is texting ruining the english language essay

Is Texting Killing the English Language?

People have always spoken differently from how they write, and texting is actually talking with your fingers

Texting has long been bemoaned as the downfall of the written word, “penmanship for illiterates,” as one critic  called it . To which the proper response is LOL. Texting properly isn’t writing at all — it’s actually more akin to spoken language. And it’s a “spoken” language that is getting richer and more complex by the year.

First, some historical perspective. Writing was only invented 5,500 years ago, whereas language probably traces back at least 80,000 years. Thus talking came first; writing is just an artifice that came along later. As such, the first writing was based on the way people talk, with short sentences — think of the Old Testament. However, while talk is largely subconscious and rapid, writing is deliberate and slow. Over time, writers took advantage of this and started crafting tapeworm sentences such as this one, from  The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire : “The whole engagement lasted above 12 hours, till the gradual retreat of the Persians was changed into a disorderly flight, of which the shameful example was given by the principal leaders and the Surenas himself.”

( MORE: Why Americans Need Spelling Bees and Vocabulary Tests )

No one talks like that casually — or should. But it is natural to desire to do so for special occasions, and that’s what oratory is, like the grand-old kinds of speeches that William Jennings Bryan delivered. In the old days, we didn’t much write like talking because there was no mechanism to reproduce the speed of conversation. But texting and instant messaging do — and a revolution has begun. It involves the brute mechanics of writing, but in its economy, spontaneity and even vulgarity, texting is actually a new kind of talking. There is a virtual cult of concision and little interest in capitalization or punctuation. The argument that texting is “poor writing” is analogous, then, to one that the Rolling Stones is “bad music” because it doesn’t use violas. Texting is developing its own kind of grammar and conventions.

( MORE: Banning the Term Illegal Immigrant Won’t Change the Stigma )

Texting is developing its own kind of grammar. Take LOL . It doesn’t actually mean “laughing out loud” in a literal sense anymore. LOL has evolved into something much subtler and sophisticated and is used even when nothing is remotely amusing. Jocelyn texts “Where have you been?” and Annabelle texts back “LOL at the library studying for two hours.” LOL  signals basic empathy between texters, easing tension and creating a sense of equality. Instead of having a literal meaning, it does something — conveying an attitude — just like the -ed ending conveys past tense rather than “meaning” anything. LOL , of all things, is grammar.

Of course no one thinks about that consciously. But then most of communication operates below the radar. Over time, the meaning of a word or an expression drifts — meat used to mean any kind of food , silly used to mean, believe it or not, blessed.

Civilization, then, is fine — people banging away on their smartphones are fluently using a code separate from the one they use in actual writing, and there is no evidence that texting is ruining composition skills. Worldwide people speak differently from the way they write, and texting — quick, casual and only intended to be read once — is actually a way of talking with your fingers.

All indications are that America’s youth are doing it quite well. Texting, far from being a scourge, is a work in progress.

This essay is adapted from McWhorter’s talk at TED 2013.

MORE:   Why Do We Love to Invent Languages?

The linguistic miracle of texting: John McWhorter at TED2013

Photos: James Duncan Davidson

More than 22 million text messages are sent across the world every day … many in truly terrible English. It’s the end of the world as we know it, many decry. The decline and fall of written language means the end for us all, right? Not so fast. Linguist John McWhorter has a great new theory on what’s really going on in modern texting. Far from being a scourge, texting is a linguistic miracle.

Spoken human language has been around for about 150,000 years, but it wasn’t until much later that written language came about; as he puts it: “If humanity has existed for 24 hours, writing came about at 11:07 pm.” This distinction is crucial what it comes to the so-called degradation of written language — because texting isn’t written language. It much more closely resembles the kind of language we’ve had for so many more years: spoken language.

When you write, you can do things you can’t do in speaking. McWhorter elocutes a passage from Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire . It’s precise, detailed and crisp — and “no one would ever speak that way. At least not if they were interested in reproducing.” Casual speech is quite different: looser, telegraphic, less reflective. Texting ignores punctuation and capitalization, but does anyone think about these things when speaking?

Formal oration, a kind of speaking that sounds like writing, has always been common. But why not try to write like you speak? Now that we have incredibly fast technology to keep up with the pace of speech — mobile phones, rather than typewriters or handwriting — that’s actually possible. What is texting? McWhorter suggests: “fingered speech.”

Texting, like any language, has its own distinct rules and structures. Take the example of “lol.” “Lol” once meant “laughing out loud.” But anybody who texts today knows that these days it has a subtler meaning. Consider the exchange:

Susan: lol thanks gmail is being slow right now Julie: lol, i know. Susan: i just sent you an email. Julie: lol, i see it.

McWhorter cites a passage from 1956 bemoaning the decline of language in young people … and then three more, all the way back to 63 AD: a pedant lamenting everyone’s terrible Latin. (That “terrible Latin” eventually became French.) As he says, “There are always people worried about the decline of language. Yet somehow the world keeps spinning.” There’s no need to worry, he says firmly. People are even benefiting from texting, from this entirely different language. Being fluent in spoken language, written language and writing-like-speaking language is an unconscious balancing act that allows each “speaker” to expand his or her linguistic repertoire.

So no scourge is imminent. McWhorter says, if he could fast-forward to 2033 — besides first checking to see if David Simon had written a sequel to The Wire — he would immediately want to see texts written by 16-year-old girls to see what’s become of this linguistic miracle.

John McWhorter’s talk is now available for viewing. Watch it on TED.com»

• Subscribe to TED Blog by email

Comments (20)

Pingback: Are Some Rules Regarding Grammar Made To Be Broken? – Sandie Centre

Pingback: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. – BTN

Pingback: Command Z: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. | New York City News & Search

Pingback: Command Z: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. – Trending News

Pingback: Command Z: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. | InsiderLifeStyles

Pingback: Command Z: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. - Synergy Capital

Pingback: Command Z: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. – College News Week

Pingback: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. – ART News

Pingback: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. | US-China News

Pingback: Laugh and the World Laughs With You. Type ‘Ha,’ Not So Much. | Newsrust.com

Pingback: Is Text Messaging a Dialect of the English Language? | mmoreno181

Pingback: Is Texting a Linguistic Miracle? | Heather Robinson

Pingback: 27 March 2013 | Circle Central

Pingback: Live Streaming TED 2013 |

Pingback: TED 2013: 9 Take-Home Themes for Me

Pingback: Why Texting “LOL” May Be Making You Smarter | News | Coletti Institute | Haan Foundation

Pingback: The dramatic grammatic evolution of “LOL” | Sentence first

Pingback: John McWhorter at TED2013: The linguistic miracle of texts | potofavati

Mialki, Texting: A Boon, Not a Threat, to Language

The following student essay illustrates one possible structure for a caus e- an d- effect argument. (Note, for example, that the refutation of opposing arguments precedes the evidence.) The student writer argues that, contrary to popular opinion, texting is not causing damage to the English language but is a creative force with the power to enrich and expand the language.

