Slashdot Mirror


It's OK to keep AIMing

fooby12 writes "According to the Univeristy of Toronto instant messaging does not hurt the grammar of the people who use it. From the article: "With 80% of Canadian teenagers using instant messaging and adopting its unique linguistic shorthand, many teachers and parents are concerned about the medium's potential to corrupt kids' grammar. But instant messaging doesn't deserve its bad reputation as a spoiler of syntax, suggests a new study from the University of Toronto.""

6 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. To the Contrary! by dshaw858 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've used AIM and IRC excessively in the past few years, and it has led me to getting a nearly perfect score on my English SAT exams. Just because some p30p3l tlk lik this dosnt meen that omg all of u r going 2 be liek th1s. Some people may actually improve based on the widespread use of IMs, just like emails or passing notes in class...

    - dshaw

  2. Re:Bad terminology by iMaple · · Score: 4, Informative

    And even if it does change the language a little bit, thats to be expected. Languages (esp English isnt static) so this is just part of the normal evolution process of the language(albeit a little quicker than the past). Personally I do have a hard time reading netspeak but then it does remind me of Chaucer sometimes :)

    eg.
    That it was May thus dremed me
    In time of love and jollite
    That al thyng gynneth waxen gay
    For there is neither busk nor hay
    In May that it nyl shrouded ben,
    And it with new leves wryen.
    These greves eke recoveren grene,
    That dry in wynter ben to sen,
    And the erthe waxeth proude withal
    For swete dewes that on it falle . . .

    Maybe thats why the can still do well in their English classes.

  3. Re:Hand Writing has suffered by EvanED · · Score: 2, Informative

    a lot of times I loose my thoughts

    Good thing you don't lose them before you have a chance to loose them.

  4. You don't seem to have much of a sense of humor. by mmell · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'll try tags in the future.

  5. I'm reminded by dr_dank · · Score: 3, Informative
    I'm reminded of this letter I saw in the NY Times in 1999 likening the coming of the internet to the downfall of the english language:


    To the Editor:

    A Feb. 20 Arts & Ideas pages article on the Internet's effect on language failed to bring the potential negative and positive consequences to their logical conclusion: the widespread acceptance of informal dialogue on the Internet is creating a generation of Americans fluent in unrefined, inexpressive and immature English.

    Much as certain dialects of English have helped create subclasses of second-class citizens, frequent Internet users are becoming easier to pick out every day; they blurt out thoughts in staccato, almost barbarian fragments. Elegant grammar is beside the point; complete sentences are rare enough.
    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  6. Re:Is grammar taught anymore... by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Informative

    Children don't have to formally learn grammar. A child learning a language natively will by definition speak with perfect grammar even without schooling, because in the science of linguistics rules of grammar are based on what is heard in the vernacular of the language in question, not what some pundit sets down by fiat.

    If you're asking whether children are still taught prescriptivist rules, that's a whole 'nother matter.