Texting is one of the latest varieties that people use to talk. Much like other new solutions at the time, texting is rolling out its manner lingo including abbreviations and graphics. It really is much different from other forms of written communication; however, many are concerned about how precisely texting influences overall impacts the writing abilities of our junior. Will the abbreviated dialect somehow disrupt and discourage students from learning how to spell or when it is appropriate to utilize abbreviated speech so when it isn’t. Contrary to proper belief, Text messaging does not pose a serious menace to standard English spelling or literacy.
Many in our fore fathers have advocated what texting has integrated. Benjamin Franklin was among the many brilliant minds of this century who advocated for a simplified spelling system (Hendrick 2008). Merriam Webster of Webster’s dictionary is in charge of eliminating the “u” from words like labor and color in order to make words more simplified and simpler to spell. Many of these men including The Spelling Society still around today, wished to see an English Language that was clear of so many vowels and silent letters (Hendrick 2008). While these men might have been happy to start to see the various forms that texted words undertake, changing the typical spelling of words overall require a good deal more work than even a few of our greatest heads could think about.
There have been many new systems that have arrive which may have came out as a hazard to the British language. When the telegraph was invented and used to transmit information over long distances, there was never the fear that this kind of abbreviated speech would somehow drip out into the public and demolish English as we know it (Sutherland 2008). Besides telegrams, there has been Morse Code, and CB radios. All of these technologies eventually dropped by the wayside and only new and better ways to communicate. If the past is any sign as to what we can get in the future, than text messaging may also find its day on the chopping stop.
If text speech is here to stay, then it still poses no hazard to the English language. As a matter of known fact this is a segmented part of the English terminology. Much just like a dialect, text talk has developed as a written form. As well noted, it differs greatly in composition, form and style from Standard English. Once the writings of Zora Neale Hurston and many more showed the beauty and creativeness of diverse English dialects, some were applauded while some were thrilled to see such richness and imagination. No-one would claim that texting has a social or historical culture that is exclusive to a people, however, much like other dialects of the British language, there is still a typical enforced and strengthened by society overall.
Text speech is very unstructured and has multiple versions for the same expressions. There’s been various dictionaries and source books that attempt to make clear some standard abbreviations but there are extremely few absolutes. For example, Matching to Plester, Wood, and Bell (2008), when presenting several middle school children a saying to translate that included the term night into text message speech, there have been several versions. They included nite, niht, nyt, nte, and nigt (141). Other words have more common spelling such as L8 for past due or the notice “u” for the word you. As a result of its non-standardized form, the one reliable method of written communications so that everyone understands still remains the typical.
Another reason why texting does not pose a threat to the British words is its purpose. It is a spontaneously set up social conversation (Plester, Lumber, and Bell 2008). Text message spelling comes from the necessity to communicate a message in a short amount of individuals. This is due primarily to the fact that many mobile phones only allow a degree of characters per communication (Hendrick 2008). In order to avoid having to continue on to a component two, words are abbreviated and characters are overlooked and shortened as a means to fit everything in. By these methods, the misspellings that many people are afraid of occur intentionally as oppose to a lack of understanding of the English terms (Baron 2009).
Some of the most typical abbreviations such as LOL (have a good laugh out loud), ILY ( I really like you), OMG (oh my God), and BTW (by the way), and spellings may divide over into formal writing in university. That is also an all natural happening as students find different ways expressing their creativeness (Barron 2009). As reported by Coulter (2008), majority of students know the difference between formal and informal writing. They know that in formal writing content material abbreviations and emoticons are not appropriate. Teachers must be prepared to accept text conversation as an informal writing style, and should educate the students the difference the same way they show the difference between appropriate uses for casual wiring such for records and email.
The developments of these abbreviated words, of several different versions, each result from its phonological origins. To be able make words, you have to own phonemic awareness in order to reconstruct the words into something important and comprehended by others (Mangu-Ward 2010). Relating to Plester, Lumber, and Bell (2008), texting takes a person to “use metalinguistic consciousness to slip between one register of words to some other, as they consider it appropriate” (p. 143). It had been a surprise to these experts to realize that children who use text messaging showed greater performance on verbal reasoning than children who did not.
As a matter of fact, their research along with many others has registered no negative effect on children who use this as a method to communicate. Matching to a study done by Britain’s Coventry University or college “children who use text message abbreviations on the phones-lol, l8ter, and so on do better in reading and spelling in college” (Mangu-Ward 2008 p. 14). Increasing somewhat further, when exploring various kinds of computer mediated discourse, there’s been no negative impact bought at all on vocabulary skills (Hendrick 2008).
There are reasons you can use to clarify why more and more people are fearful that texting is destroying the British language. One reason has ended exaggeration by the mass media (Hendrick 2008). Our bodies of advertising is well-known for taking a subject matter that has hardly any research and attempting to sensationalize it to everyone. As reported recently, the fact that research implies that not only will texting not disrupt the education of children but has also proven to increase test scores in other areas is very rarely reported by public media resources. That information will not make for a great tale that impassioned individuals can toss their support behind. Although the research states plainly the benefits associated with texting, it is doubtful that there will be any impassioned parents or instructors tossing their support the other way.
Another unintended benefit of texting is youths as well as parents are reading and writing a lot more frequently than they normally would. Youths get a chance to practice their reading and spelling everyday of their own choice (Mangu-Ward 2010). Though it is often known about the abbreviated variants and intentional misspelling of words, contrary to public opinion it does not occur nearly just as much as one would expect. When Barron and Ling conducted a study of college students text messaging they found “few more lexical shortenings; yet the grand total of clear abbreviations was only 47 out of 1 1, 473 words, which is scarcely overwhelming. The written text message spelling misconception has been dispelled by many respected professional research workers from various areas of research.
Many educational systems are starting to start to see the light relating to this questionable form of communicating. Although texting is merely one form of communication that is targeted, other mediums of informal terminology that use abbreviated talk are being used to help students. In one Seattle based high school, students in an American literature course must blog daily about strange and odd regulations (Coulter 2008). Much like texting, the students are absolve to write as they feel without penalty for grammar or spelling. Many students and instructors feel this is any appropriate way to not simply describe, but show the students the difference between formal and casual writing, while permitting them to be as creative as they would like. This technique of instructions encourages and contains the need of this type of manifestation.
No matter just how many text conversation dictionaries are manufactured, or just how many new abbreviations are more common, there will be a dependence on a standard form of communication and good writing skills (Coulture 2008). As communicative technology changes, so will the vocabulary used in these types of mediums. By understanding that texting is merely another variance of the British language and not a complete on frontal assault, people will be able to appreciate it for this true creative value and potential. Studies have obviously shown the advantages of texting on the youngsters in reference to spelling and literacy, so there should no more be any fear about its harmfulness. Instead, the marketing should focus on finding answers to the real issues of education, like resources, licensed teachers, and money.