TEXTING: A BOON, NOT A THREAT, TO LANGUAGE

KRISTINA MIALKI

Thesis statement

Certain technological developments of the last two decades have a lot of people worrying about the state of the English language. Emailing, blogging, instan t- messaging, tweeting, and texting are introducing new ways of writing and communicating, and the fear is that these technologies will encourage a sloppy, casual form of written English that will eventually replace “proper” English altogether. Texting, in particular, has people concerned because it encourages the use of a specialized, nonstandard form of English. However, the effects of this new “textese” are misunderstood. Texting is not destroying the English language; in fact, it is keeping the language alive.

Texting has become extremely popular because sending text messages is instant, mobile, and silent. To make texting more efficient, texters have developed a shorthan d— an abbreviated form of English that uses numbers and symbols in addition to letters. In textese, common phrases such as “see you later” or “talk to you later” become “cul8r” and “ttyl.” Feelings and phrases are also expressed with emoticons, such as “:-o” (meaning “alarmed”) or “>:-<” (meaning “angry”). Today, texting is the preferred method of communication for millions of peopl e— especially young people, who are the most enthusiastic users of this technology. Not surprisingly, unwarranted fears that texting will destroy the language often focus on this group.

Refutation of opposing arguments

Some people say texting will destroy the English language because it encourages the use of an overly simplified form of written English that does not follow standard rules of spelling, grammar, and punctuation. The implication is that people who text, particularly children and teens, will not learn standard written English. However, there is no evidence that texting is having or will have this effect. In fact, Australian researchers Nenagh Kemp and Catherine Bushnell at the University of Tasmania recently found just the opposite to be true. They demonstrated that students who were good at texting were also strong in reading, writing, and spelling (Rock). If, in fact, young people’s language skills are weakening, researchers should look for the real cause for this decline rather than incorrectly blaming texting.

Evidence: First point in support of thesis

Despite what its critics charge, texting is a valuable way of communicating that actually encourages more writing and reading. Texters often spend hours each day engaged with language. This is time that would otherwise probably be spent on the phone, not reading or writing. Textese may not be standard written English, but it is a rich and inventive form of communication, a creative modification of English for a particular purpose. For this reason, standard English is not in danger of being destroyed or replaced by textese. Just as most young people know not to talk to their teachers the way they talk to their friends, they know not to write essays the way they write text messages. Texting simply broadens young people’s exposure to the written word.

Evidence: Second point in support of thesis

Another reason texting is valuable is that it encourages creative use of language. These messages are typically quick and brief, so the need for new and clever abbreviations is constant. Texters are continually playing with words and coming up with new ways of expressing themselves. Texting does not, as some fear, encourage sloppy, thoughtless, or careless writing. On the contrary, it rewards ingenuity and precision. One ongoing study by Canadian researchers aims to prove this point. They have already been able to demonstrate that texters are “creative and efficient at communicating” and use “novel forms of communications” (Shaw). Nenagh Kemp has also observed how texting encourages word play. Kemp maintains that texting shows “language is fluid and flourishing, rather than in a sad state of decline” (Rock). In other words, researchers recognize that texting is not damaging the English language but actually enriching it and keeping it alive.

Concluding statement

According to Business Insider , eightee n- to twent y- fou r- yea r- olds now send 2,022 texts per month and receive 1,831 texts (Cocotas). That averages out to around 67 texts per day. The exceptional popularity of texting and its fast growth over the last fifteen years explain why it is attracting attention. It is not, however, the threat that some believe it to be. It is neither destroying the language nor deadening people’s thoughts and feelings. It is a lively, original, and creative way for people to play with words and stay connected.

Works Cited

Cocotas, Alex. “Chart of the Day: Kids Send a Mind Boggling Number of Texts Every Month.” Business Insider , 22 Mar. 2013, www.businessinsider.com/ chart-of-the-day-number-of-texts-sent-2013-3 .

Rock, Margaret. “Texting May Improve Literacy.” Mobiledia , Mashable, 12 Sept. 2011, mashable.com/ 2011/ 09/ 12/ texting-improves-literacy/ #sCYnNT6VB8qL .

Shaw, Gillian. “Researchers Study Text Messages as Language Form.” Vancouver Sun , 18 Jan. 2012, www.vancouversun.com/ life/ researchers+study+text+messages+language+form/ 6010501/ story.html .

GRAMMAR IN CONTEXT

Avoiding “The Reason Is Because”

When you write a caus e- an d- effect argument , you connect causes to effects. In the process, you might be tempted to use the ungrammatical phrase the reason is because . However, the word because means “for the reason that”; therefore, it is redundant to say “the reason is because” (which actually means “the reason is for the reason that”). Instead, use the grammatical phrase “the reason is that .”

Texting and the English Language Essay (Critical Writing)

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

This critique presents the analysis of the issues proposed by Humphrys in order to try to assess whether the text messages destroy the English language.

The article “I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language”, is an article written by Humphrys (2007), and it provides the discussion of the sidelining of the English dictionary in favor of a new language. The main point proposed by the article is that the influx of technology has destroyed the uses of the English language through the introduction of the text message service.

The article explains the removal of the hyphenated word in the Oxford English dictionary, a fact that seems to imply that the population does not have time to press the hyphen key in the computer. The author then explains that texting destroys the English language by introducing fashion to writing.

The article explains the time factor as a reason for shortening writing styles, and the influx of the text message phenomenon into normal lives. The author describes the issue of hyphenation of words in the dictionary, and gives two main reasons. The reasons proposed by the author are the ones that follow: time is a factor, but the influx of the text message is the main factor. The introduction of the text message ensures that even old population is forced to text to avoid ridicule from the young generation.

The issue of text messaging has reduced most of the words in the English dictionary. This is because texting has become common for all individuals, and they use it to write shortened versions of the words they would like to deliver from the dictionary. Therefore, this process ensures that dictionary becomes useless. According to Humphrys, the issue of shortening text messages is becoming popular due to the influx of texters in the world.

The author proposes that the issue of text messages interferes with the structure of English messages, rapes the language, destroys punctuation, destroys vocabulary and messes sentence structure. Therefore, this critique presents the analysis of the issues proposed by Humphrys in order to try to assess whether the text messages destroy the English language.

The first issue proposed by the author is the fact that texting is a new phenomenon that has become so common that people who do not text are ridiculed. For example, the author states that the youth will consider him a “grandfather” (Humphrys, 2007) if he does not text.

Therefore, the author states that to text is important for nearly everyone in the world, a factor meaning that people will neglect conventional language writing skills when composing text messages. The result is that people will form their own new language to replace the language that they have used to when writing.

The other point that the author puts forward is that the economy of texting reduces the instances in which individuals make calls (Humphrys, 2007). The author supports this point by stating that some voice calls are irritating for the receivers; the caller leaves long and rambling text messages in the answering machine.

This point indicates that the author is irritated by the calling phenomenon, a fact that necessitates texting. The age of the receivers and texters is also important. Many people, regardless of their age, will prefer to text in order to avoid the tedious and costly nature of making voice calls.

Texting allows people to skip some words that they would have used to when speaking English language, because of the use of smileys in the texting language (Humphrys, 2007). The author states that the history of the smiles, from the first smileys that included the gloomy and smiley face, to the current crop of smiles that have grown, includes 16 pages of smileys.

The author states that smiles have reached an instant where it is impossible to type the colon, dash, and bracket without forming a smiley face. The use of smiles, in one way, have served to destroy the English language by introducing obscure ways of expression, a texter can now express emotions without writing out the whole word.

The grotesque abbreviations, that have plagued the English language, also serve to destroy the English language (Humphrys, 2007). The number of abbreviations has increased in recent years to an extent that abbreviations have evolved to obscure meanings. Texting has increased to the extent that abbreviations have to be understood before being written.

Therefore, the author states that abbreviations destroy the whole point of texting, for example, some abbreviations lose meaning due to their complexity. The abbreviation ’IMHO U R GR8’ (Humphrys, 2007), which means ‘In my humble opinion you are great,’ is a factor that destroys the fact of texting.

In defense of the texting phenomenon, the author states that times are continually evolving, therefore, the texting phenomenon should be universally accepted (Humphrys, 2007). The introduction of e-mail services also serve to interfere with the structure of the English language because of the wrong use of grammar when composing e-mails.

In the past, mails were sent by post, therefore, the mail was written in a conventional grammatical ways. However, with the introduction of the e-mail, most writers find themselves slipping into sloppy writing habits, a fact that means that the language is destroyed (Humphrys, 2007).

Some examples of sloppy writing habits include lack of proper punctuation and diction when writing. In conclusion, it can be seen that the author has a genuine case for hating the texting phenomena; texting destroys the structure of the language, and makes an individual lose his/her language skills.

Humphrys, J. (2007). I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language. Dailymail. Retrieved from: < https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483511/I-h8-txt-msgs-How-texting-wrecking-language.html >

• The Effect of the American Culture on My Use of Language
• Summary of John Humphrys
• Formal Written English is disappearing
• Drunk Driving vs. Texting While Driving
• Texting as a Valuable Way of Communication
• The Benefits of Being Bilingual in a Global Society
• The Course of English for Special Purposes
• “Sexism in English: Embodiment and Language”
• Written as Spoken Language
• Language Accommodation
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, June 17). Texting and the English Language. https://ivypanda.com/essays/texting-and-the-english-language/

"Texting and the English Language." IvyPanda , 17 June 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/texting-and-the-english-language/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Texting and the English Language'. 17 June.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Texting and the English Language." June 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/texting-and-the-english-language/.

1. IvyPanda . "Texting and the English Language." June 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/texting-and-the-english-language/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Texting and the English Language." June 17, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/texting-and-the-english-language/.

Is text messaging ruining the English language?

The speed and shorthand of SMS has irreversibly changed our use of English, but is this a good or bad thing?

A UN poll in 2012 found that at the time of polling just over a year ago, there were as many mobile phones as people in the world: over six billion. When you consider that around half of that global population lives in a state of subsistence or poverty which makes owning a mobile phone unlikely, those statistics are even more incredible.

Mobile phone usage and telecommunication has been one of the runaway successes of the twenty-first century. But the question which puzzles us at EF English Live is – has it affected the way we use the language of English? And if it has, is it for better or for worse?

In this blog we’ll take a look at a few areas that might help us navigate this tricky problem. Hpe u tnk it’s gr8!

Mobile phone usage: a few quick facts

– The country with the highest density of mobile phones is…Panama! This Latin American state has an average of over 202 phones per 100 people; meaning each person has at least two mobile telephones.

– The country with the lowest density of mobile phones is North Korea – this is perhaps a combination of economic factors and the regime’s secretive policy towards foreigners and communication.

– The country with the most mobile phones is China, registering just over 1.2 billion (with a population of 1.3 billion) – with the exception of India (over 800 million mobiles) this is more than double every other country’s number.

About the communication our mobile phones are capable of

Most phones run off a network that is described using a number followed by the letter G. As mobiles have developed we have been able to use them for more and more modes of communication – writing, speaking, filming, image sharing; and this has profoundly affected our use of English.

– the ‘G’ in 3G/4G networks stands for ‘generation’; 1G was used to describe the very first mobile telephones introduced by Motorola in the mid-1980s. 1G phones used analogue technology

– 3G phones (introduced in the late 1990s) were the first to go beyond simple voice technologies and introduce digital technologies including internet communication

– with the advent of 3G and 4G, live messaging and other forms of ‘instant’ writing have become the norm for mobile users

Talking vs texting

One conflict that has been produced by the surge in mobile phone use is a rift between people who like to talk and people who prefer to text. Sending text messages has become a medium of choice for mobile phone users.

Young people are increasingly prone to texting and shy away from making calls, which are more direct – but also less permanent forms of communication. Ironically, the speed at which instant messaging or texting takes place means that mistakes and shorthands are common: but we often let each other get away with them because we know what they mean.

Many teachers in primary and secondary schools have expressed concern at the number of children whose literacy levels are dropping; and who are not even able to write by hand, so accustomed are they to computers, tablets and mobiles.

Some texting terms have even made it into common parlance: ‘lol’ (laugh out loud), ‘omg’ (oh my god), pls (please). The craze for shortening words, absorbed from texting, is also changing how we speak – ‘amaze’ for ‘amazing’, ‘totes’ for totally, ‘blates’ for blatantly: these are all largely teenage usages that are becoming mainstream.

But does this mean it’s turning us all into inarticulate blobs?

Mini-debate:

This house proposes that text messaging is ruining the English language

You only need to look at recent education statistics to see that text messaging is completely devastating the English language. Recent findings have suggested that schoolchildren in the 1960s and 1970s were far more literate than children of today. In 2013, the average schoolchild struggles more with spelling, grammar and essay-writing: essential skills which before now were considered key to a good grasp of the English language. Text messaging is alienating English speakers from their native tongue and confusing non-natives who wish to learn the language. It promotes mis-spelling. English is a beautiful tongue with a rich literary history which does not deserve to be overshadowed by phrases like ‘c u l8r’ and ‘megalolz’.

