Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

School and text talk.

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Hello,
In school we were planning our essays on text and chat which both use text talk. We have to add g/y clippings and all the types of text you use. This is also very confusing for me because I'm not good at text talk and always have to ask what the word means, and this is a controlled assesment so the teacher always watches.

I need more ideas on for and against text talk.

Thank you
for reading.
«134

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I personally think text talk is a waste of time, and that they should never encourage it in schools. It just encourages bad english.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Check these out. 1
    2
    3
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    I personally think text talk is a waste of time, and that they should never encourage it in schools. It just encourages bad english.
    Hello,
    I see your point but using text talk we are also learning because I only learnt what rofl and lol was yesterday, so I learnt something here. And we do not influence it into schools its part of the key stage work.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Hello,
    I see your point but using text talk we are also learning because I only learnt what rofl and lol was yesterday, so I learnt something here. And we do not influence it into schools its part of the key stage work.

    If its part of the key stage work then I think it is influencing it to an extent.

    You are learning what certain words in text talk is, but that only reinforces some peoples (lack of) ability to use proper english.

    Theres a difference between using text talk and knowing what it stands for. Most of the time I could just use google.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Language is malleable.

    People who only complain are fuddy-duddies who mope on about the good old days, and cannot logically state why the good old days were better.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    Language is malleable.

    People who only complain are fuddy-duddies who mope on about the good old days, and cannot logically state why the good old days were better.

    I, and a lot of other people find that it takes an awful lot more effort to read text talk than normal writing.

    Im not a fuddy duddy moping on about the good old days, good and proper english is still a current thing and isnt (I hope) going away anytime soon.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    Language is malleable.

    People who only complain are fuddy-duddies who mope on about the good old days, and cannot logically state why the good old days were better.
    They were better because they involved proper sentences and half decent spelling. Everyone could understand each other.

    WHAT A TERRIBLE THING!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Franki wrote: »
    They were better because they involved proper sentences and half decent spelling. Everyone could understand each other.

    WHAT A TERRIBLE THING!

    But people do understand each other. Language in any form cannot exist if there is no mutual understanding.

    The fact is that language is just a social construct. Why spell "colour" as so? Is this some law of the universe? Did God himself say so? No, it just is. As is most human language.

    I see text talk as just another evolution in human language. There are no absolutes in life.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    But people do understand each other. Language in any form cannot exist if there is no mutual understanding.

    The fact is that language is just a social construct. Why spell "colour" as so? Is this some law of the universe? Did God himself say so? No, it just is. As is most human language.

    I see text talk as just another evolution in human language. There are no absolutes in life.

    Im not saying it isnt a language, Im just saying that it is very difficult for me and many others to understand, well you can work it out, but why should people be allowed to get sloppy with their english, just to make it harder for others to understand them.

    If its a case of "it just is", why cant you accept that about common knowledge kira?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    G wrote: »
    Im not saying it isnt a language, Im just saying that it is very difficult for me and many others to understand, well you can work it out, but why should people be allowed to get sloppy with their english, just to make it harder for others to understand them.

    If its a case of "it just is", why cant you accept that about common knowledge kira?

    It is just is, since the rules of human language are just is. They are not and cannot be set in any other way by society.

    Younger people understand well enough, so leave them to it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Text talk is nothing new. It has occurred at any time in history where there has been a limit on characters. They used to use it in telegrams too, and nobody had trouble understanding it. The difference now is that I think kids have used it in a far more expressive way, whereas it was a purely functional form of language in the past. I don't use it because I have unlimited texts and good predictive text, but most kids don't have that (well, the first bit, anyway). But I think this idea that it causes kids to somehow forget how to use language appropriately when they need to is BS. Having said that, I can't stand people using it when they've obviously got a full keyboard. But kids and teenagers have always invented new language that is designed so that their parents and teachers don't know what they're on about. That's why every other kid sounds like a little Ali G clone nowadays. And almost every one of them will get to their 30s and 40s and bemoan the dropping standards of English.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We don't do text talk at school... it's pointless. We are currently allowed to use slang though, as we are doing autobiographical writing. This, I think, is the only time with in an English lesson that anything but proper English is acceptable.
    Xx
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My thoughts are neatly summed up in this little piece of antiquity:
    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=129274

    As a linguist, I feel qualified to opine on this. Language does evolve, yes, but not through misuse. It evolves as words, grammatical structures and so forth become less relevant, less used and as such, cease to be required. Think of it as linguistic Darwinism. It does not evolve by constant misuse and then accusing anyone who attempts to correct them of being a fusty old square. Spelling and grammar are not open to interpretation. Just as 2x2 does not equal 17, "Lolz cu l8" is not a valid sentence. There is a right way and a wrong way. End of.

    Furthermore, via the medium of t'interweb, if you typ lk dis, it makes you look illiterate. Additionally, as we discussed a while ago with a certain person who was subsequently banned (thanks in no small part to B-A...), if people cannot read what you have written, they are much less inclined to reply. In short, if you can't be bothered to spell correctly and make what you are attempting to convey legible, why the fuck should I, or anyone else, bother replying if I have to decypher it first?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Dear Thunderstruck,

    I think we should have fabulous grammarnazi babies. I may have just fallen in love with you for that post.

    I hope this is acceptable to you.

    Me
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My thoughts are neatly summed up in this little piece of antiquity:
    http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=129274

    As a linguist, I feel qualified to opine on this. Language does evolve, yes, but not through misuse. It evolves as words, grammatical structures and so forth become less relevant, less used and as such, cease to be required. Think of it as linguistic Darwinism. It does not evolve by constant misuse and then accusing anyone who attempts to correct them of being a fusty old square. Spelling and grammar are not open to interpretation. Just as 2x2 does not equal 17, "Lolz cu l8" is not a valid sentence. There is a right way and a wrong way. End of.

