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.





Hm, describing Orwells masterpiece as "deep shit" is... interesting...
In this thread, doesn't Brave New World seem far more fitting? ;)

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.

Yeah... Right.


I, for one, like reading. At my college we have to read about 5~6 books every year, and then write a summary about it, but usually i just google the title, search for main plot events, and then work out my thoughts about it. I don't like being forced to read, in my opinion that just makes youth have a negative impression about it. Back when i was about 10 years old, i didn't have anything to spend my time with, as for none of my friends lived near me, just a SNES and a few cartdriges. My father had an handful of books at his bedroom, thought. I remember whenever i got bored, i'd just go there and spend 4~5 straight hours, reading. I know this may seem old-fashioned, but i think reading paper books is far better than reading e-books or anything of the likes, when it comes to novels.
While it's true internet is much more convenient to search info than browsing through the pages of an encyclopedia, when reading novels in any kind of eletronic devices, i often get distracted and can't enjoy the narrative to it's full potential. I don't know if it's just me, but it happens everytime.
Nowadays i haven't the time to read as much as back then, but i know those times gave me a tangible advantage over my fellow compatriots. Well, at least i'm not one of those stereotyped brazilians, am i?

Oh, and about the authors i like to read the most. Clarice Lispector, Aluэsio de Azevedo, Machado de Assis, and Monteiro Lobato. I suppose you don't know them. I didn't have the chance to read any foreign writer's work back at that age as for my father didn't have any, except for The Ambassador, by Morris West. Althought it had a great premise, i didn't exactly enjoy it. Actually, reading it was quite tiresome. He also had the Devil's advocate, but as for i didn't quite liked the first book by him, i didn't feel like reading his other book... Guess i've picked the wrong book to start with. Anyway, i rather read national writers. Portuguese is one of the most exploitable languages around, when it comes to literature, really. Translations just don't do it for me.

Hah, this post wasn't much of an argument, but whatever.

I was home-schooled, so I didn't have to put up with shit. It was a great privilege to be able to learn at home. I also enjoy reading, but I don't really have a favorite author or book. I usually just pick up whatever is lying around.

CBA typing a paragraph. It's a really good book, why else would I be recommending it? :o

I enjoy reading, but I don't read a lot of books. Most of my reading is short-medium stories online. I don't think there's any problem with this. It's a form of entertainment, unless you read non-ficiton, anyway. Currently reading the Riverworld books, btw.

ISN'T



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.


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.


I completely agree, It is very useful to use in that sense.


I didn't say they Couldn't it's more that they choose not to.


Don't make those assumptions. In the wrong times, I do find it quite annoying.


So I don't hate it, I just mostly choose not to use it. And in the right times, I find it inappropriate.



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...

Well I would say that kids seem to get the wrong idea about books, for example I often say that Terry Pratchett's Discworld series is funny, to which the average response is 'how can a book be funny?'.
Looks to me like there's a bit of disbelief that a book could possibly rival a movie, but I'm not sure how you'd get around that problem.

I actually laugh out loud in some points of a book. I can be funny. Just as reading a joke online or out of a joke book.
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?

I really love to read, I usually read the summaries on the back of the book before i read it.
If it seems interesting, I'll read it.

On an off note, I was at Hastings looking at books, and there was a book called Go the F**k to Sleep, and it actually looked like a babies book. It said something like "The lights are on at night in the town, please go the F**k to sleep."
It was hilarious.