As any linguist knows, language is not a static thing. Change and development is the one constant in life, and the changing sounds and phrases of a language are merely reflections of the changes in a particular society. You cannot expect the English language to remain the same while the world around us – and particularly the way we communicate – is subject to so much variation. Text messaging can be a fun and playful way to communicate – the important thing to remember for education is teaching children how to employ different ways of communication. Writing an essay and writing a text are different things; children can learn both. What is more, texting is being used to actually help literacy in developing countries: a UN SMS-based literacy program in Pakistan aims to help women in Islamabad to read. Now what’s so bad about that?

What do you think? Does text messaging make it harder to learn and speak English ? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Learn English Online

• How it works
• Levels and certificate
• Plans and prices
• Terms and conditions

Our Courses

• Business English
• General English
• Travel English
• TOEFL Preparation
• TOEIC Preparation
• EF English Live App
• Popular topics
• Online enquiry
• Test your English
• All articles

EF English Live

• Work with us
• Privacy policy

© 1996-2023 Signum International AG. All rights reserved.

• Is Texting Killing the English Language?
• Educational
• Posted on June 8, 2016
• By spinkerton
• In Educational

But let’s go back a while. Writing was invented over 5,00 years ago, and language likely traces back perhaps 80,000 years. So talking came first; writing is just an artifice that came along much later. Due to this, writing was first based on the way people talk, with short sentences — think of the Old Testament. However, while talking is largely subconscious and rapid, writing is slower and more deliberate. Like language assessment tests, speaking tests are always shorter in duration than written tests. But in getting back to texting – It’s developing its own type of grammar (no pun intended). Take  LOL for example . It doesn’t actually mean “laughing out loud” in a literal sense anymore.  LOL  has evolved into something much subtler and sophisticated and is used even when nothing is remotely amusing. Jessica texts “Where have you been?” and David texts back “LOL at the library studying for two hours.”  LOL  signals basic empathy between texters, easing tension and creating a sense of equality. Instead of having a literal meaning, it does something — conveying an attitude — just like the -ed ending conveys past tense rather than “meaning” anything.  LOL , of all things, is grammar.

Over time, the meaning of a word or an expression evolves —  meat  used to mean any kind of  food ,  silly  used to mean, believe it or not, blessed.

Civilization, then, is fine — people typing away on their smartphones are fluently using a code separate from the one they use in actual writing, and there’s no evidence that texting is ruining composition skills. Worldwide people speak differently from the way they write, and texting — quick, casual and only intended to be read once — is actually a way of talking with your fingers.

All indications are that America’s youth are doing it quite well. Texting, far from being a scourge, is a work in progress.

This essay is adapted from McWhorter’s  talk  at TED 2013.

Latest Anti-Discrimination Rules: Language Assistance for Non-English Speakers

Does bilingualism in america threaten the english language.

Shelby has worked at Language Testing International for over four years in content development and digital marketing. She holds a master's degree in European and Russian Studies from Yale University and is passionate about all things language and culture.

Recommended Posts

The Benefits of Periodic Language Proficiency Assessment for World Language Teachers

Empowering Agentive Learning with ACTFL OPIc Tests and Diagnostic Grids

Advocating for Multilingualism and Language Education: 2023 Language Advocacy Days

Become an Insider

Sign up today to receive premium content.

Is Texting Ruining the English Language? [Infographic]

Anuli is a writer and new-media enthusiast who dreams about becoming the sixth Spice Girl. Until then follow her on Google+  or Twitter: @akaanuli .

Mom was right, it’s not what you say, but how you say it. And today’s students prefer to say it through text messaging.

A new infographic released by OnlineSchools.com explores whether the widespread practice of abbreviated messaging is proof that the future of the English language is changing.

Communicating through text messaging has become so popular that the Oxford English Dictionary now includes “textish” terms, such as LOL (laugh out loud), OMG (oh my God) and TMI (too much information), making them an official part of the English language. OMG, we’ve sure come a long way from the Queen’s English!

Text messaging is a common method of communication for students: 97 percent of young adults who own a cell phone text on a daily basis. Since young adults send an average of 109.5 text messages a day, it is no surprise that texting slang has found its way into the classroom.

The effect of texting on grammar has been highly debated by educators.

One study of “Generation Txt” students showed that scores on grammar assessment tests decreased as text-speak use increased. However, a separate British study of students ages 8–12 discovered a link between text messages and high performance on standardized spelling tests.

It is uncertain whether text messaging has doomed the future of the English language, but one thing is for sure: Students will continue to text.

This infographic originally appeared on OnlineSchools.com.

• Smartphones

Related Articles

Deep Dive Into AI

How can AI improve and optimize your customer experience?

Copyright © 2024 CDW LLC 200 N. Milwaukee Avenue , Vernon Hills, IL 60061 Do Not Sell My Personal Information

 QUOTE          CONTACT          NEWSLETTER

• About Language Connections
• Clients & Testimonials
• FAQ’s
• Online Reviews
• Interpreting
• Translation
• Localization
• Design & Desktop Publishing
• Transcription
• Audio and Video Production
• Language Training
• Interpreter Training
• Life Sciences
• International Development
• Case Studies
• ESL Training Resources
• Industry Specific Language Training
• Publications
• Sample Translation Portfolio
• Sample Interpretation Portfolio
• White Papers
• Is Txting Ruining the English…

Is Txting Ruining the English Language 4 U?

Anxiously waiting to receive a text, or experiencing “textpectation,” is an example of a word blend.  This is one of the many ways that new words enter a language. Changes in meaning and spelling, as well as the adoption of new words, are part of any actively spoken language– and all spoken languages are dynamic forms of human expression. In fact, over half the words in the English language have been formed by adding prefixes and suffixes to root words (a process that continues today). For many, however, texting is changing the English language in undesirable ways.  Adopted texting abbreviations for everyday words are not only taking over the way we write English, but also affecting the way we speak.

While adapting to such changes is historically how languages have evolved and survived over time, technology is also challenging our tolerance for change at a much faster pace. So is texting changing our language too much and too fast? Forget about the absence of proper grammar and spelling. What happens when we no longer write out the phrase “You Only Live Once” and replace it with “YOLO?”  When did “LOL”(1*) and “OMG” become real words that are actually found in the Oxford English Dictionary? Why do we use numbers to stand in for words like 2 (representing to or too), 4 (representing for, or as in 4get to represent “forget”) and 8 (representing “ate,” as in l8ter, meaning “later”)? Are we ruining the language, or just modernizing it to fit our needs?

