I was reading an article on this today and wanted to get some thoughts about it. There are two sides to this coin: 1. That the use of IM and TM is affecting the writing of the younger generations. They are incorporating the abbreviations into their papers, class assignments, and job applications, assuming that because these abbreviations are accepted in society, they are accepted in academic and business worlds as well. The premise is that this will eventually become the next evolution in the constantly changing and developing English language. 2. That the use of IM and TM is resulting in students writing more and also revising and editing more as well. Some teachers are using IM and TM as learning tools to show the constant evolution of the English language from the times of Shakespeare until present day. As well as starting on line chat rooms where children can discuss literary works using internet – speak, but are not allowed to use it when they are writing a formal paper. Not enough evidence to support either side at the moment, but I can definitely see some of the IM and TM abbreviations becoming part of the accepted English language. Who knows, maybe twenty years from now writers will be using OMG and LOL as accepted words in their manuscripts and novels. (Sad day that will be) How do you think IM and TM will affect writing and do you think it will eventually become acceptable to use the abbreviations in literary works? Red Rain http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/strategies/topics/literacy/articles/instant-messaging/index.html
Ugh, I certainly hope this will never happen. If those words and acronyms become part of the English language one day, I'm sure they will be considered slang and not used by people with higher education and especially (well hopefully) not authors.
there was as article on bbc news last week where they have introduced extra classes to stop kids writing in their accents. Kids in Newcastle were naturally spelling water as wota for example. Other kids were using text abbreviations like l8r (later) in exam papers. These kids were 16! They then went see the careers officer and he exhibited CVs with the same abbreviations so maybe in 20 years, English as we know it will be like some alien language. they also showed kids can't write, attrocious handwriting skills due to keyboards and 7/10 parents who were asked to look at their childrens papers didn't see anything wrong. It was like they thought it was acceptable - they didn't see 'see you later' spelt as 'c u l8r' wrong, it had to be pointed out and you could see the drop in their faces, in fact the parents spelt it like that themselves. These parents were aged in their mid 20s with kids 7 and 8 years old. Spooky!
The only thing is, that writers want to make money, and if they need to incorporate these abbreviations into their books in order for them to be profitable…. (Based on social trends) they might do it. It may only take a few best-sellers written like this to change the accepted form of writing. I would hope not either, but I can see why people are worried that it could become acceptable in the future.
I agree, Spooky Question is will society as a whole embrace this change in the future, thus causing us as writers to do so? Or will they reject it and keep to proper formal writing. I don’t see it happening in the near future, but it could very well occur eventually.
My age is showing, I had to look at the link to know what IM and TM were. With new technology comes a whole new vocabulary set. Some of the text acronyms are bound to leak into general usage like, lol, omg, and a few more. I don't see shortcuts like 'ur' replacing already common terms like 'you are'. I met one writer recently who won't write contractions in her work. I'm guessing she's from some old school that objected to slaughtering the language. I don't know, it was the first I heard the objection. Me, I just go with the flow and try not to sweat the small stuff, especially the stuff that reminds me of my dad objecting to 'kids these days'. [gives mammamaia a hug]
Hopefully not, I'd rather die than live in a world where 'text speak' is considered an acceptable way to write an English essay.
The fact that a sixteen year old wrote l8r, instead of later, is depressing. I hate text speak, and I think the reason why so many use it, no matter the writing venue, is due to a lack of formal reinforcement in their education. I come from a small demographic within this generation that had computers readily available, both in home and in class. Maybe it's just me, but having the access didn't make me want to carry over the interweb/text speak. On a positive note, however, it also taught me how to type--I had the keyboard memorized by the age of ten. Some of the games even taught me how to think critically through the use of real time economies, trading, networking, dealing with large amounts of people, etc.. Even using AIM and other Instant Messenging services taught me how to think critically, because I had a chance to go over my reply, before sending it. And since I was usually talking to a girl I had a crush on, this part was most crucial. This is also the same with a lot of kids I know who grew up as I did, and are now around my age (twenty-four). I attribute this to a focus on hand-writing and grammar in the schools my friends and I attended. Just as well, I never remember thinking, "Why can't I write like I can online?" because I knew I couldn't. And as I got older, the less I used of text/online speak, especially the more I played PC games. Text speak eventually became ugly to me, unless we're talking short-hand for note-taking, or conducting an interview, or something. That's cool. This brings me back to my first statement, but I'm going to re-write it. The fact that a sixteen year old wrote l8r, instead of later, and teachers are encouraging this kind of communication, is depressing.
I am guilty of using some text speak--Lol and the absolute rejection of the spelling of the word probably (Eg. Probly)--when I'm IMing or Texting. I used to use it a lot more, but then I took a college english class and decided that the english language is to amazing a thing to defile like that. There have always been those in society who don't care enough to learn the proper way to use language and the written word. I think that text speak may be replacing total illiteracy in some ways. Most people have cell phones, and use them to text, or use IM services, and they at least have enough of a functional understanding of english to know how to shorten it and spell phonetically. In my mind, that's better than not being able to write at all. It doesn't say a lot for the educational systems, but... there hasn't been much good to say about them for a long time. And on the other hand, there will always be those who know the proper way, and have true appreciation for language. I think that it'll all balance out.
Netspeak is so horrible that there is considerable backlash. People who would ordinarily be tempted to be a bit casual with their ordinary communications are tracing by being fastidious about their day to day writing.
I was gonna make that point too... but got lost in other thoughts while typing and forgot. I ttly agree wit ths.
I blame netspeak for the grammar problems of today. It is more of a convenience for an informal conversation. After the first month, I stuck to plain english.
I hope not as well, but as I researched the English language a little more, it seems that at least in America, the core of our language is mostly borrowed words. I believe over 148 words are borrowed from other languages. French being the biggest contributor, as 30% of our language is borrowed from them. With that said, it seems that if we are constantly adapting and integrating other languages into our own, it would be just a matter of time before TM and IM abbreviations were also included into our writing as well. Here is a website that goes into a little more detail in regards to how our language has evolved. http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Words04/structure/borrowed.html It might help to clarify the thought I am trying to convey.
This is a good point as well; technology does play a huge part in how language evolves. It can be reasoned that because we are constantly advancing our technology, our language will advance with it. I tried to research this to see if there was any documented correlation but could not find any supporting evidence for it.
Take the reasoning that we as humans are lazy readers and only read the first and last letter of each word. Oer Mhnd cun figure out what the word is without it being properly written. This would leave me to believe that eventually, we would cut out the unnecessary letters in between and develop a more efficient form of writing. Again, this is just speculation on my part; I have not researched it (as of yet).
I believe this to be true. With some teachers integrating text-speak into their school curriculum in order to get the children more involved in writing, they are actually reinforcing the poor writing skills by doing so.
I use it as well, but it isn’t hard for me to revert back to normal writing. Like erebh said, the children of today are having difficulty distinguishing between what is proper and what is not, which is why I fear that eventually the English language as we know it will disappear.
I agree it can be blamed for grammar problems of today. But I bet it will be the accepted form of writing in the future. I feel that if the educators of our world keep integrating it into school curriculums it will soon become part of the English language. Oh Noes! The death of proper English! I've been wanting to use that gif for awhile now, had to find a way to incorporate into one of my replies
I don’t understand what thought you’re trying to convey, could you elaborate a little more? Sometimes I need it spelled out to me...
The English language degenerating into abbreviations and acronyms is not evolution. Kids don't need to be taught about "txt tlk" in school. They learn real quick as soon as they get their first cell phone. And the LAST thing they need is to be told it's an acceptable form of communication outside of texting or instant messaging with their friends. If you let them use acronyms for everything, how are they going to learn how to spell? Or read, for that matter? Netspeak has a place, but it's no substitute for proper English.
I agree with that, but I think the biggest degeneration in standards in English language is the way it's spoken by people who should know better - newsreaders, newspaper headlines, even some teachers I've heard (and read) get confused with basics such as me and I. And that 'shouldn't of' is getting everywhere. These are adults who are supposed to be educated getting it wrong - so what chance do the kids have? At least with text speak they know (or should be taught) that it is another language and should be used, as you say, in the appropriate places. I think language is a bit like driving - if some of us were asked to take a test again, it's pretty certain we'd fail and continue to pass those failures onto our children on a daily and repetitive basis.
