It’s reviving it- and pushing our literacy in bold new directions.” I think what the author has to say here is very important and many people should understand this. I feel like technology is helping writing grow in a drastic new direction. Technology has taken over the world and I believe it may be for the better. Why? Well like it says in the reading our generation is constantly using technology. Everyday, everyone's using some type of technology and constantly on social media and when you are on social media what do you do? Well, you're writing or you are reading. For example, constantly, when I’m on Facebook, articles appear everywhere and they catch my attention. I start to read them and once I read one I most likely read another one that is linked to it. Reading is a huge advantagement when it comes to writing, because to be a good writer you need to read. Another example would be Twitter, Twitter you are also constantly writing tweets. When writing a tweet you want to write something that catches people’s attention and you want to be grammatically correct because if you don't you will look dumb and uneducated. So Twitter pushes you to work on your grammar skills and write
A huge beneficial effect of the Internet is time-efficiency because it no longer takes days to find research. Fortunately, it only takes a couple of minutes to do a few Google searches. Another benefit to the Internet, in comparison to the last example, is that it is a channel for most of the world’s information. For Carr, as for others, the Internet is becoming a universal medium. Lastly, it is probable that we may be doing more reading today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was a choice of interest. It is assumed that we may do more reading today because not only do we have access to a variety of texts, but also a numerous amount of ways of communicating. For example, social media accounts and text-messaging. A negative effect of the Internet is that it is chipping away capacity for contemplation. The Internet is
Communication on the Internet is often quite informal. It can appear to be in an entirely different language at times. This is because writing on the Internet is often done by amateurs with little to no revision and no requirements to get published. Getting an idea out as fast as possible is frequently the goal of these Web writers, which can result in failure to correctly apply the basics of writing, such as grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The essay “Literacy Debate: Online R U Really Reading?” by Motoko Rich is about whether or not reading on the Internet is as effective for today’s youth as reading books. Rich employs specific word choice as well as misleading statistics and quotations to show her opinion on Internet literacy without directly stating her thoughts.
“The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing” (Carr 773). Carr’s point is because people are using the web, it is making it harder for them to concentrate and process information. Carr and Turkle both suggest in their articles that people now have lost the ability to be able to concentrate and to be
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
Had there been no internet, the earth would have been a better place to live in with increased peace and happiness. The internet has not only deteriorated the social structures, norms and civilization, it has also had effected people’s day to day life. A social network through internet has created a lot of problems in the modern society. In the article “Friending, Ancient or Otherwise”, Wright argues how there has been a shift in communication between the individual and the society. It has corrupted the English language and degraded the overall educational qualities. Internet also helps students plagiarize materials. Despite of its some usefulness in the modern world, internet and social
Journalist, Clive Thompson in his book, “Smarter Than You Think”, specifically in the chapter titled, “Public Thinking”, published on September 12, 2013, addresses the topic of technology and argues that because of the internet, we are doing more writing now than ever. Therefore technology is helping us think publicly in new and improved ways. He supports this claim by asserting that there is an improvement in our writing, which is happening because of the “audience effect”, he then goes on to say that anything we write changes the way we think, and finally he talks about how the internet builds connections, which is essential to the spread of new ideas. Thompson’s purpose is to inform readers about how the internet is a tool being used to advance our society in order to encourage more people to partake in online, public thinking. He adopts a contemplative tone for his audience, the readers of The New York Times, and others interested in the topic of technology. It is my intention in this paper to analyze the author’s subclaims and use of rhetorical strategies.
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?
Communication with our society and the aptitude for reading has been transformed by the Internet as we, no matter who we are or what we use, adapt to the mechanism of technology and become a less intelligent, shallow community. Due to the many hours we spend on our electronic devices and the fast-paced reading we’ve adjusted to, our brains have become psychologically less perceptive of how the Internet is affecting our everyday lives. We need to make note of our daily habits and how much time we spend online, for the Internet will continue to affect generation after
Facebook encourages narcissistic blabbering, video and PowerPoint have replaced carefully crafted essays, and texting has dehydrated language into “bleak, bald, sad shorthand” (as University College of London English professor John Sutherland has moaned).” (Source 7) this quote says that technology is to blame for kids today not being able to write, and she uses Facebook and texting as an example. My opinion, I think he’s right because we use different types of speech while doing or talking or even making a status because we feel like that is the thing to do, when it would be easier if you just use this type of speech for everything that you do. For instance, would you talk to your parents the way you talk to your friends, or would you talk to the principle like he’s your pet dog? There is a purpose for these different types of speech but at the same time, I believe that most of the reasons are irrelevant.
He mentions that others he has talked to that are the literary type, have noticed some of the same situations going on (5). He also makes mention of a pathologist who blogs about computer use and medicine, who states, “I now have almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print... Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it” (6). What this tells us is that we use the internet too much and that we no longer retain knowledge because it is readily available at our fingertips. This has not been proven to be the
One of the most common clichÃ©s is that the Internet has robbed us of our attention spans and impeded our ability to communicate effectively. Once we could write properly, now we only text. Google has made us lazy in terms of how we research and access data. However, is this true? In three major news publications, three major essayists have grappled with this question and come to completely different conclusions. Although the neurological evidence in support of the 'Internet is stealing our brains' thesis is mixed, there is at minimum evidence that people 'feel' as though the Internet has changed their ability to express themselves and to synthesize information.
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
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.