Moreover, this trend is not confined to texting.  Tweeting, with its limit on the number of characters allowed, has also created a push for forming abbreviations or “initialisms.” Of course, as texting  and tweeting become more popular as a form of communication everywhere, English is not the only language that is being affected. For example, in China, weibo.com has replaced Twitter and the number of weibo users is quickly growing. One of the most interesting phenomena born from electronic communication are the universal symbols representing emotions: emoticons. The human need to communicate emotions has made these symbols extremely popular. Moreover, not only are they used in texting and tweeting, which have functionally replaced phone calls and voice messages, but also in writing emails and instant messaging. In the absence of tone and facial expression, it is natural that we would want some form of relaying how we feel.

So while we may suggest that texting has changed our everyday language at a faster pace than ever before, scholars of Old English might be less surprised by these changes. Linguists may not feel that texting is necessarily ruining the English language.  Rather, it is just a continuation of the process of evolution.  It inevitably occurs with the passing of time, and is perhaps preferable to a stagnant language that loses its usability and becomes extinct. We will continue to adapt to changes in our everyday language, including keeping up with the ways in which we communicate electronically.

(1*)  According to Oxford Dictionary, LOL dates to 1960 when it was used as an abbreviation for little old lady and not laugh out loud.

About Language Connections :

Language Connections is one of the top language service companies in the US. Over the last 30 years, we’ve focused on providing the best business translation services , interpreting services , as well as interpreter training and customized language training programs. In addition to top-tier corporate language training , we offer certified corporate interpreters and professional business translation services in 200+ languages. Our network includes linguists with backgrounds in all major industries. They’re ready to meet your needs, whether they’re for technical translation services , legal translation , government translation services , international development translation services , education translation services , life sciences translation , or something else. Reach out to us today for a free quote on our cost-efficient and timely translation services, interpreters, or other linguistic services .

Language Connections Inc. 2001 Beacon Street, Suite 105, Boston, MA 02135 Phone: +1-617-731-3510 Email: [email protected]  

Author:  LC Authors

Subscriber Only Resources?

Access this article and hundreds more like it with a subscription to  Scholastic News  magazine.

Debate photos courtesy of families; Shutterstock.com (all other images)

Article Options

Presentation View

Is Txting Ruining Ur Writing?

Misspelled words. No capital letters. Missing punctuation. People with smartphones know that these are common in text messages. But would you write that way in a school essay? 

Many teachers worry that too much texting might cause kids to develop bad writing habits. Some people think using incorrect spelling and grammar in texts is fine for adults but not for kids. After all, kids are still learning how to write well.

Other people argue that kids realize texting has different rules than the writing they do for school. Plus, a study from the Netherlands suggests there’s nothing to worry about. Researchers found that texting regularly doesn’t hurt kids’ writing. In fact, the more shortcuts kids used in texts, the better they performed on grammar tests. 

Here’s what two of our readers think.

When sending texts, kids use shortcuts that prevent them from learning to be skilled writers. We use abbreviations like NP for “no problem” instead of writing out the words.

Smartphones can autocorrect spelling, which takes away the need to memorize how to spell important words. Kids’ phones are doing all the work for them! 

Kids know that texting is a relaxed way of writing that we shouldn’t use on tests or in essays—unless we want a bad grade! I text all the time and still get good grades in English language arts.

Plus, texting can actually improve kids’ writing. The autocorrect tool on phones shows the correct spellings of words, so we know better in the future.

Is texting ruining your writing?

empeora tu eskritura con ls SMS?

Muchas palabras abreviadas, sin mayúsculas, sin signos de puntuación. Los que tienen teléfonos inteligentes saben que todo esto es habitual en los mensajes de texto. Pero, ¿escribirías lo mismo en una redacción escolar? 

A muchos maestros les preocupa que el exceso de mensajes de texto haga que los niños adquieran malos hábitos de escritura. Hay quien opina que utilizar una ortografía y una gramática incorrectas en los textos está bien para los adultos, pero no para los niños. Después de todo, los niños aún están aprendiendo a escribir bien.

Otros sostienen que los niños saben que los mensajes de texto tienen reglas distintas a las de la escritura escolar. Además, un estudio holandés sugiere que no hay de qué preocuparse. Los investigadores descubrieron que enviar mensajes de texto con regularidad no perjudica la escritura de los niños. De hecho, cuantos más atajos usaban en sus textos, mejores resultados obtenían en las pruebas de gramática. 

Esto es lo que piensan dos de nuestros lectores:

Al enviar mensajes de texto, los niños usan muchos atajos que les impiden aprender a escribir con destreza. Usamos abreviaturas como PQ para “porque” en lugar de escribir las palabras completas. 

Los teléfonos inteligentes pueden autocorregir la ortografía, lo que elimina la necesidad de memorizar cómo se escriben las palabras importantes. 

¡Los teléfonos de los niños hacen todo el trabajo por ellos!

Los niños saben que los mensajes de texto son una forma relajada de escribir que no deberíamos usar en los exámenes o redacciones (¡a no ser que queramos una mala calificación!). Yo escribo mensajes de texto todo el tiempo y sigo con buenas calificaciones en lengua y literatura inglesas.

Además, los mensajes de texto pueden mejorar la escritura de los niños. La herramienta de autocorrección de los teléfonos muestra la ortografía correcta de las palabras, para que sepamos escribir mejor en el futuro. 

¿empeora tu eskritura con ls SMS?

Texting really is ruining personal relationships

It’s just too easy. Delayed on your way to a meeting, you text, “sorry running late.” You leave for work in the morning after a fight with your partner and spend the train ride typing a monologue of hurt and anger. You get a second invitation for Saturday night, so you text the person you originally made plans with: “Apologies, not feeling well, need to cancel.”

Our increasing preference for texting over email and phone calls creates a higher quantity of interactions, but it decreases their quality, harming our relationships.

On the surface, these texts may seem like an acceptable way to handle daily communication, but they actually are all examples of ways to avoid conflict, from making lying easier to dodging in-person confrontation. Our increasing preference for texting over email and phone calls creates a higher quantity of interactions, but it decreases their quality, harming our relationships. Indeed, it’s a far cry from paying attention and listening to the thoughts and feelings of another person, and it’s missing the human contact and learning that comes from true dialogue.

The problems with texting begin with the way it reduces conversation to words or photos on a screen; the way it converts the interchange of human connection to brief, stilted fragments. Even with a plethora of emojis and exclamation points, the absence of intonation muddles the communication.

Opinion How do you text? Inside the battle between 'raindrop' and 'waterfall' texters

As a psychotherapist, I see this phenomenon almost daily, along with the unintended consequences it causes. Patients often read me text messages during therapy sessions in hopes that I can decipher them, since without facial cues and tone of voice, it can be challenging to understand the intention of the message.

