The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
"The most hotly contested controversy sparked by the text-messaging phenomenon of the past eight years is over truant letters. "Textese," a nascent dialect of English that subverts letters and numbers to produce ultra-concise words and sentiments, is horrifying language loyalists and pedagogues. And their fears are stoked by some staggering numbers: this year the world is on track to produce 2.3 trillion messages—a nearly 20 percent increase from 2007 and almost 150 percent from 2000. The accompanying revenue for telephone companies is growing nearly as fast—to an estimated $60 billion this year. In the English-speaking world, Britain alone generates well over 6 billion text messages every month. People are communicating more and faster than ever, but some worry that, as textese drops consonants, vowels and punctuation and makes no distinction between letters and numbers, people will no longer know how we're really supposed to communicate. Will text messaging produce generations of illiterates? Could this—OMG—be the death of the English language?"
Full article here
There are some interesting points in the article:
The language of texting is hardly as deviant as people think.
* Tailored text predates the text message, so we might as well accept that ours is a langauge of vandals. Who even knows these days what p.m. stands for?
* The resulting differences between American and British English are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the language of nespapers and text messages. Interestingly, there are hardly any diffeences between American and British texting.
Texting actually makes young people better communicators, not worse.
* In one British experiment, children who texted - and who wielded plenty of abbreviations - scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. In fact, the more adept they were at abbreviating, the better they did in spelling and writing.
* Winners of text poetry contests in Britain proves that the force behind texting is a penchant for innovation, not linguistic laziness.
This wasn't in the article I don't think but apparently 1 in 10 people in Britain have injured themselves by walking into something, whilst texting,
Have any of you ever had injured yourself whilst texting??
What are your thoughts on the texting mania that has gripped us and its effects on the proper use of the English language?
Full article here
There are some interesting points in the article:
The language of texting is hardly as deviant as people think.
* Tailored text predates the text message, so we might as well accept that ours is a langauge of vandals. Who even knows these days what p.m. stands for?
* The resulting differences between American and British English are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the language of nespapers and text messages. Interestingly, there are hardly any diffeences between American and British texting.
Texting actually makes young people better communicators, not worse.
* In one British experiment, children who texted - and who wielded plenty of abbreviations - scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. In fact, the more adept they were at abbreviating, the better they did in spelling and writing.
* Winners of text poetry contests in Britain proves that the force behind texting is a penchant for innovation, not linguistic laziness.
This wasn't in the article I don't think but apparently 1 in 10 people in Britain have injured themselves by walking into something, whilst texting,
Have any of you ever had injured yourself whilst texting??
What are your thoughts on the texting mania that has gripped us and its effects on the proper use of the English language?
Page:
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
"The most hotly contested controversy sparked by the text-messaging phenomenon of the past eight years is over truant letters. "Textese," a nascent dialect of English that subverts letters and numbers to produce ultra-concise words and sentiments, is horrifying language loyalists and pedagogues. And their fears are stoked by some staggering numbers: this year the world is on track to produce 2.3 trillion messages—a nearly 20 percent increase from 2007 and almost 150 percent from 2000. The accompanying revenue for telephone companies is growing nearly as fast—to an estimated $60 billion this year. In the English-speaking world, Britain alone generates well over 6 billion text messages every month. People are communicating more and faster than ever, but some worry that, as textese drops consonants, vowels and punctuation and makes no distinction between letters and numbers, people will no longer know how we're really supposed to communicate. Will text messaging produce generations of illiterates? Could this—OMG—be the death of the English language?"
Full article here
There are some interesting points in the article:
The language of texting is hardly as deviant as people think.
* Tailored text predates the text message, so we might as well accept that ours is a langauge of vandals. Who even knows these days what p.m. stands for?
* The resulting differences between American and British English are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the language of nespapers and text messages. Interestingly, there are hardly any diffeences between American and British texting.
Texting actually makes young people better communicators, not worse.
* In one British experiment, children who texted - and who wielded plenty of abbreviations - scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. In fact, the more adept they were at abbreviating, the better they did in spelling and writing.
* Winners of text poetry contests in Britain proves that the force behind texting is a penchant for innovation, not linguistic laziness.
This wasn't in the article I don't think but apparently 1 in 10 people in Britain have injured themselves by walking into something, whilst texting,
Have any of you ever had injured yourself whilst texting??
What are your thoughts on the texting mania that has gripped us and its effects on the proper use of the English language?
Full article here
There are some interesting points in the article:
The language of texting is hardly as deviant as people think.
* Tailored text predates the text message, so we might as well accept that ours is a langauge of vandals. Who even knows these days what p.m. stands for?
* The resulting differences between American and British English are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the language of nespapers and text messages. Interestingly, there are hardly any diffeences between American and British texting.
Texting actually makes young people better communicators, not worse.
* In one British experiment, children who texted - and who wielded plenty of abbreviations - scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. In fact, the more adept they were at abbreviating, the better they did in spelling and writing.
* Winners of text poetry contests in Britain proves that the force behind texting is a penchant for innovation, not linguistic laziness.
This wasn't in the article I don't think but apparently 1 in 10 people in Britain have injured themselves by walking into something, whilst texting,
Have any of you ever had injured yourself whilst texting??
What are your thoughts on the texting mania that has gripped us and its effects on the proper use of the English language?
Page: