okkkkk yes i did need this for homework cuz my teacher told us to pick a song and get the lyrics . so there need some ice for that burn! OH wait why wud i wana give u some wen u r a totall ugly jurk who is absssesed with a singer, who doesnt even know u! oh and next time u wana diss me -well looks like there wont ve another time cus u just got smoked.. ouch sizzle did that burn u? like i wud care anyways!! xoxo URnERDS!
Oh my Lord, where to begin? This enlightening comment was found posted January 22nd, 2009 in the board on Taylor’s Swifts-Love Story lyrics (and yes, it has been sitting in my draft folder since then). I heard it and the lyrics intrigued me enough to look it up. This song has a little (okay, large) Romeo & Juliet theme, which works out all well and good until Juliet blurts out that she’s a Scarlet Letter. At this point in time everyone is just thinking to themselves, “How could Juliet be anything like Hester? That’s a big secret.” I hope anyways.
A for Adultery, P for Princess?
But I digress from the issue at hand: the disintegration of the English language through electronic communication. The above example is probably from a tween, that lovely age between ages 10-12. While the superior attitude of her (I don’t know why, but I assume the poster was female) words is concern enough, her use of ‘internet English’ is what shocks me the most. The horribly mangled spelling and complete lack of grammar makes the message all the more offensive. But this is how the younger generation is communicating, using poor language skills to impart negative comments. And of course there are those who are simply lazy.
This guy should tour elementary schools.
Ingrid Mina Fandrych takes an oppositional stance, saying that electronic communications such as e-mail and forums are not destroying a medium of communication (ie: proper English), but has become a new medium entirely. She places electronic text between the mediums of written and oral language, as it replaces traditional Latin-derived words with the vernacular. This makes English simpler as well as more logical and practical for everyday communication.
I disagree because Fandrych sees electronic communication as a linguistic advancement rather than a self-destructive force. Before the creation of a universal dictionary reading and writing must have been a headache as everyone had a preferred spelling or meaning to words. Several hundred years later I see this happening again. We live in a society of consistency, and this is probably the reason poor spelling and grammar grates my nerves like cheese.
Fandrych noted that the New York Times ran a story about the characteristics of ‘internet English’ and how they were appearing more and more frequently within student work. These characteristics being “…shortened words, abbreviations, improper spelling, capitalization and use of typewriter characters.” Her new third medium is slowly destroying the older.
Have we reached the point were the education system can no longer teach correct language skills because of the internet’s dominant role in our every day lives? The day is fast approaching when our language is going to have to think seriously on the direction it’s taking and its communicative consequences; lets not take the lazy path. Let’s spend the extra 15 seconds to type out a full sentence, the minute or two it takes to look-up an unfamiliar word. English is by far one of the most colourful and vast languages, rise up to the challenge.
Using more than one or two fingers helps.
Fandrych, Ingrid Mina. “Electronic Communication and Technical Terminology: A Rapprochement?.” Nawa: Journal of Language & Communication 1(2007): 147-158.
