Is IM and TM changing the English language?

Discussion in 'Word Mechanics' started by Red Rain, Mar 11, 2013.

  1. GingerCoffee

    GingerCoffee Web Surfer Girl Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    Messages:
    18,385
    Likes Received:
    7,080
    Location:
    Ralph's side of the island.
    http://www.techterms.com/

    Or did you mean something else? ;)
     
  2. Lemex

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,704
    Likes Received:
    3,425
    Location:
    Northeast England
    So-called 'Grammar Nazis' are an example. It's often very amusing when these Grammar Nazis make such basic slip-ups too!
     
  3. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    Yes, I do think IM and TM are changing the English language. Quite honestly, I'm not too mad about it. Language evolves, and this is no exception. We have to keep in mind that there is no objective standard when it comes to speaking or using language. People use language to communicate, and as long as people understand each other, I see nothing wrong with the direction we are headed in (even though I may not like it).
     
  4. Kaidonni

    Kaidonni Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    9
    Oh yes, there is an objective standard. Various languages work certain ways, and you cannot simply swap around word order or miss out a verb ending or mix up case in certain instances, or what you said comes out as complete rubbish. English allows rather flexible word order, but all of these abbreviations in and of themselves mean very little, they refer to specific phrases we are already familiar with within the context of the English language. Abbreviations are just that - shorthand, not a substitute for the proper phrases. You can't just use 'ur' for 'your' or 'you're', as it then screws up teaching the language as a second language ('your' and 'you're' sound exactly the same but mean very different things', one is a possessive pronoun and one is a personal pronoun combined with a specific verb and specific tense of that verb). It certainly means mixing up what letters represent what consonant and vowel sounds for no good reason (e.g. 'there', 'they're' and 'their' all sound the same).

    Certain abbreviations could become actual words, such as 'OTOH' (meaning 'on the other hand'). However, if you notice, the way it is spelt out provides approximate vowel sounds ('o' is simply an approximate orthographic representation of a possible vowel sound, it isn't an actual sound). We could use the international phonetic alphabet to indicate how to pronounce this particular abbreviation if we turned it into an actual word (and let us remember that certain languages use one word where English is forced to use many or can't even represent the same concept at all). However, 'YMMV' violates the spelling system of English - there is nothing there to indicate how it is pronounced. It really is gibberish. For it to be an actual word, it would need vowel sounds included and the abbreviation modified to reflect that. If we pronounced it the way people pronounce the letters in the alphabet (and that is nowhere near the same as pronouncing a particular consonant or vowel sound), it becomes a very clunky word.

    Other languages will be even less forgiving, for instance when word order is less flexible and case takes the place of prepositions (and is not combined with them). So, you can't really change language in just any manner you wish, and some are less likely to accept certain changes because it violates the actual manner in which that language even operates.
     
  5. thirdwind

    thirdwind Member Contest Administrator Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    7,851
    Likes Received:
    3,339
    Location:
    Boston
    Who defines/maintains this standard? The words and rules found in dictionaries and grammar guides are there to reflect common usage. If enough people begin to use "YMMV" or whatever, the dictionaries/guides must take this into account. Believe it or not, they actually have committees for this sort of thing. I believe they meet every few years to discuss what definitions/words should be modified/added.
     
  6. Kaidonni

    Kaidonni Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2011
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    9
    I'm not arguing it couldn't become a word, but I am arguing that when you look under the hood, there are all sorts of rules flying about in the English language - and any language - that must be respected (you can't do just *anything* with a language). Consonant and vowel clusters are one such point, and while they can and will evolve, as will the orthographic representation of phonemes and their allophonic variations, 'YMMV' as a word right now seems too great a step from the actual structure to the words in the language at present. Deep down, we know it is an abbreviation and not an actual word, because otherwise we'd completely eliminate the original phrase. That will happen - but then the rest of the language must go with it, changing in various other ways so it can actually be taught and come into general usage beyond an abbreviation. It may remain part of dialect and slang for a very long while, and only used by those most fluent in English, and not in any formal instances such as teaching it as a second language. When it does fuse with the language, other changes will follow (you won't have one thousand ways to denote a possessive pronoun as most will end up redundant).

    The only way to teach a language is through standardisation (so there does have to be an objective standard), because unless one has a grasp of the basics and 'rules', one cannot do all of the amazing things that lead to those abbreviations and slang, etc. Everyone has to be on the same page in the beginning in their respective language, and only then can they muck about. There is a standard solely so we can actually communicate, and that standard will always be there - it won't be the same as it was a thousand years ago, and it will be different in another thousand years - but it will be there to ensure we know what we are actually talking about. In fact, these are standards across language, such as the function of a personal pronoun.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. ChaosReigns

    ChaosReigns Ov The Left Hand Path Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    1,155
    Likes Received:
    554
    Location:
    Medway, Kent, UK
    i really hope not, i grew up with these being phased in, but i much rather use proper English when typing than shortening things! and surely with qwerty keyboards on most modern phones shouldn't that make it easier to type properly? i use most of the standard abbreviations like can't and don't because its what i see as acceptable in English but the others? eck no
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice