Argument Essay: Use Of Text-Speak

A very common debatable topic is text-messaging. Or more specifically the use of text-speak, otherwise referred to as “textese. ” David Crystal and John Humphrys have both written articles on text-speak. Both of the articles mention the texting; history, effects, usage and etc. According to the author David Crystal in the online article “2B OR NOT 2B”? , text messages developed in the “early 90s”. He also brings up the idea of “textese”, which is basically the language of text messages.

In the article he says “The most noticeable feature is the use of single letters, numerals, and symbols to represent words or parts of words, as with b “be” and 2 “to””. Statements written in this fashion are truly known as rebuses. Rebuses actually go back for centuries. For example in Christmas annuals adults used to solve rebuses that rsesmbles todays text messages. Common textese used today isn’t as modern as the actual text message. Initializing of phrases has been going on for years. Crystal also states that “abbreviated words ever since…become new words”.

Common words used in daily language have actually come from the shortening of words. “Eric Partridge published his Dictionary of Abbreviations in 1942. It contained dozens of SMS-looking examples, such as agn “again”, mth “month”, and gd “good” – 50 years before texting was born. ” Understnding this allows you to realize the fact that actual textese is older than the text message itself. John Humphrys is the author that wrote the article “I h8 txt msgs”. Humphrys states a brief overview of history. According to Humphrys it has been “25 years since the emoticon (that’s the posh word) was born.

Emoticons or emojis are characters using keyboard text that tend to display emotions and feeling. Humphrys also says that it started with two emoticons and now it has evolved into sixteen pages of emoticons. The sixth edition of the Oxford Dictionary has removed 16000 hyphens from words. From reading both of the articles we can gather that David Crystal is not anti-text message. He does not believe that texting is destroying the English language, through clearly given statements. The other author is John Humphrys.

John Humphrys believes that texting is the imminent downfall of the English language, which he discusses as well. Both authors have a variation on textese. Complicated textese are looked at in different ways. David Crystals states “they are linguistically complex. There are an extraordinary number of ways which people play with language. ” On the other hand, John Humphrys states “instead of aiding communication it can be a barrier”. John Humphrys writes “Even worse are the grotesque abbreviations. ” He is ok with simple ones such as “4, u and tks”, but when it gets longers that’s when a problem is presented.

He believes that instead of writing messages we have developed the texting language in complicated ways. David Crystals point on this matter is simple. We as humans are creative with our textese. We uses to make our writing sound more creative and colorful. He also links the use of abbreviations to a “technological problem”. Texters used character limits to develop the text speak. On the other hand complicated textese can be a barrier like John Humphrys stated. The more complicated it is the harder it can be to understand the true point, behind the message.

If the message is not easy to comprhend we are wasting our time. Both authors also discuss writing habits with the use of textese. John Humphrys say that he finds himself slipping into sloppy habits. He has been accidentally abandoning capital letters and using rows and rows of dots. Proper punctuation disappears due to character limits. This creates neglience when you have to transfer from texting to physical writing. He writes “I am also cross with myself for the way I have adapted my own style. In the early days I treated e-mails as though they were letters.

I tried to construct proper, grammatical sentences and used punctuation that would have brought a smile to the lips of that guardian of our language, Lynne Truss”. Lynne Truss is an English writer who wrote Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. The book discusses the importance of punctuation and why it needs to be used properly. Thus his reasoning for calling her the “guardian of our language. ” He himself doesn’t enjoy falling into those sloppy habits that found in Truss’s book. John Humphrys also believes that the English language is disappearing to the use of textese.

This statement is reiterated due to to the Oxford English Dictionary removing hyphenated words. Instead of deleting words we should be implementing words as our diversity grows. Our literacy decreases as our use of textese increases. This leads to our incompetence. On the other hand David Crystal has his own idea on this topic. “Children could not be good at texting if they had not already developed considerable literacy awareness. ” David Crystals is simply saying before you can use the textese you need basic understanding of the English language.

Children understanding how to properly text is due to the fact that they understand the English language which is actually expressing competence. He also states “The children who were better at spelling and writing used the most textisms. And the younger they received their first phone, the higher their scores. ”. This is a pro-text statement. Texting actually increases literacy in this statement rather than decreasing like John Humphrys stated in article. Children are benefiting from electronics. He directly connects test scores to the age when a child receives their first phone .

He mentions this because children are our future. The intellectuality of the children benefits from them using textese. He also states “The language as a whole will not decline. In texting what we are seeing, in a small way, is language in evolution”. Texting will not lead us to decline but it leads to progress. Our language shall increase and spread. Both authors bring up the idea of self-expression through text message. John Humphrys states “But as it has developed its users have sought out increasingly obscure ways of expressing themselves which, when you think about it, entirely defeats the purpose.

The purpose of a text message is to express ourselves via text without having to call someone. We are supposed to get our opinion across without the person on the other end questioning what we’re feeling. Text messages are faceless. The text message has no form of expression so the entire point of texting is useless according to Humphrys. Thus why text if we can not express ourselves properly. David Crystal actually believes you can express yourself through text messages. He even brings up an historical expression. He references the case of Stuart Campbell.

Stuart Campbell was found guilty of murdering his niece. Throughout the trial he attributed his innocence to text messages he claimed his niece sent him that would prove him innocent. The job of forensic linguists is to figure out text message patterns. Using their skills in this case they were able to figure out that he forged the messages. It also states that “easily detectable than in writing using standard English. ” For them to figure out that his niece did not write the text message actually shows that some self expression and self-identity can be found within text messages.

John Humphrys and David Crystal both have valuable thoughts when discussing the text messaging debate. Both articles need to be read in it’s entirety before one can become subjective. The text language we use is actually older than the actual text message. With text messaging we can share our English faster; but if the message isn’t clear the speed of communication can be slowed down. There are dictionaries adding abbreviations and removig hyphenated words. Depending how we construct our messages is how much expression we show the person receiving it.