We have partnered with TradePub to bring you free industry magazines and resources - no coupons or credit cards required!

Visit: englishforums.tradepub.com


1 2 3
Share this topic:
This is a discussion thread.
Latest post Thu, Dec 4 2003 2:38 AM by Usenet. 19 replies.
| |
Jim O'Neill    754072 Mon, 24 Nov 03 03:37 PM

I'm researching a project on real-time written communication (AIM, ICQ, etc.) and its effects on written language. Being a word lover myself, I'm chagrined at the possibility that, with everyone on the Internet learning to write the way they talk (and condensing writing further into abbreviations and shorthand), the English language of general use will gradually lose much of its variety, capacity for individual expression, and ability to convey precise, specific concepts.

I'm aware of linguists' arguments that language evolves no matter what, and that the development of slang and the loss of certain rules like the "John and I (vs. me) went to the store" rule are perfectly legitimate and often make more sense than "standard" usage and for the most part I agree.. But when a generation is growing up whose normal mode of written expression is:
"omg!!1! the ohter day i was @ the store adn saw brad who was like hey do u wanna hang out b4 the show? ur hot! and i wannted to scream!"
...I get a bit concerned that this is not evolution but devolution.

I'd like to know what others think. Is English going to hell? Is it inevitable? Is it nothing to worry about and I should shut up?

Thanks,
Jim
Arcadian Rises    754074 Mon, 24 Nov 03 03:48 PM

Most of the above, I believe.
That reminds me of the joke about the old Sanskrit message found on a wall that read something like "Our new generation has no moral values."
John O'Flaherty    754109 Mon, 24 Nov 03 04:13 PM

"I'm researching a project on real-time written communication (AIM, ICQ, etc.) and its effects on written language. Being a word ... think. Is English going to hell? Is it inevitable? Is it nothing to worry about and I should shut up?"

People adapt language to suit their ends. One of those can be play, and that seems to be what's going on in your example. Forms can change, and temporary ones develop, and those changes don't seem harmful to language in general. How could exercise of flexibility be harmful?
I wonder if this kind of complaint happens because the complainer has a big investment in a certain kind of language use, and they feel it's devalued by lots of people going in other directions. Has it ever been shown that a language evolved to its permanent detriment ? I mean in the sense of impairing communication, not by some conservative esthetic standard.

john
Arcadian Rises    754131 Mon, 24 Nov 03 04:22 PM

The very political correct vocabulary is an epitome of impaired communication. If I tell you that "she has a special child", do you understand what I mean, or you need more context?
John O'Flaherty    754152 Mon, 24 Nov 03 04:57 PM

"The very political correct vocabulary is an epitome of impaired communication. If I tell you that "she has a special child", do you understand what I mean, or you need more context?"

It needs more context, for sure. But even politically correct vocabulary is serving the purposes of its users. The defect lies in their overly scrupulous intentions, more than in language.

john
Dr. Jai Maharaj    754260 Mon, 24 Nov 03 07:01 PM

"I'm researching a project on real-time written communication (AIM, ICQ, ... it nothing to worry about and I should shut up?"

"People adapt language to suit their ends. One of those can be play, and that seems to be what's going ... evolved to its permanent detriment ? I mean in the sense of impairing communication, not by some conservative esthetic standard."

*

English is Munglish

*
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
Jim O'Neill    754536 Mon, 24 Nov 03 10:36 PM

"People adapt language to suit their ends. One of those can be play, and that seems to be what's going ... temporary ones develop, and those changes don't seem harmful to language in general. How could exercise of flexibility be harmful?"

Regardless of language forms being harmful or not (and I agree with you in spirit), my example touches on another trend that I'm just as concerned with: Loss of personality or individuality.

In my opinion, the less you type (say, in an email, chat room, or forum) to someone else, the less of your personality comes through to that person. While smileys and abbreviations can be apt and sometimes expressive enough, I still think that if what you type is close to what you would say out loud, you express yourself better.

Internet abbreviations, shorthand and emoticons are so homogeneous that the writing of people who rely too much on them turns into a kind of inscrutable code that doesn't represent them very well as people.

At least, those are my thoughts. Dissent or discussion is welcome.

Jim
Peter Moylan    754780 Tue, 25 Nov 03 03:39 AM

""omg!!1! the ohter day i was @ the store adn saw brad who was like hey do u wanna hang ... think. Is English going to hell? Is it inevitable? Is it nothing to worry about and I should shut up?"

It's a way of excluding outsiders. I had to read the above very slowly and carefully before figuring out what it meant. Presumably the people who write this way can read it just as fluently as we read normal English.
In all likelihood the author of this example is bilingual, and writes just like us when the occasion demands.

Peter Moylan (Email Removed) http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software)
Richard R. Hershberger    754796 Tue, 25 Nov 03 04:23 AM

"People adapt language to suit their ends. One of those ... language in general. How could exercise of flexibility be harmful?"

"Regardless of language forms being harmful or not (and I agree with you in spirit), my example touches on another ... code that doesn't represent them very well as people. At least, those are my thoughts. Dissent or discussion is welcome."

My off-the-cuff reaction is that the people who write messages such as the example you gave in your original post are not trying to show their individuality. They are, I suspect, at an age when strict conformity to the norms of their social group are the priority. Most people grow out of that, and the ones that don't have problems far beyond their use of language.
Richard R. Hershberger
1 2 3
© MediaCet Ltd. 2009, v5.0.3607.32596. All content posted by our users is a contribution to the public domain, this does not include imported usenet posts.*
For web related enquires please contact us on webmaster@mediacet.com, status updates are available at status.mediacet.com.
*Usenet post removal: Use 'X-No-Archive'. You may not have understood that your posts would end up in the public domain. Please send proof of the poster's email, we will remove immediately.