Thread: Textspeak, poor grammar and a general grump.

Originally Posted by commiecat

When you look at how many people in Europe, Asia and South America have English as an auxiliary language, native speakers are quickly becoming a minority.

We (the English) are the native speakers, and have been outnumbered by Americans, Australians etc. for some time now.

I don't dislike txt speak so much, but there is an increasing number of people who are unable to speak good English, and worse than that, they are proud of it. They think it's cool (substitute whatever word is currently the cool version of "cool" as you wish.)

I don't think this can be trivialised as old people complaining, the problem is genuine and getting worse. The whole point of language is to allow communication, people who say it's OK for language to evolve are missing that point. Without a standard version of English as a reference point there will be problems.

I think World War 3 will be started because of a simple language mixup.

Originally Posted by Rajagra

We (the English) are the native speakers, and have been outnumbered by Americans, Australians etc. for some time now.

Yes, but while I've never really done much comparisons as far as grammar goes, I'd say that the differences are mostly in style and slang.

Here is the article I was referencing:
How English Is Evolving Into a Language We May Not Even Understand

I would like to point this out as well.

There are actually shorthand languages that are very similar to text speak. There is a shorthand that is taught to English (Brittan) reporters that is very similar to the broken sml txts that we have been conversing about. There are also shorthands that rely on txt type writing for taking notes and such.

Many of these have been around for 30 plus years.

I agree that if I make a mistake it is just that, a mistake. I was on one board with a guy that loved to point out mistakes. It quickly became a game and I intentionally made mistakes with his pet peeves to screw with him.

I also agree that language, any language, is liquid. It ebbs and flows with society. Merriam Webster publishes the slang dictionary every year and some of those actually make it into the real dictionary.

If you want a hoot start looking for books about forgotten or discarded words and phrases. Even better there is a complete English dictionary that come with a magnifying round. It contains every word that the company ever put into it's dictionaries.

I agree with Jim R about apostrophes and I would like to add that commas get my hackles up too. I personally hate when they are over used, under usage is fine in my book as we are not writing dissertations.

I do find it strange that with the advent of blogging that English grammar is not evolving either. I guess if you are never taught that something is wrong you will never pick up on it.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Oh SNAP!

I knew I'd drop a typo in there! I just knew it!

There's at least one other grammatical mistake in there. Positive rep for anyone who finds it.

It's easy to proof others writing...

others'

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Oh SNAP!

I knew I'd drop a typo in there! I just knew it!

There's at least one other grammatical mistake in there. Positive rep for anyone who finds it.

also "peoples' errors, but"
the verb tenses in that sentence are suspect as well

I was too lazy to read past you're first sentance.

Originally Posted by jockeys

f
1. language evolves. there is no escaping this. to wit, I was reading Sherlock Holmes last night. a character named Phelps was meeting Dr. Watson and become "quite gay and ejaculated to Watson." 100 years ago, that meant "be happy and shout" means something quite a bit different today

.

It still means "be happy and shout" but now a days it has added meanings.

Originally Posted by commiecat

It's easy to proof others writing...

others'

That one got by me too. Good catch

Originally Posted by Rajagra

We (the English) are the native speakers, and have been outnumbered by Americans, Australians etc. for some time now.

Don't forget those pesky Canucks too!

the problem is genuine and getting worse.

Evidence? References please!

... people who say it's OK for language to evolve are missing that point. Without a standard version of English as a reference point there will be problems.

But Ray, to rail against language change is to ignore what has already happened over centuries. I notice you don't write in Shakesperian English, or Chaucerian... The reference point does not stand still. It is a moving target!

I started my career 20 years ago as a sub-editor of an academic journal (you can tell my standards have slipped a long way since then!). As a sub, one is expected to have an obsessive and pedantic approach to correct English in its written form. I had all manner of tomes in my reference library... each was a 'standard' There was Copy-editing by Judith Butler, Plain English by some old git, and our own House Style (every publisher has its own House Style). And then, for American authors, I was expected to refer to the Chicago Manual.

There is no such thing as a single point of reference which is fixed in time. There are many, depending on your locality and context, and they change -- hence the many iterations of those reference manuals of English above, many in their twenty-something or thirty-something editions!

In order to communicate, the standard must be current. Which means the standard must evolve with the language users.

Originally Posted by commiecat

Yes, but while I've never really done much comparisons as far as grammar goes, I'd say that the differences are mostly in style and slang.

Here is the article I was referencing:
How English Is Evolving Into a Language We May Not Even Understand

Yes, but you understand my amusement at Americans being referred to as "native" speakers of English?

Originally Posted by majurey

Which means the standard must evolve with the language users.

Evolving is not the same as incorporating the worst excesses of people who just want to sound trendy and deliberately exclude others from understanding what is said.

English could be improved in many ways. But adding to its faults is not progress.

I find it hard to believe this pic hasn't showed yet.

I don't get worked up over grammar, spelling or handwriting.
the text shorthand is quite useful and saves lots of keystrokes
IMHO I don't see what the BFD is.
YMMV