Slashdot Mirror


"English" Not Threatened By Webspeak

MudButt writes "Linguists say not to worry too much about Netspeak, otherwise known as the language of choice in chat rooms and IM clients. According to this Yahoo! article, linguists say that terms like "cya", "brb", "afk" are a healthy way of exploring the power of the written language. They went on to say "FYI, RTFA"!"

5 of 695 comments (clear)

  1. Spelling & Grammer by andrew_0812 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What bothers me is not the acronyms. It is the degradation of spelling and grammer that seems to be rampant on the net. It makes me cringe to see the way that some people communicate. Of course, the problem could have existed in pre-webforum times, and it is just more apparant now.

    P.S. I am intentionally not spell checking this post, because if I mispelled something, it will help to proev my point.

  2. OSS Strikes Again by dteichman2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hi. I'm in high school. 3 people in my English class just failed a writing assignment because they used "u" instead of "you," "i" instead of "I" and most importantly "cum" instead of "come."

    I'm guessing that English is, in fact, being threatened. If they only used Gaim instead of AIM, they wouldn't have problems with language because it replaces "webspeak" with English.

    --


    Silence is golden... and duct tape is silver.
  3. Re:When are we getting machine code natural langua by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When are we getting machine code natural language?

    It's called Lojban. (Just an interesting tidbit I picked up after having my question answered in the AI thread.) :-)

  4. Netspeak, not idiotalk by katsiris · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Of course there's nothing wrong with playing with acronyms and trying to increase the efficiency of communications. I'm sometimes wonder about these so-called short-cuts not really being shortcuts (many of them are a lot harder to type than the actual word), but I don't think the concern is slang destroying english.

    Rather, it's the laziness involving a complete lack of punctuation and other more subtle elements of the language which convey the tone and perhaps intent that is worrisome. Combine that with self-correcting software like spell checkers, and essentially a person never really develops communications skills beyond a certain point. And then they carry themselves in text communications as idiots.

    A friend applied for a job that he wasn't really interested in and received a form-letter rejection via email, riddled with grammatical errors, incorrect usage of some words (they're/their/there, then/than), and so on. He corrected the letter rather sarcastically and sent it back to them and they actually apologized AND offered him the job! Apparently people who can write english as well as speak it are in short supply.

  5. Re:When are we getting machine code natural langua by WasteOfAmmo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    English is the most unpure language and suprisingly the most popular language because of its ease.

    In what way can the term ease be used to describe anything about English? Let us see:

    • in grammer? Well there are probably several dozen grammer nazis reading this post that can atest that there is nothing easy about the English grammer. In fact several of the grammer nazis will correct what the last grammer nazi did wrong.
    • in spelling? Certainly English is easy to spell so long as you remember that there are no rules except that there are exceptions to every rule.
    • maybe it is intuitive? Certainly, after all you have minimum, maximum, and then... middlemum (my 3 year old came up with that one when trying to explain the average of something to us).
    • in speech? Based on the number of lawyers we have around and the lengths of even the smallest legal document needed to clearly expain a common sense topic I see no way of descibing English speech as easy (not to use or understand).

    I could go on with my argument on how badly English is screwed up and aught to be scrapped completely but many others have proven my point through some creative writing:

    We polish the Polish furniture.
    He could lead if he would get the lead out.
    A farm can produce produce.
    The dump was so full it had to refuse refuse.
    The soldier decided to desert in the desert.
    The present is a good time to present the present.
    At the Army base, a bass was painted on the head of a bass drum.
    The dove dove into the bushes.
    I did not object to the object.
    The insurance for the invalid was invalid.
    The bandage was wound around the wound.
    There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
    They were too close to the door to close it.
    The buck does funny things when the does are present.
    They sent a sewer down to stitch the tear in the sewer line.
    To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
    The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
    After a number of Novocain injections, my jaw got number.
    I shed a tear when I saw the tear in my clothes.
    I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
    How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
    I spent last evening evening out a pile of dirt.

    The English Lesson
    We'll begin with box, and the plural is boxes,
    But the plural of ox is oxen, not oxes.
    Then one fowl is goose, but two are called geese,
    Yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
    You may find a lone mouse or a whole lot of mice,
    But the plural of house is houses, not hice.
    If the plural of man is always called men,
    Why shouldn't the plural of pan be pen?
    The cow in the plural may be cows or kine,
    But the plural of vow is vows, not vine.
    And I speak of a foot, and you show me your feet,
    But I give a boot... would a pair be beet?
    If one is a tooth, and a whole set is teeth,
    Why shouldn't the plural of booth be beeth?
    If the singular is this, and the plural is these,
    Why shouldn't the plural of kiss be kese?
    Then one may be that, and three be those,
    Yet the plural of hat would never be hose.
    We speak of a brother, and also of brethren,
    But though we say mother, we never say methren.
    The masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
    But imagine the feminine she, shis, and shim.
    So our English, I think you will agree,
    Is the trickiest language you ever did see.

    I take it you already know
    of tough, and bough and cough and dough?
    Others may stumble, but not you
    on hiccough, through, slough and though.
    Well done! And now you wish, perhaps
    To learn of less familiar traps?
    Beware of heard, a dreadful word
    That looks like beard and sounds like bird.
    And dead; it's said like bed, not bead!
    For goodness sake, don't call it deed!
    Watch out for meat and great and threat,
    (They rhyme with suite and straight an