity he's given up on trying to help them improve them...

  • Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are.

The olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae.

The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm.

Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh?