Originally Posted by JayStar
Goreman:
"Slang/txt speak" isn't a language. It's just kids being lazy.
Actually it is a dialect, and it isn't just kids.
I guess you are too young to know the context under which txt speak evolved, so I will briefly explain it to you. During the early days of mobile phones, specificily when SMS was first introduced, they were quite expensive and there was a character limit that was quite small (for example, $3 for a 50 char text). Thus it became common practice to abbreviate words; "text" -> "txt" to save characters.
Then there is the second factor, currently the English language is large and non-sensual, there are no governing rules or overarching concepts. Thus phonetic spelling became common, to fix this problem; "see you" -> "cya"
The 3rd catalyst was speed. When speaking we can easily reach 120 WPM, but it takes a very good typist to reach that speed under formal English. Thus the phonetic and character shortening was pushed forward.
This makes "txt speak" a shorthand dialect; people do not write in "txt speak" because they cannot write in formal English, it is because contextually it makes no sense to write in formal English.
Currently the demographic that makes the most use of "txt speak" is around 20-30, this is because they were the first native "txt speak" users. However, teenagers and younger of course use it because it is highly effective.
You could say it is the digital equivalent of Teeline. Though to people like you it seems to be the equivalent of Kansai dialect!
By the way, English is a living language, and you should not reject the new changes simply because of some self-important elitism. Even as recent as 50 years ago English was extremely different. If you go back further, say 200 years, you will find English nearly incomprehensible.
Don't run around complaining that modern English is modern, because that is obvious and a good thing.
Originally Posted by tarektarek
Read deep shit like 1984.
Hm, describing Orwells masterpiece as "deep shit" is... interesting...
In this thread, doesn't Brave New World seem far more fitting? ;)
Last edited by Gorman; Aug 11, 2011 at 03:35 AM.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Hm, describing Orwells masterpiece as "deep shit" is... interesting...
In this thread, doesn't Brave New World seem far more fitting? ;)
CBA typing a paragraph. It's a really good book, why else would I be recommending it? :o
I'm back and stuff, it's probably temporary.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Actually it is a dialect, and it isn't just kids.
Originally Posted by JayStar
"Slang/txt speak" isn't a language. It's just kids being lazy.
ISN'T
I guess you are too young to know the context under which txt speak evolved, so I will briefly explain it to you. During the early days of mobile phones, specificily when SMS was first introduced, they were quite expensive and there was a character limit that was quite small (for example, $3 for a 50 char text). Thus it became common practice to abbreviate words; "text" -> "txt" to save characters.
I understand that fact. And at that time it made plenty of sense. But in times like today when next to no one has a plan that's paid by the text, it's just seems lazy to speak in that format. But I guess I don't hate it when people do it,actually I'm quite fine with it. But I HATE it when people speak like that when it is completely inappropriate to do so. Examples : School, Formal letters (trust me I've seen it) and even when filling applications for clans and groups on Toribash.
Then there is the second factor, currently the English language is large and non-sensual, there are no governing rules or overarching concepts. Thus phonetic spelling became common, to fix this problem; "see you" -> "cya"
Once again, I don't feel it's wrong, I may do it in a slight form in game or when messaging friends, but less often than more. But when people do it when they should be setting an example is what ticks me off.
The 3rd catalyst was speed. When speaking we can easily reach 120 WPM, but it takes a very good typist to reach that speed under formal English. Thus the phonetic and character shortening was pushed forward.
I completely agree, It is very useful to use in that sense.
This makes "txt speak" a shorthand dialect; people do not write in "txt speak" because they cannot write in formal English, it is because contextually it makes no sense to write in formal English.
I didn't say they Couldn't it's more that they choose not to.
You could say it is the digital equivalent of Teeline. Though to people like you it seems to be the equivalent of Kansai dialect!
Don't make those assumptions. In the wrong times, I do find it quite annoying.
By the way, English is a living language, and you should not reject the new changes simply because of some self-important elitism. Even as recent as 50 years ago English was extremely different. If you go back further, say 200 years, you will find English nearly incomprehensible.
So I don't hate it, I just mostly choose not to use it. And in the right times, I find it inappropriate.
Originally Posted by Mightiest
Mainly because books are shitty stories which most likely teach you nothing but to have no friends and live on a website which simulates the book's world.
ROCK ON HARRY POTTER.
I can't help but feel you are contradicting yourself. You say books are "shitty stories that teach you nothing" etc.. But then Rock on Harry Potter?
Either way, I read plenty, I've read Harry Potter, enjoyed it, even read them again a few years latter. But to say books do nothing but to leave one friendless, is absurd. I have plenty of friends, and if this makes any sense to you, I'm not that weird kid that has no friends and brings books everywhere and just reads. I have one of those people in my class. It's NOT because of the books. The kid is just socially awkward and uses books as a gate way to friends, almost to limit life's in put on him. To escape from his troubles in a sense. This sounds really corny, I know...
Last edited by JayStar; Aug 11, 2011 at 04:33 AM.
Originally Posted by JayStar
ISN'T
Wow nice, good thing you read all those books so you could come back with such an intelligent comeback!
Originally Posted by JayStar
I understand that fact. And at that time it made plenty of sense. But in times like today when next to no one has a plan that's paid by the text, it's just seems lazy to speak in that format. But I guess I don't hate it when people do it,actually I'm quite fine with it. But I HATE it when people speak like that when it is completely inappropriate to do so. Examples : School, Formal letters (trust me I've seen it) and even when filling applications for clans and groups on Toribash.
Sure, if you ignore EVERY FACTOR EXCEPT COST... However, I don't like to just randomly ignore things, so I would simply say, you are wrong.
In what context do you say 'formal letters'?
People misuse many things, but that doesn't mean you should be completely against those things...
Originally Posted by JayStar
Once again, I don't feel it's wrong, I may do it in a slight form in game or when messaging friends, but less often than more. But when people do it when they should be setting an example is what ticks me off.
"setting an example"... If they are in a position to set an example, they are in a position to define it.
Moot point.
Originally Posted by JayStar
I didn't say they Couldn't it's more that they choose not to.
And how is that a problem?
Are you from the past, are you an elitist, or can you simply not understand it? :/
Pick 1 or more.
Originally Posted by JayStar
Don't make those assumptions. In the wrong times, I do find it quite annoying.
You don't find it to be the digital equivalent of Teeline? Please explain.
They have the same goals and techniques, so what is wrong with the parallel?
Originally Posted by JayStar
So I don't hate it, I just mostly choose not to use it. And in the right times, I find it inappropriate.
Well if you choose not to use it, then that is your problem isn't it?
If your culture and society choose a course of action, and you decide to contradict it, then it is your fault.
Originally Posted by JayStar
And why kids choose to watch a movie over reading the book, even after people say the book is better? Most kids are lazy, how can you argue that?
Actually reading a book takes more time, and requires a harder to find situation. It is also less social; when people watch TV or watch a movie they generally don't do it alone, they do it with their friends, they all share the experience. Books are by nature solitary and time consuming, not something as easily shared. It is not a choice between "lazy" and "active" (though, you are possibly the only person to argue that books are more active), it is a choice between "social" and "solitary".
How can you argue that? ^^
Last edited by Gorman; Aug 11, 2011 at 03:08 PM.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Wow nice, good thing you read all those books so you could come back with such an intelligent comeback!
Not a come back, just clarifying.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Sure, if you ignore EVERY FACTOR EXCEPT COST... However, I don't like to just randomly ignore things, so I would simply say, you are wrong.
You stated every factor, and I commented on each one separately. I didn't ignore each one, But cost is out of the issue now, we can agree on that. And to simply say I'm wrong with out any argument doesn't help.
Originally Posted by Gorman
In what context do you say 'formal letters'?
I've received letters in the mail from friends, and they write in txt speak. Not as formal as a letter to Obama, but still show some class.
By the way, these are my opinions, I understand you may feel different and that's fine.
Originally Posted by Gorman
People misuse many things, but that doesn't mean you should be completely against those things...
I'm starting to feel you never read my response. I never said it was wrong. I just find it annoying in certain situations. And they're not many of those situations.
Originally Posted by Gorman
"setting an example"... If they are in a position to set an example, they are in a position to define it.
Moot point.
Fair enough.
Originally Posted by Gorman
And how is that a problem?
Are you from the past, are you an elitist, or can you simply not understand it? :/
Pick 1 or more.
I'll choose other. I can understand it, but sometimes it takes me a while to figure out what they're trying to say. Example. (This is from a friend who recently texted me) "Wat tim is the 5pm game?" My answer.. 5? Turns out he meant something like, "Is the game at 5pm?"
Originally Posted by Gorman
You don't find it to be the digital equivalent of Teeline? Please explain.
They have the same goals and techniques, so what is wrong with the parallel?
I do, you said:
Originally Posted by Gorman
Though to people like you it seems to be the equivalent of Kansai dialect!
That assumption.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Well if you choose not to use it, then that is your problem isn't it?
If your culture and society choose a course of action, and you decide to contradict it, then it is your fault.
It is, I completely agree. I won't ever use it. It's not like I feel I'm above everyone else I just don't like it.
Originally Posted by Gorman
Actually reading a book takes more time, and requires a harder to find situation. It is also less social; when people watch TV or watch a movie they generally don't do it alone, they do it with their friends, they all share the experience. Books are by nature solitary and time consuming, not something as easily shared. It is not a choice between "lazy" and "active" (though, you are possibly the only person to argue that books are more active), it is a choice between "social" and "solitary".
How can you argue that? ^^
Watching a movie with friends is more social your right, I won't argue that. But, books can be easily shared, if you discuss it with someone else who has read the book. Find my quote where I said books are more active. I may have said books contain more detail. I've never heard anyone say, "lets go watch the movie instead of reading the book because then we can all share the experience. They may have said, "lets go watch the movie, it's faster than reading the book." Which is fine. I like to do both read the book and watch the movie. But usually it's a kid saying "I don't want to read the book, it's easier to just watch the movie." And that's where I find it a bit lazy. To never have read a book, just because it's easier to watch the movie.
