Twob Or Not 2b David Crystal Analysis

This essay critically evaluates media article, “Is Texting Killing the English Language?” (McWhorter, 2013). This essay will examine key assertions made by McWhorter that the language of texting is not the same as traditional writing, therefore the accepted grammar and vocabulary entailing is different to standard English grammar. Thus, McWhorter asserts that despite the different grammar users of “textese” have are able to distinguish between texting and traditional writing. In an age of growing concerns within the media about the potential negative influence of texting on literacy skills, particularly amongst young people, McWhorter asserts that there is no negative influence. This essay will critically evaluate and equate these key assertions

The article I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language, by John Humphrys, addresses text messaging as a threat to people's ability to engage formally in use of the English language; especially in the younger generation. John Humphrys takes a unique perspective when analyzing the practice of text messaging. Humphrys focuses on the present and mainstream uses of text messaging, without analyzing the historical processes and the language values of the so called text speak. This paper will argue against John Humphrys' claim. Text messaging is a valid form of language as it; has been created through historical and social processes; holds a set of unique and evolving characteristics; and therefore in no way harmful to the users'

Has our “text,” language ruined our actual language? The author of 2b or not 2b is written by David Crystal. Throughout his article Crystal argues about the benefits of texting and how texting is not a new thing. David Crystal uses two rhetorical strategies to prove his argument, one being humor to compare two types of poems that were sent through text message, the other using analogy to compare schooling, and texting, and the last his using analogy to compare abbreviations that are used today, were used in history.

How old were you when you got your first phone? Did texting come naturally to you? If asking your great grandfather what LOL means he would more than likely reply with asking you what language you were speaking. Over the years we have come to see a drastic evolution between texting and how we communicate verbally to one another. A linguist and prolific author David Crystal expresses the idea of technology advancements in texting, as evidence in his piece, published in 2008 in the Guardian a London Daily, “2b or Not 2b?”. Crystal uses factual evidenced throughout his article to introduce the concept that, “In texting what we are seeing, in a small way, is language in evolution” (par. 31). His knowledge towards this linguistic phenomenon may be valid due to multiple factual evidence provided.

People lend themselves to thinking that texting is killing serious literacy. "The fact of the matter is that it just isn't true" (McWhorter 1) in his video, "Texting is Killing Language. JK!!!". The speaker explains thqt language had evolved from basic speech to writer text over thousands of years. He notes that while it is beautiful, nobody speaks how we write in formal literature it is boring and nobody has time for it in today's society. This however was the case in the time of Abraham Lincoln and even when it was common practice was hard to listen to. The progression of technology has given us the ability to write faster with the type writer, electric type writers, and cimputers provided you have someone able to process the information

Well you are wrong, Texting has been with the english languish before technology was even created. Texting is basically a fancy word for abbreviations. Many famous people such as Charles Dickens, Mark Twain, and Walter Scott have used abrrievations such as wot, cos, and gissa states Crystal. Texting is not an alien a language that is created by young people but, the english language in evolution. Crystal states on lines 172-173,“ Abbreviations were used as a natural, intuitive response to a technological problem.” The texting language shouldn't be discriminated since it is English language in evolution.

Elizabeth Gorney states, instant messaging and texting have created a need for our messages to be delivered now, and in order to make this occur a fraction of second faster, abbreviations came into existence (2). The language of texting is referred to as “textspeak”. In “textspeak” punctuation marks and letters are adapted to express attitudes or emotions. Gorney explains “Texting” by David Crystal and how “textspeak” is like decoding a message. According to Crystal, they require a different interpretation of the language because of the technology and the speed that messages can be delivered (qtd. in Gorney 4). There is a different adaption of symbols and punctuation that the English language does not use, and to non-text speakers it is a new way of

How does phone texting affect writing skills? Michaela Cullington says that text messaging its taking over our lives. The abbreviations people use instead of words, while texting, has created a new language called “textspeak”. One of Michaela’s claims is that texting affects the ability to write formal papers, it is having a negative impact on writing. Another argument in the text is that some people see texting as beneficial exercise in writing. The last argument is that others believes that texting does not have any effect at all on student writing, it has not effect on their writing abilities in general. I refute these three arguments made in Michaela’s text because First, students are now writing more than in the past generations because of text messages, helping them get in the use of reading and also helping them with grammar. Following up, texting and writing an important paper is not the same thing, therefore texting is hardly beneficial when it comes to write an essay, report, etc. Not to mention, that texting can be affecting grammar and spelling, it can cause bad habits in students.