Worse, it encourages passive — or more often passive-aggressive — behavior, what I call “hit and runs.” Typing on a screen invites impulsive responses. Absent the ability to see the reflection of pain or hurt on someone’s face, it’s easy for people to pound out anger or meanness. You don’t risk interruption or need to take a breath, but what may serve one person as a chance to clear the air often ends up overwhelming the recipient.

Lying is also easier with texting, since it doesn’t betray the motivation behind the message. Are you texting home to say you’re working late while out for drinks with a coworker? Is your cold really that bad, or is the prospect of another family dinner unappealing? Written words can hide a great deal of emotion, and if forced to leave a voice message or deliver news in person, your lie could come through because of weak intonation or guilt (or both).

And although texting enables more frequent contact, it also can be used to curtail conversation. The best example of this is the egregious way texts are used as preemptive apologies, as in the reflexive “sorrys” that accompany notes one is running late. But is the sender really sorry, or the apology merely a brush-off to keep conflict at bay?

Opinion We want to hear what you THINK. Please submit a letter to the editor.

Indeed, preemptive apologies are offered in hopes of not having to deal with the consequence of having offended someone. While I can hear that you are sorry, I also need a chance to say that I am hurt if we are really to resolve the incident. Without the chance to express my feelings, the apology will be less meaningful, as reconciliation is strengthened when both parties have a say. Do I appreciate a text from a patient that she is on her way and will be 15 minutes late? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean that we won’t talk about why she was late, especially if it’s a pattern.

At root, texting is lazy, and our relationships suffer when we don’t invest in them. A “Happy Birthday!” text — even with cake and champagne emojis — will never bring the same smile as a card in the mail or a phone call. Such actions take time and planning. I’ve had patients show me the texts people have sent them to express condolences after the death of a loved one. No matter how many crying emojis are used, this is just wrong. A card and a stamp take effort that demonstrate the sender understands the importance of the event in the other person’s life. A conversation allows deep emotions to be shared, and the risk involved in opening up this way is not only worth it but necessary for real connection.

From multitasking to abbreviated, one-sided sharing of information that’s supposed to pass as conversation, text messages often leave the receiver feeling short-changed, confused or devalued. That people are in touch through texting with greater frequency and immediacy than ever before means that, ironically, the opportunity for disappointment is also greater. Recently, a patient told me of a text she received from her husband who was at home with her at the time but unwilling to come upstairs and tell her to her face how angry he was. She didn’t know whether to be more upset by what he said or by his behavior.

Our skills for conversing are getting rusty and will only get worse as more people use virtual assistants, online shopping and other apps that help us avoid actually talking to another human being. Texting breeds not just grammar and spelling illiteracy but, more importantly, emotional illiteracy as well.

Texting breeds not just grammar and spelling illiteracy but, more importantly, emotional illiteracy as well.

So if you’re running late, please text, but don’t think that exempts you from talking about it in person. If you want to send a heart emoji, go for it, but don’t forget to tell me you love me when you get home. If I’ve hurt your feelings, by all means text me — to arrange a time when we can actually discuss what happened.

The disappointment, anger and conflict that might arise in this and other authentic conversations don’t have to be scary. Conversations that allow me to hear your voice, see your expressions and support true dialogue are still the gold standard for bringing us closer. A good conversation is the best antidote to loneliness that I know. And for that to happen, please silence your phone and leave it in your pocket. Then, let’s talk.

Maggie Mulqueen, Ph.D., is a psychologist in private practice in Brookline, Massachusetts. She is the author of "On Our Own Terms: Redefining Competence and Femininity." More of her work can be found at  drmaggiemulqueen.com .

Has Texting and Email Ruined Students’ Writing Skills?

What effect does texting have on your kids.

Posted March 11, 2012 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

• What Is a Career
• Take our Procrastination Test
• Find a career counselor near me

Teachers and parents alike have voiced concern over whether texting, with its abbreviations, shortcuts, and odd grammar, hurts kids' writing skills. There has been little definitive research on the topic, although surveys of teens suggest that the majority consider text language and written English to be separate forms of communication.

Linguists are divided, with some seeing deterioration in writing skills that they attribute to text and email, and others believing that text messaging constitutes a different form of language. Schools in Australia are actually teaching students about text messaging and comparing its form and structure to written English. When treating texting as a different sort of language, there can be academic (and practical) benefits to actually studying it: Students can learn more about syntax and grammar (and improve their texting at the same time).

Since texting, email, and whatever the next form of electronic communication will be, are not going away, it makes sense to study it, and perhaps teach it (or at least teach about it) in schools.

As an organizational psychologist who studies nonverbal communication , there was a concern as email became more commonplace in work settings that the loss of face-to-face communication and phone conversations, with their rich nonverbal cues, would lead to communication breakdowns. Although there are indeed problems with email communication, savvy users take care to make meaning clear, and the use of "emoticons" (the smiley faces) has helped to put in some of the lost emotional cues. Email is not going away, so it makes sense to study how to use it more effectively.

Ronald E. Riggio, Ph.D. , is the Henry R. Kravis Professor of Leadership and Organizational Psychology at Claremont McKenna College.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Is Text Messaging Ruining English?

With every generation come cries that teenagers are destroying the language with their newfangled slang. The current grievance harps on the way casual language used in texts and instant messages inhibits kids from understanding how to write and speak “properly.” While amateur language lovers might think this argument makes sense, experts say this is not at all the case. In fact, linguists say teenagers, far from destroying English, are innovating and enriching the language.

First of all, abbreviations like haha , lol , omg , brb , and btw are more infrequent than you might imagine, according to a 2008 paper by Sali A. Tagliamonte and Derek Denis . Of course, 2008 is a long time ago in terms of digital fluency, but the findings of the study are nevertheless fascinating. Looking at IM conversations of Toronto-based teenagers, Tagliamonte found that “the use of short forms, abbreviations, and emotional language is infinitesimally small.” These sorts of stereotypical markers of teen language accounted for only 3 percent of Tagliamonte’s data. Perhaps one of her most interesting findings is that older teens start to outgrow the abbreviation lol , opting for the more mature haha . Tagliamonte’s 16-year-old daughter told her, “I used to use lol when I was a kid.”

Tagliamonte, who now is exploring language development in texting as well as instant messaging, argues that these forms of communication are a cultivated mix of formal and informal language and that these mediums are “on the forefront of change.” In an article published in May of this year, Tagliamonte concludes that “students showed that they knew where to use proper English.” For example, a student might not start sentences with capital letters in IMs and text messages, but still understands to do this in formal papers. Tagliamonte believes that this kind of natural blending of conversational registers employed by teens would not be possible without a sophisticated understanding of both formal and informal language.

