The language of txting: is it language in evolution or language in deterioration

THE LANGUAGE OF TEXTING By Location The Language of Texting is a Deterioration of Language In the 21st century, the language of texting has become a common aspect in many societies. With the increasing use of mobile phones and the internet, more and more young people are using the texting language in their informal communication. Adults also use this form of communication. A linguistic analysis of the language in texting reveals that is highly phonetic (Crystal 2001, p. 58). Therefore, a continued use of this form of language has led to more phonetic terms currently used in texting. A critical view of the effect of the texting language reveals that it registers devastating effects on literacy. Linguists who are for the texting language have highlighted the critical roles it plays (Goddard and Geesin 2011, p. 46). Although it is true that this form of language serves to highlight the informal nature of writing and bring out the casual tone of an informal conversation, it registers negative effects on the literacy levels of children. A comparison of the literacy levels, especially with a focus on spelling and grammar reveals that the language in texting has affected children negatively. Many children in school struggle to get the right difference between the phonetic terms used in texting and the correct spelling promoted by Standard English (Crystal 2009, n. p).
The devastating effects of the language in texting are evidenced by the use of colloquial contractions such as ‘ av’ instead of ‘ have’, and ‘ wiv’ instead of ‘ we have’. Moreover, the other informal variance such as ‘ nope’ for ‘ no’, and ‘ yep’ for ‘ yes’ are also appearing in school work. Other children have resulted to mistakes related to phonetic spelling commonly used texting. For example, a child is likely to write ‘ b gud’ instead of ‘ be good’. The language used in texting has also led the children to confuse the use of vowels because it promotes consonantal writing. Children are likely to write words such as ‘ thks’ instead of ‘ thanks’ and ‘ frm’ instead of ‘ from’ (Tagg 2012, p. 58). Although all these forms of texting language have their functions in communication, there is evidence that they confuse children. This is especially the case with children who are learning English as a second language. The prosperity of a language depends on what the older generation passes to the younger one. If children in school are registering poor grammar and spelling due to the influence of the texting language, then the linguistic future appears bleak (Baron 2010, p. 165).
Bibliography
Baron, NS 2010, Always on: Language in an Online and Mobile World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crystal, D 2001, Internet Linguistics: A Student Guide, London: Routledge.
Crystal, D 2009, Txtng: The Gr8 Db8, Oxford: OUP.
Goddard, A. and Geesin, B 2011, Language and Technology, London: Routledge.
Tagg, C 2012, The discourse of text messaging: Analysis of SMS communication, New York: Continuum.