In the article “2b or Not 2b” by David Crystal, he explains why he thinks texting will not destroy language. He infers that texting adds a new facet to communication. Crystal starts by establishing an opposing argument in the introduction when he mentions John Humphrys’ “I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language” (335). One can deduce from the title of the article—and Humphrys’ description of texters as “vandals who are doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbors 800 years ago.” (335)—that Humphrys does not support texting. Crystal goes on to mention John Sutherland, another man who describes texting as “bleak, bald, sad shorthand. Drab shrinktalk … Linguistically it’s all pig’s ear … it masks dyslexia, poor spelling and mental laziness. Texting is penmanship for illiterates.” …show more content…
Texting has grown exponentially since then, but texting does not necessarily hinder literacy. Crystal argues, “Although many texters enjoy breaking linguistic rules, they also know they need to be understood,” (337). When the messages are longer, more abbreviations tend to be used. He references a study that has proven that the number of abbreviations in a text message has resulted in higher scores on reading and vocabulary tests. According to Crystal, you have to know how letters relate to sounds throughout language to write
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
In Michaela Cullington’s essay titled, “Does Texting Affect Writing?” the author tests the ongoing question of how today’s youth handles the effects of texting in the education system. Using successful evidence from both sides of the argument as well as participating in her own experiment, Cullington is able to fully demonstrate how texting does not interfere with today’s students and their abilities to write formally in the classroom.
The result verified that there is evidence of a decline in grammar scores based on the number of abbreviations in their sent and received text messages (Swayne and Messer). In other words, the word abbreviations and punctuation short-cuts that famously used in text messaging can alter individuals’ ability to recognize and apply proper spelling, grammar and punctuation techniques in writing and daily life communication. If the uses of abbreviations are not controlled from the beginning, both sender and receiver of text messaging will be associated with how poorly they will perform on the test based on the level of standard literacy they have.
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
Recently I read ‘Feed’, by M.T Anderson, a dystopian novel about how advancement in technology is negatively affecting our society and the way we communicate with each other. The author led me to believe that these advancements, such as texting, are causing our language to deteriorate. Further research proves that texting may be improving and many are learning to accept. When the era of the written word dies, will we be left with an illiterate generation with poor grammar? Students are texting constantly. In and out of class, it is becoming a bigger and bigger part of their lives. Some might say that we are creating a less literate generation, but research shows that texting improves student literacy for three reasons. First, texting improves
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
“Does Texting Affect Writing” is about Michaela Cullington, the author, comparing two opposing perspectives. The perspective is whether texting hinders the formal writing skills of students or not. Millennials are a population that cannot go a day without looking at their phones so, due to the “increasing use of mobile phones, concerns have been raised about its influence on their literacy skills. No matter if it is sending or receiving a text or checking social media sites, technology has taken over the lives of the young generations. The essay “Does Texting Affect Writing?” in They Say, I say exposes how the significant action of texting and using textspeak, i.e. abbreviations and symbols, may be hindering the writing skills of teenaged students. People communicate using textese to “more quickly type what they are trying to say” (Cullington, 2017, p. 361). Textese is a “register that allows omission of words and the use or textisms: instances of non-standard written language such as 4ever” (Van Dijk, 2016). When these people use textese often, it can become habitual and transition into their school assignments. Michaela Cullington constantly repeats words and uses comparisons and abnormalities for the concerns about textspeak, the responses to the concerns, methods and the discussion of findings on the topic to be analyzed.
My response to the article of the week “Txring is killing language” is a presentation by the linguist John McWhorter giving his opinion on texting. He believes that texting is not killing language it’s actually creating a new language. Texting is a double bladed knife it can really benefit you when you need it. Like when you need a quick and fast answer from a friend or you can use emojis to show your expression. At the same time texting has killed many people because they were texting and driving. I agree with McWhorter on “texting is becoming a new language” but takes responsibility to use. Kids have been bullied thru texting and many kid have committed suicide. Many mistakes have made over texting if you are texting and someone sends you
In David Crystal’s article “2b or Not 2b”, he disapproves the common belief that texting will destroy language. Crystal states that he thinks texting may even add a new dimensions to how we communicate and or improve our literacy skills. Pointing out the fact that no one has to actually know the proper form of language before using alternatives or abbreviations. Texting gives freedom and creativity to the person writing and an opportunity to experience a different way to interact with others. Crystal on page 341, simply concludes that no matter how much we are playful and powerful with texting it is just simply overall “fun”. Though, not all will agree, many feel it is a problem that needs to be removed.This came from a counter argument written
How old were you when you got your first phone? Did texting come naturally to you? If asking your great grandfather what LOL means he would more than likely reply with asking you what language you were speaking. Over the years we have come to see a drastic evolution between texting and how we communicate verbally to one another. A linguist and prolific author David Crystal expresses the idea of technology advancements in texting, as evidence in his piece, published in 2008 in the Guardian a London Daily, “2b or Not 2b?”. Crystal uses factual evidenced throughout his article to introduce the concept that, “In texting what we are seeing, in a small way, is language in evolution” (par. 31). His knowledge towards this linguistic phenomenon may be valid due to multiple factual evidence provided.
Abbreviations such as lol (laugh out loud), brb (be right back), and ttyl (talk to you later) are commonly used when texting, yet are not really shown in formal writing. Students reported that text speaking formal writing. “Other students use these abbreviations and other speak text in their writing, but catches their mistakes quickly”. (Cullington 364). Supporting her research Cullington asked participants to complete questionnaires’’… the research hypothesized that texting and the use of abbreviations would have a negative impact on students. However, the results did not support their hypothesis. (Cullington 369).
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
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.
We use abbreviations and emoji’s to get our point across. As college students we send so many texting messages that we do not realize that we hold on to those habits of using incorrect spelling and full sentences. Using this way of communication so often has caused college students to carry it over to formal writing projects. Texting is another form of writing, some would believe that it will help with our writing skills but at the same time it making us lose our depth when it comes to writing. Students don’t use a much detail when it comes to writing papers. Grammar gets affected and we get in the habit of abbreviating our words which do not help enhance our writing at all. This articles just goes through saying that texting reflects on a lot more than just students language skills.