It was once trendy to try to speak like people wrote, and now it’s the other way around. For the first time in history, we can write quickly enough to capture qualities of spoken language in our writing, and teens are skillfully doing just that. John McWhorter’s 2013 TED Talk “ Txting is killing language. JK!!! ” further supports the idea that teens are language innovators. He believes their creative development of the English language should be not mocked, but studied, calling texting “an expansion of [young people’s] linguistic repertoire.” He singles out the subtle communication prowess of lol . Teens are using it in non-funny situations, and its meaning has expanded beyond just “laugh out loud.” Now it can be used as a marker of empathy and tone, something often lacking in written communication. This is an enhancement–not a perversion–of language. There’s also evidence to suggest that lol sometimes carries a similar meaning to wtf (and furthermore, the abbreviation wtf is more functional and sophisticated than it seems).

Teens aren’t the only ones opting for abbreviations in written communication. The first citation of OMG in the Oxford English Dictionary is from a 1917 letter from the British admiral John Arbuthnot Fisher to none other than Winston Churchill. He writes, “I hear that a new order of Knighthood is on the tapis–O.M.G. (Oh! My God!)–Shower it on the Admiralty!!” Clearly, to give young people all the credit for spreading new abbreviations would be shortsighted, though this letter does bring up the question of where Admiral John Fisher first encountered OMG . Perhaps he picked up this colorful expression from his grandchildren.

Current Events

Science & Technology

Hobbies & Passions

Trending Words

[ skrof -y uh -l uh s ]

• By clicking "Sign Up", you are accepting Dictionary.com Terms & Conditions and Privacy policies.
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Texting Is Not Ruining Language — It’s Evolving It

I’m old enough to remember the debate about whether or not it was appropriate to use the word “ text ” as a verb. “How are we supposed to conjugate it into the past tense?” we’d say, our voices laden with incredulity. “Say, ‘ I texted ’? That’s ridiculous. ” Merriam Webster records the first use of “text” as a verb in 1998 . These days we bandy it about without a second thought.

Since the beginning of texting, some linguists have accused it of being the downfall of the English language. In a 2002 article in the Guardian , John Sutherland, a Professor of Modern English Literature at University College London, called texting “penmanship for illiterates” and referred to emojis as “face symbols.” He also predicted that texting was no more than a passing fad, sure to burn out after “a year or two (max).” “If you don’t text now,” he wrote, “it’s not worth learning: in a couple of years voice recognition systems will kick in.”

Ah, well, some articles age better than others, I suppose. I’m sure plenty of Sutherland’s other proclamations weren’t so completely dead wrong.

Language Evolves, And Texting Is Part Of That

Still, Sutherland’s hubris with regard to his ability to predict the evolution of language should serve as a warning to us all, especially those of us who have reached the age of using phrases like “kids these days”: criticism of how young people communicate tends to age very badly.

Gretchen McCulloch, author of “ Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language ” and co-host of the podcast “Lingthusiasm,” makes the case that texting is just another way to communicate, and is a natural part of our language evolution. She notes that texting has developed its own rules and conventions, but those conventions tend to be highly context-dependent: Older people text differently than younger people. We text friends differently than we text colleagues.

The underlying focus of the communication can be different, too. “The old rules are these top-down, ‘here’s how you use an apostrophe,’ ‘here’s how you use a semicolon’ type of thing,” McCulloch said in an interview with NPR . “The new rules are about: How are other people going to interpret your tone of voice? … The old rules are about using language to demonstrate intellectual superiority, and the new rules are about using language to create connection between people.”

Periods Are Aggressive. Apparently.

Last week, a friend of mine posted the following queery to Facebook: “Both of my teenagers agree that periods in text messages are ‘aggressive.’ Are they broken?” 228 comments later, there was no general consensus on whether periods are aggressive, but specific trends were clear: young people think adding a period is the text equivalent of a death stare. Older people are like, “But … punctuation. It’s the end of a sentence. Hello .”

I send enough texts throughout the day that I tend to side more with the whippersnappers on this one: I leave off periods, and when someone responds with a period I have to pause and consider context before I determine if the person is annoyed with me or just meticulous with punctuation.

McCulloch addressed the contentious period in her interview with NPR too. She said that it makes sense that as texting evolved, the period started to get left off. With formal writing, you need a formal break to mark the the separation between sentences. With texting, the separation is marked by hitting send. Adding a period is redundant.

So, to a young person, the text “awesome” is an exclamation of approval and excitement, whereas the text “Awesome.” might come across as sarcastic. (Think: “Ugh, awesome ,” with an eyeroll.)

Texting Isn’t The Downfall Of Grammar, Either

In episode seven of her podcast , “Lingthusiasm,” McCulloch confronts the assertion that kids are ruining language, specifically with texting. One study that was published in 2012 claimed a correlation between the amount of time a kid spent texting and a decline in grammar skills. The media jumped on the study and published various articles parroting the results without actually analyzing the study’s methodologies. When linguists took a closer look at the study, they found that not only was the correlation statistically insignificant, but that it could also be attributed to grade level. And the kids (middle school-aged) were only required to take a 20-question test on grammar. The content of their writing — their ability to clearly articulate their ideas — wasn’t even considered.

According to McCulloch and multiple other studies , informal text speak is not a predictor of poor skills in formal writing. In fact, a 2010 study by M.A. Drouin from Indiana University–Purdue University found that students who texted more scored higher on grammar, spelling, and reading fluency tests.

Kids Are Expressing Themselves Through Writing More Than Ever Before

And doesn’t that makes sense? After all, kids are constantly writing . They’re literally expressing themselves via written word all the freaking time. Teens’ texts might be a hot mess in terms of punctuation and grammar, but that doesn’t mean they “can’t write.”

I write for a living, and the thumb-typed texts I peck out on my phone in personal correspondences differ massively from what I produce on my laptop. On my phone, where I text with my thumbs only, I ignore spelling errors, typos, and other grammar rules (my own and others’) — but only when I’m on my phone. If I’m typing a message on my computer keyboard, I automatically use punctuation, because in that case my fingers are used to including punctuation. My kids do the same. Their texting is a mess, but the writing they do for school assignments follows traditional spelling and grammar conventions appropriate to their grade level and sometimes beyond.

Texting Is Making Language Evolve Even Faster

The more connected we are, the faster language evolves. Every year, hundreds of words are added to Merriam Webster . Not only does our digital connectedness allow new words and phrases to spread with unprecedented quickness, but sites like Urban Dictionary allow older generations to catch on to slang phrases of younger generations and incorporate them into their own lexicon, thereby instantly stripping them of their coolness. (RIP, “ on fleek .”)

Texting has become almost like a different language with its own expectations, shorthands, and implied meanings. In terms of the interpersonal sharing of ideas, it has no more or no less value than formal written English. It is a natural part of the evolution of one of the most distinctly human things we do — communicate with language. Our kids will surprise us with their ability to register-switch, or code-switch, between informal text-speak and the kind of language required to compose an essay for school. And they’ll surprise us with their limitless creativity for generating new words faster than we can keep up.