    Furthermore, via the medium of t'interweb, if you typ lk dis, it makes you look illiterate. Additionally, as we discussed a while ago with a certain person who was subsequently banned (thanks in no small part to B-A...), if people cannot read what you have written, they are much less inclined to reply. In short, if you can't be bothered to spell correctly and make what you are attempting to convey legible, why the fuck should I, or anyone else, bother replying if I have to decypher it first?

    You mean decipher, right? ;)

    I only mention this because as someone who likes to point out when people have fallen victim to Godwin's law, I thought you would appreciate the irony of you falling victim to Muphry's law.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kira wrote: »
    There are no absolutes in life.

    1. You will eventually die

    2. You will be taxed until you do.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My stance on textspeak is this. I was taught to write using proper English or as near as I can get to that. Texting didn't exist for the mass market when I was in school, therefore there was no textspeak.

    I do, however, understand most forms of textspeak and that is simply from being on a fair few internet communities. I can write in proper form, and I can also communicate in text speak. I see this as another string to my bow. I'm all for learning new methods of communication and integration.

    My point is that, if your formative educational learning is conducted in proper English and structured sentences then I don't see how learning textspeak harms you greatly. I work for a living, it's not like I can use textspeak 24hrs a day and see my language skills plummet. Children in schools are not being allowed to pass exams using textspeak as far as I'm aware. So I really don't see the harm.

    That's just my stance on the issue, I won't debate it because I'm not asking anyone to feel the same way.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Im not saying that using text talk harms your ability to use proper english, however in children, it harms their ability to learn proper english in the first place.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I do see your point, super, but having worked with people who will spend their lives going from shitty minimum wage job to shitty minimum wage job, and so have no requirement to write 'properly', I can't help but be frustrated by text talk. I have a Facebook news feed which on a good day has about 25% text talk on it. It makes me sad and angry.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Franki wrote: »
    I have a Facebook news feed which on a good day has about 25% text talk on it. It makes me sad and angry.

    OMG lolz :d
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Franki wrote: »
    I do see your point, super, but having worked with people who will spend their lives going from shitty minimum wage job to shitty minimum wage job, and so have no requirement to write 'properly', I can't help but be frustrated by text talk. I have a Facebook news feed which on a good day has about 25% text talk on it. It makes me sad and angry.

    Yes, I would agree completely if the use of textspeak detracted from learning the core skills needed to progress in life. That could only be a bad thing. It's all very well speaking a different form of language, but unless that is the language that is used in the mainstream then you are really going against the idea of integration. It's a bit like being able to speak French in Japan. It's good that you can speak French, but it isn't going to help you integrate if you can't speak Japanese.

    That's why I think that textspeak is fine as a second or third language, but cannot be allowed to become a first language unless it is adopted by the masses and becomes the norm in the business world. Which is pretty damn unlikely until the day that the robots from the Smash adverts rule the world! :crazyeyes Which they will, you heard it here first!!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kids and teenagers have always invented new language that is designed so that their parents and teachers don't know what they're on about. That's why every other kid sounds like a little Ali G clone nowadays. And almost every one of them will get to their 30s and 40s and bemoan the dropping standards of English.

    That's true, to an extent, but they have to know what the standards are before they'll know whether or not the youth of whatever age they're in are dropping them. This is why text talk, or any form of slang or colloquialism should never be allowed in school in the context of a formal learning environment.

    How people talk or speak outside of that environment is up to them. I personally think that the use of text talk in a situation which does not even slightly require it makes a person look lazy and undereducated, but that's probably cause I'm an old fuddy duddy ;)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    jamelia wrote: »
    You mean decipher, right? ;)

    I only mention this because as someone who likes to point out when people have fallen victim to Godwin's law, I thought you would appreciate the irony of you falling victim to Muphry's law.

    What is Muphry's law?

    If you're going to point out my poor spelling, which I freely admit, you may wish to check your own first. As SG would doubtless remark, epic fail.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What is Muphry's law?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law
    If you're going to point out my poor spelling, which I freely admit, you may wish to check your own first. As SG would doubtless remark, epic fail.

    As SG would doubtless remark, double fail. Or something equally annoying.

    :d
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As the man in the orthopaedic shoes said, I stand corrected. We polyglots are notoriously poor spellers but I do my best.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How very obscurantist, retrogressive and regressive of me to supplicate that hoi polloi and plebeians everywhere converse and perorate in a manner that one can consuetude! This avant-garde, concomitant phenomenon for what the proletariat adduce to be "text talk" perplexes me. I find it does not pertain to me, and that it is strikingly operose to decipher and absorb from a manuscript.

    Conceivably, I am just superannuated in that regard, but it still devitalizes me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As SG would doubtless remark, epic fail.
    You're a banker. Spelling's probably not your strong point. Then again, neither are numbers... :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    super147 wrote: »
    That's why I think that textspeak is fine as a second or third language.
    It's not a language, it's a bastardisation of one.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    How very obscurantist, retrogressive and regressive of me to supplicate that hoi polloi and plebeians everywhere converse and perorate in a manner that one can consuetude! This avant-garde, concomitant phenomenon for what the proletariat adduce to be "text talk" perplexes me. I find it does not pertain to me, and that it is strikingly operose to decipher and absorb from a manuscript.

    Conceivably, I am just superannuated in that regard, but it still devitalizes me.

    That's a lot of Roget's! :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's a lot of Roget's! :D
    Only referred to a thesaurus twice there, for the record. Had to rack my brains for the rest.

    I almost wrote "rake" instead of "rack" there. That would have been bloody.
Sign In or Register to comment.