The Impact Of Texting And Tweeting On Our Live Speech.

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

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.

In the article, the authors reference the infamous AT&T BFF Jill commercial that aired in 2007, when texting and smart phones were just becoming popular. This commercial represents the idea that texting can have an influence on adolescents Standard English when talking out loud. This commercial also depicts the epidemic of texting lingo replacing Standard English that many people at the time feared. There were multiple receptions of the commercial exemplified in this article. The authors review the comments made about the commercial on not only the comment section of YouTube, but popular news channels such as

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

Using this strategy is effective because everyone has emotions. How you write your essay you can trigger whatever emotion you want your reader to feel. In "Texting and Writing" by Michaela Cullington does exactly that. For example from the very first sentences, "It's taking over our lives. We can do it almost anywhere....What is it? It's texting!" (Cullington 403). Being informal in an essay can build common ground it's more like you are reading what your friend sent you and how you would speak normally. This appeals to emotions because you can relate. It can express happy emotions or upset emotions that you have dealt with when reading texts from people. Texting has changed how we view words and how we see them. Cullington states, "Each student admitted to using abbreviations in writing on occasion" (Cullington 408). Abbreviations can link back to the first article, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" As a supporting example that we do not want to read lengthy paragraphs. We see abbreviations as a way out and Cullington does a great job explaining abbreviations, its also all over technology such as

“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.

Language used in a communication could cause confusion if abbreviations or jargon is used inappropriately.

However, according to McWhorter, texting is an “emergent complexity” with new structure. Unlike the writing of prior generations, texting embodies a new form of writing that ignores the structure and standardization of formal writing. McWhorter furthers this claim by using examples of common pragmatic particles in texting such as “LOL” and “slash.” According to McWhorter, the first pragmatic particle “LOL” acts as a “maker of accommodation and empathy.” To clarify, “LOL” acts as an indication of understanding among parties present and a continuation of the conversation. Likewise, the second particle “slash” acts as a means of changing topics in the conversation. With the rise of these conventions, according to McWhorter, an array of “new constructions” or a new vocabulary exists for use despite the lack of

     Cullington then talks about her personal experiences about texting and whether it had an effect on her or not. She states that she is a texter. However, she enjoys it regardless of what others think about it. She feels confident in her writing skills which causes her to succeed  as much as she does. She does not notice the negative affects on her writing skills because of texting. (Cullington 369). Cullington then admit that she rarely uses abbreviations in her texting, and she never uses them in her formal writing which is kind of accurate compared to someone who does use abbreviations in texting would most likely always or sometimes uses them in the formal writings.

The subject of how technology is changing written English is a touchy subject; many people believe that our current technology is allowing us to become lazy. Text messaging being the ultimate reason we are taking so many short cuts when it comes to writing proper English. There are so many abbreviated words and meanings in text messaging, I sometimes find myself confused when I receive messages from people that I have to google what they are trying to say. I don’t want to respond and assume I know what they are trying say.

As stated in the introduction, when the first text message was sent in 1992 it provided the initial spark that digital communication needed. When T9 (predictive text) was invented in 1995 text messaging was bought to a whole new level, it made text messaging faster and therefore increased the use of text messages. People went from barely sending text messages to replacing face-to-face communication with them. But however useful T9 was it did have it’s downfalls, it was quite ineffective and quite often picked the wrong words this could of led to the use of abbreviations to avoid this problem. On the other hand abbreviations could be a product of older generations, as on the old pay as you go SIMS there was a 160 character limit, which could cause people to abbreviate simply to avoid spending more money on text messages.

Lauren Collister is correct in arguing that, instead of ignoring or deriding the variation in written language, embracing the change in language and the ability of speakers and writers to code-switch can lead to better communication skills in all contexts. In agreement with her point, she describes that text messaging is a conversation that involves a lot of back and forth, which is right because people use textspeak, not to generate thoughtfulness and literary communication, but to keep in contact and facilitate communication. We see this with the increased use of ellipses, which can invite the recipient to continue the conversation, says Collister by giving an example of the period which is a definitive stop that signals, as linguistics professor Mark Liberman has explained, “This is final, this is the end of the discussion” (qtd. in Collister). To recall, she says earlier this year, psychologist Danielle Gunraj tested how people perceived one-sentence text messages that used a period at the end of the sentence; whereby, participants thought these text messages were more insincere than those that didn’t have a period. “Texting is lacking many of the social cues used in actual face-to-face conversations,” lead researcher Celia Kin said in

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.