2b or not to 2b is an interesting article by David Crystal. The article argues that text massage is ruining the languages. John Humphrys argues that text messages are destroying our language and grammar. He also states that slanguage and abbreviation are like a “digital virus”. The use of text massage has been increasing dreamlessly. In year 2000 the average text massage per customer was 35 text per month, in 2005 on Christmas day alone 205 million texts were sent. People are using slang words and abbreviation while texting such as “BRB” meaning BE right back and “2nte” meaning tonight. Using slang words and abbreviation in while texting is fun because it is easier to type but using it too much makes it less meaning full and it makes text really

Contrary to what many people believe text messaging and “textisms,” the abbreviated spellings of text messages, may not be harming the younger generation in terms of literacy and grammar skills. Recent studies have even found that a in younger children texting and textisms is helping improve spelling and literacy development (Kemp 2014). One of the recurring points made by researchers is that textism does not do much harm to our literacy skills because most people are able to decide the appropriate times to use textisms and when it is a appropriate to use correct grammar, spellings, as well as punctuation and capitalization.

Abbreviations, acronyms and emoticons have all been put into use through billions of text messages. The one hundred and sixty character limit has meant that proper spelling and grammar has to give way to a more practical form of communicating. Daily Mail columnist John Humphrys in his article ‘I H8 txt messages: How English is ruing our language’ thinks that people who text are doing what ‘Genghis Khan did to his neighbours eight hundred years ago.’ (Humphrys 2007). However, as author Henry Hitchings in his book A History of Proper English (Hitchings 2011) points out the comparison ‘…is not the same in fact or in spirit….’ (Hitchings 2011 p 296) as people who text know the difference between writing for schoolwork and writing for their friends (p. 296). Although mobile messaging may be crude compared to the more civilised form of English, it still has some benefits. For example the asterisk symbol has been used as a way of correcting mistakes (Collister 2015). It is a way to ‘avoid a conversational detour.’ (Collister 2015). People can use the asterisk symbol instead of wasting precious time trying to fix their mistake. The asterisk symbol, adopted by the technologically minded (Collister 2015), is a great and quick way of fixing mistakes but still maintaining that flow of conversation. An emoticon can also help to ‘…add meaning to a message or express meaning all on their own.’ (Collister 2015). People can use emoticons to express a range of emotions from happiness to anger and people will be able to understand what they mean. The invention of mobile phones, through the use of symbols and emoticons to express emotions or fix mistakes, have helped language to evolve, and thereby improving writing and reading skills through the promotion of flexibility, by ensuring that not all communications is just through

What are some of the particular features of texting that Crystal identifies? Are they still relevant? There are several features of texting that Crystal addresses in this chapter. The spelling of texts is new and different. Children’s ability to capitalize correctly, punctuate and spell will decline. Children’s schoolwork will suffer because they will assign texting customs to the classroom which result in a decrease in exam scores. The upcoming texting generation will not be able to articulate proper English, thus causing the whole language to deteriorate. While there has never been any clear evidence to support the above concerns, I feel the older generations are not convinced texting is not determinantal to the younger generations.

Texting is not a language, it is not killing language. The language children are around is what determines the way they speak, not a simple text. In the TED Talk video “Txtng is killing language. JK” by John McWorther we are told that it is incorrect when a statement like this is spoken “Texting is a scurge. Texting spells the decline and fall of any kind of serious literacy or among any young people in the U.S and now the whole world today.” In order to see that texting is a miraculous thing we have to pull the camera back and look at what language really is. Texting is not writing, when you text you do not write in complete sentences, sometimes do not even give a complete thought.

Texting decreases the need for any in-depth conversation and can also be seen as a form of avoidance, as abbreviations help people avoid meaningful dialogue or conversations that would be carried on face-to-face instead. Texting also has a negative effect grammar and spelling seeing as it takes shortcuts with emoticons, spelling and punctuation which in conclusion is depriving children and teens from learning the writing and communication skills they need for further needed important education and work. The controversial question that people still ask to this day is whether or not the acronyms, shortcuts, and abbreviations of sloppy communications seriously affect the quality of school work or written communications that students are required

I would oppose texting is harming students literature because, it’s shown to help improve literature. According to the text in “Text-Speak Can Help Students.” , “ Students distinguish between the informational language they use for friendly conversations and more formal language used for academic writing.” This means that they switch from using “how r u” to “how are you?” So students do tend to learn from texting. According to the text, “ Text-Speak can actually help students. That is because it enhances their writing skills and makes them more agile users of language.” This means that the comprehend that they learn better grammar. In conclusion texting can help students learn how to write better and use better