This article was originally published on April 19, 2021

Is Texting Ruining the English Language? Essay Sample

Some say that it is queering children’s ability to efficaciously pass on both written and orally. and there are statements stating that it really helps kids pass on better. In this essay I will be looking at both sides of the statement and seeking to come up with a decision as to whether texting is really destructing the English linguistic communication. Arguments against this statement are varied; some believe it helps the kids communicate more efficaciously. As a kid communication by text can be seen as ‘cool’ i personally believe it’s merely a tendency that like others will come and travel. At the minute the tendency of text message linguistic communication is really popular and with most English citizens having a nomadic it is really widely spread but one uncertainty people really use text message linguistic communication in mundane address and other things such as school and work. I think that the usage of this linguistic communication is strictly for texting and should be kept to that. while others think it’s merely the English linguistic communication germinating as it has done for 100s of old ages. for illustration our linguistic communication presently evolved from Shakespearean and so on.

Peoples believe that the English linguistic communication is flexible and used to alter therefore it can accommodate to alterations. in this instance text messaging; Text messaging is a perfect illustration of how people adapt and mould linguistic communication to accommodate different contexts. Text messaging can besides be seen a more of a convenience than a new linguistic communication in itself. more a tool than the creative activity of a whole new linguistic communication. Text message linguistic communication is extremely abbreviated an therefore saves clip. clip that can be used to make other things. another ground why people like it so much. Arguments holding with this statement besides differ. The chief statement to be considered is that people can be considered as field lazy for utilizing this linguistic communication. The usage of abbreviations allows the user to avoid holding to spell right and hence confines the individual to the text linguistic communication itself; hence I believe its pure indolence.

Peoples would besides reason that its set uping children’s ability to pass on both written and orally which in their hereafter lives would be a monolithic job with school. occupations and what non. The people reasoning against this believe that texting itself is doing kids to bury the regulations of RP English and wholly disregard the usage of proper grammar whereas I would state it’s informal and merely a tool of convenience. I personally believe that it is harmless and is merely an easier and much more convenient manner of pass oning I believe that some people are looking excessively profoundly into the result of text message linguistic communication and that the linguistic communication itself is perchance merely a tendency instead than a whole new linguistic communication emerging. Like the Morse codification I believe this is merely advancement in engineering and that every bit long as it is kept on text so the English linguistic communication should confront no problem in

lasting. merely as it has done for many old ages.

More about Essay Database

• Essay Database Summary
• Essay Database Accounting
• Essay Database Anthropology
• Essay Database Architecture
• Essay Database Biology
• Essay Database Business
• Essay Database Chemistry
• Essay Database Computer Science
• Essay Database Criminology
• Essay Database Culture and Arts
• Essay Database Economics
• Essay Database Geography
• Essay Database History
• Essay Database Human resources
• Essay Database International Studies
• Essay Database Jurisprudence
• Essay Database Linguistics
• Essay Database Management
• Essay Database Marketing
• Essay Database Mathematics
• Essay Database Medicine
• Essay Database Movies
• Essay Database Music
• Essay Database Physics
• Essay Database Politics
• Essay Database Psychology
• Essay Database Relationships
• Essay Database Religion
• Essay Database Science
• Essay Database Society
• Essay Database Sociology
• Essay Database Technology
• Essay Database Television
• Essay Database Tourism
• Essay Database Women and Gender

Related Posts

• Television: Is it Ruining Our Society? Essay Sample
• Is Hip-Hop Music Ruining Our Teenagers?
• Texting While Driving is Dangerous Essay
• Texting and Driving
• Texting Effects on Written Communication Skills
• Texting and Driving case study
• Texting & Driving : 1 Way 2 Die
• Explore the Varieties of and Attitudes to Texting
• What Are the Importance of English Language in This Modern World Essay Sample
• The Aspired Macbeth and the Evil Macbeth Book Review

How about getting full access immediately?

• Share full article

Advertisement

Subscriber-only Newsletter

Jessica Grose

What teachers told me about a.i. in school.

By Jessica Grose

Opinion Writer

Leila Wheless, a North Carolina teacher who has been an educator since 1991, tried to keep “an open heart” about using artificial intelligence in her middle school English and language arts classroom. She reviewed the guidance of her state’s generative A.I. “ recommendations and considerations ” for public schools. But the results of her students’ A.I. use were dispiriting.

“For one particular assignment related to the novel ‘Persepolis,’ I had students research prophets,” Wheless explained, because the main character fantasizes about being a prophet. But, she told me via email, internet searches that incorporated A.I.:

Gave students jewels such as “the Christian prophet Moses got chocolate stains out of T-shirts” — I guess rather than Moses got water out of a rock(?). And let me tell you, eighth graders wrote that down as their response. They did not come up to me and ask, “Is that correct? Moses is known for getting chocolate stains out of T-shirts?” They simply do not have the background knowledge or indeed the intellectual stamina to question unlikely responses.

After I wrote a series in the spring about tech use in K-12 classrooms , I asked teachers about their experiences with A.I. because its ubiquity is fairly new and educators are just starting to figure out how to grapple with it. I spoke with middle school, high school and college instructors, and my overall takeaway is that while there are a few real benefits to using A.I. in schools — it can be useful in speeding up rote tasks like adding citations to essays and doing basic coding — the drawbacks are significant.

The biggest issue isn’t just that students might use it to cheat — students have been trying to cheat forever — or that they might wind up with absurdly wrong answers, like confusing Moses with Mr. Clean. The thornier problem is that when students rely on a generative A.I. tool like ChatGPT to outsource brainstorming and writing, they may be losing the ability to think critically and to overcome frustration with tasks that don’t come easily to them.

Sarah Martin, who teaches high school English in California, wrote to me saying, “Cheating by copying from A.I. is rampant, particularly among my disaffected seniors who are just waiting until graduation.”

When I followed up with her over the phone, she said that it’s getting more and more difficult to catch A.I. use because a savvier user will recognize absurdities and hallucinations and go back over what a chatbot spits out to make it read more as if the user wrote it herself. But what troubles Martin more than some students’ shrewd academic dishonesty is “that there’s just no grit that’s instilled in them. There’s no sense of ‘Yes, you’re going to struggle, but you’re going to feel good at the end of it.’”

She said that the amount of time her students are inclined to work on something that challenges them has become much shorter over the seven years she’s been teaching. There was a time, she said, when a typical student would wrestle with a concept for days before getting it. But now, if that student doesn’t understand something within minutes, he’s more likely to give up on his own brain power and look for an alternative, whether it’s a chatbot or asking a friend for help.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .