Texting and Technology

On the topic of Texting, linguists David Crystal and John McWhorter both have very different and very interesting theories. This is an exploration of them, pitting them against each other to discover similarities and differences. 

1)The Basis of Textspeak/Summary

The first issue to tackle is what they believe the basis of textspeak to be. Crystal believes that textspeak shows the 'human ability to be linguistically creative' and to adapt language to suit our demands. By doing so, he is taking textspeak to be an extension of humanity's written language. This is evident again when he refers to it as new 'literary genre' and cites that it has been turned into poems, short stories and novels - like any other language. McWhorter, on the other hand, proceeds with this point in a totally different direction. He holds that textspeak is the first instance of humanity writing as we speak. Language, he says, originated as speech and that is really what language is. Consequently, although we've been writing and speaking for so many years and have developed the ability to "talk as we write" (i.e. formal register, speeches, etc.), we have now for the first time developed the ability to "write as we talk." This has been made possible thanks to the convenience and speed of texting as well as the electronic platform of creating text messages. In conclusion, we see that while Crystal considered textspeak to be an extension of our written language, McWhorter saw it as a new form of language. 

2)The Development of Textspeak 

We've already mentioned that Crystal believes textspeak to be a new literary genre. Apart from the normal developments one would expect of a literary genre (short stories, novels etc.), however, Crystal also notes that different dialects are being developed in the world of textspeak. He agrees, in this sense, with McWhorter's view of textspeak being based on language. Crystal states that, through the many different ways that are being developed to say things, different dialects of textspeak will soon be developed. We see how in this respect textspeak is basing it's progress on speech, echoing McWhorter's theories. The latter similarly states that as we advance in textspeak, we will develop more ways of making textspeak more like 'actual people talk.' This will happen as we naturally develop words/symbols to replace conventions of speech. 

3)Abbreviations and Punctuation

This is another point where differing views are presented. Crystal believes that texters make these changes consciously. They recognize the high-information value of consonants - hence leading to abbreviations and removal of vowels, as well as the low-information value of punctuation - hence the repeated lack of it in texting. McWhorter, however, contests that these changes aren't made consciously. We drop problems of punctuation and spelling when participating in textspeak because we don't pay attention to these things when speaking, and textspeak is a form of speaking (but as writing). In addition, while Crystal believes acronyms have developed out of convenience, McWhorter believes that some of them have naturally cultivated themselves to fill the gaps left when converting speech to writing. One example is 'LOL', which has evolved to become a marker of empathy when used in texting.

4)The Effect on the Quality of Language

Both linguists believe that texting has not caused a deterioration in the quality of English used today, albeit with different supporting reasons. Crystal believes that, ultimately, texting is a form of practice in literacy. And it follows that the more you practice something, the better your get at it - therefore making literacy scores increase with time spent texting. On the use of abbreviations he makes the very valid point that, "to leave a letter out, you have to first know it's there." The use of abbreviations, he maintains, can be controlled and only used when necessary. McWhorter agrees but makes a different point, reminding us that all throughout history, there have always been cases of bad language. He takes us back all the way to 63 A.D. (where there was no texting), and showed complaints of bad language. Evidently bad language will exist irregardless of texting. Additionally, he believes that textspeak is an "expansion of youth's linguistic repertoire" and that more youths are, in this sense, bilingual. As such, both linguists hold that not only has texting not harmed our language, it has improved it - by making its usage more frequent and diversifying our use of it. 

  

Fun Fact!: John McWhorter has also written an article on cultural appropriation, which I replied to in my previous blog post. You can read his article here.