This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Is text slang and msn talk ruining the language?

username81904

Is it gradual language development or is it just a plain lazy.

In the same way that old English developed into our modern day language do you see it happening again? How do you think people will be speeking in a 300 years?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

ForeverIsMyName

People who claim that English is changing for the worse obviously don't understand that language is a means of communication which is constantly adapted to fulfill it's purpose more efficiently and effectively.

Reply 2

Penny Crayon

I think it is a bit of both to be honest.

Personally, I think it's sad that kids are handing in essays
written in 'text' talk, not knowing that they wont be accepted
because they aren't in proper English.

Also the mixed nationalities of this country will edge the English
language further and further away from its current/former state.

Examples such as 'Dis' and 'Dat' coming from other accents
such as Jamaican accents in which alot of our idiotic,
wannabe gangster, youngsters have introduced.

Sad really.

Reply 3

Zoecb

ForeverIsMyName

*ITS!

And it bloody doesn't! It makes it LESS efficient and effective. It makes it completely unintelligable and makes me SO ANGRY!

*has definitely decided write about standardisation for her linguistics exam in January*

Reply 4

username81904

Using less sylabols seems to make conversations much quicker and cheaper because i can send less texts, i have to store less data on my phone. is it possible for short hand linguistics to be standardised?

Reply 5

Alasdair

To be honest, anyone who takes an interest in language or linguistics should be descriptive, not proscriptive about it...

Anyway, it's not as if people are really speaking differently because of txtspk - they're just writing differently (although I must admit to having said 'lol' once or twice). And writing is supposed to be a reflection of the spoken language, so...

Reply 6

ForeverIsMyName

Zoecb

It makes it LESS efficient and effective.

Then it will die out because it's an inefficient method of communication.

Simple.

Reply 7

Alasdair

ForeverIsMyName

Then it will die out because it's an inefficient method of communication.

Simple.

Unless it has something else going for it, such as prestige...

Reply 8

ForeverIsMyName

alasdair_R

Unless it has something else going for it, such as prestige...

In that case the parts of the language that aren't functional will adapt, making it functional.

Language is constantly evolving. 10 years ago, people would be complaining about how we speak now. Where's the problem? No system has a lingustic monopoly, and I'm glad.

Reply 9

Alasdair

ForeverIsMyName

Where's the problem?

I wasn't complaining!

Reply 10

ForeverIsMyName

Damn right you weren't!

:p:

Reply 11

dogtanian

Zoecb

Interesting that as a lingust you're taking the prescriptive stance in an essay!

I won't be boring and repeat the whole language constantly changing.. stuff. I generally don't use informal forms in situations where I would consider them inappropriate, but clearly some people are starting to do that.

It's all quite interesting, really.

Reply 12

dogtanian

In certain contexts, it IS better. The obvious being paying for two texts being silly if cutting out a vowel makes it readable.

Communication should mutually understood, both in meaning and in social context. If two teenagers on MSN decide to use something I would consider to be unreadable, then it's appropriate. If one wrote an essay in it and the teacher considered it an inappropriate form, as I'm sure they would, then there has been a failure in that attempt at communication.

Simple.

Reply 13

Alasdair

darkfairy

If txt spk is more efficient and effective, why don't you use it now? (apart from the fact that it's against the rules of the forum)

Presumably it's more effective in certain circumstances. Now that we have nice soft touch keyboards, entering words into a computer system isn't one of those circumstances.

However, in other circumstances, where it's quicker/easier not to have to enter all of the word (a mobile phone keypad, or an old typewriter), text speak is in fact more effective.

Churchill used it quite a lot when thumping away on his typewriter, for example. 'yr' was a particular favourite of his, I believe...

Reply 14

samba

its vital in any low bandwidth situation!

Reply 15

Iago

Foreverismyname is fairly right - these things sort themselves out. The debate here is structured as though language use were in some way a result of government policy, or something that can be artificially controlled on a large scale. It can't. Some people will fight new forms of language (e.g. by not allowing essays to have them in, by ordering employees to write in a certain way etc.) and some people will aim to keep them away from 'formal' situations. Some will use whatever is handy, and some will actively support it in certain circumstances (that Scottish poet who writes in accent-phonetics springs to mind). And some people will just moan because it's something else to moan about.

Whatever the case, language will continue to evolve according to usage, regardless of any individual's conscious attempts at steering the direction.

Reply 16

dogtanian

Surely that's a personal decision for the people concerned? Like, the examiner and the student?

Reply 17

Crosseyed And Painless

As long as constantly using the shortest possible way to communicate something doesn't take over, I'm fine with it. I adore language and completely envy anyone with a decent command over ours...I do have a go at my brother for not speaking 'propper' because it's fun, but I also accept, and love that it's in a constant state of flux.
My one proplem with text speak is the fact that I often find it hard to decipher without reading it out loud, and harder to write as I have to think about it. I don't own a phone, so I'm always going over the character limit when I text from my mum's...*erm*

Reply 18

samba

darkfairy

That's why I think text speak should only be limited to places where it would be useful i.e. not an English Literature exam.

Well thats ****ing obvious innit.

I don't see how it would be effective in formal situations for example, as we're talking about txt spk and the English Language as a whole.

It'll be invaluable wherever bandwidth is at a premium, formal or informal.

Reply 19

samba

darkfairy

Apparantly not to those who do use it in English Literature exams.

Some people don't realise that it's not financially viable to do a crap degree at a crap uni, but that doesn't make it any less obvious to the intelligent amongst us.

Right...

Underwater GPS for example.