Smarter Than You Think Analysis

In the article “2b or not 2b”, David Crystal begins with discussing how others such as John Humphry argued that texters are “vandals who are doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbors 800 years ago. They are destroying it” (335). This is also the common belief of most people. People often argue about the bad points of technology over our language. However, Crystal believes that texting can improve children’s ability to read and write rather than hinder their literacy as many people claim. He also argues that not all texting are done in abbreviated words. Complex messages and institutional messages are often texted in standard form of

Authors such as David Crystal along with language teachers like Shirley Holm supply Cullington with valuable experiences and opinions on why texting benefits young adults. Cullington picked up that texting allows students to have a “comfortable form of communication” (365) which aids them in their growth in the English subject. After the author gathered a great number of sources and opinions from either side, she then decided to conduct her own experiment to which she got her own results.

Although her study supports the hypothesis that texting and writing have no relationship to one another, Cullington (and the researchers whose work she analyzed) recognizes the significance of new technology and society’s evolving modes of communication. She writes, “The use of text mes- saging as a common means of communication is becoming increasingly popular; therefore, this issue should continue to be examined” (94). Not surprisingly, the popularity of texting has increased since the time of Cullington’s article and so too has research on its effect on student writ- ing. What Cullington may not have anticipated, however, are the ways in which texting itself has changed. How might innovations such as Internet access, various “apps,” and software advance- ments have changed texting in the mere two years since Michaela Cullington published her article in 2011?

Clive Thompson’s “Smarter Than You Think” reflects upon the idea that technology is her to help us more than we think, rather than the popular belief that technology is ruining the way we think. Thompson believes that the pair between human and technology is making us smarter. Along with that, our minds are slowly adapting to the use of technology, advancing our thinking. Lastly, the relationship between technology and human, has brought humanity closer than ever with the ability to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Clive Thomason believes the stronger the bond between humans and technology, the smarter we can become; I also alongside with Thompson believe this is true, and if so us as humans need to embrace the use of

We as a society are evolving with each generation to come. We are getting stronger, faster, and smarter. Just as cell phones are no longer square blocks with numbers on them and TV’s are not in black and white, writing itself has also evolved. Once upon a time many wrote and spoke in a Shakespearean form of language and over the years it has evolved into something we call modern English. In recent years, technology has advanced greatly and cell phones have become one of our primary use of communication. With cell phones came a new form of writing called text messaging. Text messaging is used to send short, concise messages to anyone around the world. Often times text messages involve the use of abbreviations which stand for different things and also involves frequent use of emoji’s as a form of expression. This form of writing is now considered informal writing and is not acceptable in academic settings. In Michaela Cullington’s essay “Does Texting Affect Writing?” she touches on both sides of whether texting is hindering students writing or if it’s actually having a positive effect. She then makes is clear that she believes most students are educated enough to know when text speak is appropriate and when it’s not so therefore it has no effect on students. Although, I agree with her thesis, she lacks credibility due to her insufficient evidence. In addition, I also believe

After reading Texting and Writing, by Michaela Cullington, I do not agree with many of her viewpoints. Cullington argues that texting does not affect a students writing. Textspeak, the abbreviation and shortening of words like used when writing a text message, does affect the way a student writes because they use the abbreviations, and their writings tend to lack punctuation. When a writer uses excessive abbreviations on a regular basis they can get stuck in the writer’s head causing them to use them in all of their writings. Cullington did make good points of her own opinion on texting and writing in her piece, but I disagree with her and believe that texting and

There has been claims that texting can adversely affect students’ formal writing skills. Michaela Cullington, author of “Does Texting Affect Writing”, responds to these claims by saying that texting does not affect students’ formal writing but helps them improve it. She mentions that texting teaches students’ how to write concisely, students’ know that textspeak is only appropriate when texting and not when writing formally, and that texting allows students’ to have a casual setting to practice their writing which help improve their formal writing. All of Cullington’s arguments are invalid; texting does harm students’ formal writing in multiple ways such as: writing texts “concisely” is not beneficial since students will forget how to expand

Texting Cullington’s introduction is well-written the way she is describing when and where texting is coming in handy. This captures the reader’s attention and the eager in reading more to find out what Cullington is talking about. The essay contains information on the different perspective of texting. Cullington did not agree or disagree directly but used research of her own and discussed what her finding was. “My research suggests that texting actually has a minimal effect on student writing” (367).

it reinforces simplistic writing that may be acceptable for conversation but is not good for critical thinking or analysis.” This statement is saying that texting is good for the simple parts of writing but does is not effective for the analysis part. Texting can be good for writing in some

In recent discussion of, “Does Texting Affects Writing” by Michaela Cullington, one view is that texting has a negative impact on teens and their writing. Cullington shows both sides of what students, teachers, and professors have to say about the issue of texting; yet after research this belief may not prove to be true. Then she writes about personal experience regarding the issue.

In the article” Is Texting Killing the English Language?” from TIME, they start the article off with one critic referring to texting as the downfall for the written word. “Penmanship for illiterates,” The article goes not agree with the critic. The article explains that texting is the new kind of talking. In these times there is hardly any hand written correspondence. If you want to reach out to someone you send then an email or the most common is a text. Texting has made reaching out to someone so easy and convenient. If you have a thought, or an idea you grab your phone and send a text message. You usually have a response within seconds. I don’t think that technology is killing the written language; I feel that it is just making it easier to have quick communication with others. I feel that texting is like short hand you are abbreviating words to get your message across quickly. Our society is so rushed and

Though the power of text messaging has many benefits to it, the misuse of this technology can cause serious problems for society. With the ability to communicate instantaneously on a mobile device, society focuses more and more on their

Technology is quickly becoming a huge part of day to day life for nearly everyone. If you walk around most places, you will see a large percent of people either on their cell phones, on their computers, or using some other electronic device. While some of it is being used for business and other important things, most of the time, it is more for entertainment. It is because of this that people claim that technology is changing the way people think today. In his article “Is Google making us stupid”, Nicholas Carr argues that people have become dependent upon the internet for information rather than having to work to figure it out. In the article “Does texting effect writing”, Michaela Cullington argues that people’s texting is effecting the way people write because people don’t show emotion when texting, so that is translating back into their writing. Both arguments are effective, both appeal to emotion, but the more effective argument is Carr’s because it is a more sound argument based on logic and credibility.

Texting is a fairly new form of communication that has taken the world by storm. It became popular around 2001, and originally had its limitations, such as the 160-character limit. But now that technology has advanced, texting has followed along and is now a convenient, casual, and a more immediate way of communicating. So naturally, texting has evolved also in terms of the language used within it. We see this mostly in the form of abbreviations and short hand spelled words. Some people argue that texting has ruined the English language. Studies and observations have shown that the benefits of texting and cyber speak are much more broad then expected. Textisms have been shown to increase phonology skills, brain activity, creativity and provide a relatable outlet for students in education.

Peterson, 2009). Students use texting more because it is an easier way of communicating. The downside of it being a faster and easier way to