ACt

Particularly rampant on the internet, textspeak or leetspeak ... or l33tsp3@k is a growing trend in all forms of media. From your phone to your computer to that english paper you should have submitted on time, it is seeping into the English language. So the simple question is:

Is this bad or good?

For purists, this is an easy debate. The English language is well established and the break down into abbreviations and addition of letters appears lazy, disorganized and unintelligent. But a few points to consider.

The English language is a bastard. Literally. The roots of it are diverse and almost counter-intuitive. It sprouts from an island that has had multiple conquers from different cultures that then proceeded to conquer the world and be affected by that colonialism. Few languages can claim words that have Latin (and all the languages from it), Greek, Arab, Germanic, Celtic, etc roots to its lexicon and continually pick up new words as it grows to be rooted and housed in all languages due to globalization.

The rules aren't straight forward. I'm sure you've heard the riddle: How do you pronounce "ghoti"? (If you haven't, don't google it and figure it out.)

Many words have multiple spellings. Is the change from you to u much different from honour to honor? Add to that bizarre phonetics such as "knight", "philosophy" and "George". Couldn't the English language deal with a bit of simplification?

So as expediency has led to "ill b l8" and "where r u?" and pronunciations such as "'splain dis to me" dropping the final "g" off of every gerund, could it be argued that this is just a natural flow of a language that is becoming the world standard or is it a slow destruction that must be stopped?

I plan to be devil's advocate and a lazy mediator. I just would like to say off the bat that I don't want this to become a "You're stupid because you can't take the time to type everything out" type of debate. If people are using short forms, let them. I think it will be pertinent to the debate. (Unless of course they are advocating proper spelling - then call them on hypocrisy.)

Anyway, enough of me. D-b8.

Sensei-Q

ASCI l337 =/= gamers l337 =/= wannabe MSN l337 =/= random people who know nothing about ACSI-l337.

Some people don't know the full ASCI alphabet, so they just replace some letters and words. This became popular.

__________________

Numinous

To make a Real Life comparison:

Recently, the Portuguese language had an Orthographic Pact in all Portuguese-speaking countries to solidify how Portuguese was written over the world. It had many simplifications to the writing and a more intuitive approach to it. Brazil loved it, the Portuguese-speaking African Countries too and Timor. Portugal hated it with all its guts. Why? Because of one big factor: pride in heritage.

Portugal, as the name indicates, is the mother-nation of Portuguese and all the roots in Latin and even English and Germanic and all the richness in nautical terms (even our word for "cock" is based on a nautical pun). Also, Portugal is much older as nation (1143) than its ex-colonies (Brazil: 1822; the rest in the 1970's). And being the mother-nation, Portugal has a culture vastly different of its ex-colonies, that have cultural roots on African tribes (because of slavery) and a watered-down version of Portuguese. What the guys that made the Pact didn't take into consideration is that the ex-colonies were going to be benefited with said Pact because it catered more to their culture while it took a dump on Portugal.

You simply can't ask people to alter how they write with an Orthographic Pact. It has to be progressive, like CENTURIES progressive. The last Deal in Portugal was in 1878 and it was to kill off disused alternative spellings of words (like cousa vs coisa, nobody was using the first since the XVI century).

Funny thing is, the Minister of Education tried to enforce Portuguese class teachers to evaluate exams based on the new Pact. And the teachers just said "so everybody will fail the exams, since everybody refuses to write accordingly with the new Pact."


I'm afraid that leetspeak wouldn't even fly, because it isn't a cultural phenomenon important enough to make people even consider it a natural evolution of the English language.

__________________

ACt

@ Sensei-Q: OK, but this is a debate. What's your point? That leetspeak is excluded from any influence on the English language?

@ Numinous: Thanks for the example. But I wouldn't say leetspeak is so sheltered it doesn't cause effects. It is highly prevalent in various forms all over the internet. But I wasn't just going after switching out numbers for letters, but all forms of modified English we get with electronic media and how they are altering the English language. As everything comes under further influence of computers, these quick or altered forms of communication are going to be more popular. I have seen examples of mangled English handed into my wife, who teaches science. The kicker usually is that these are done on computers and spell check should catch them but the students don't bother to change them.

The debate I'm after is whether or not it should be allowed. I see now that probably playing with numbers was a quick jump point for too many.

Also, I'm interested: do you find the electronic age is beginning to have effects on Portuguese?

Sensei-Q

^Was adding up to your point. It influences various other languages as well. People should either learn to speak full ASCI, or not at all. Cause mixing it with normal English fucks it up. Separating them (like how it was intended in the first place) should happen. But how are you going to not allow the mixing?

__________________

Mal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sensei-Q ^Was adding up to your point. It influences various other languages as well. People should either learn to speak full ASCI, or not at all. Cause mixing it with normal English fucks it up. Separating them (like how it was intended in the first place) should happen. But how are you going to not allow the mixing?

My vote is for "not at all."


I think the English language, as it is currently, is perfectly fine. Why should we substitute a single letter for some of our more common three letter words, or insert similar sounding numbers? For "efficiency?" Why is efficiency so important? Are you so rushed in the entirety of your daily routine that you truly can't be bothered to type "you" instead of 'u' in order to save that fraction of a second? If such changes to the language are required for efficiency, all of the English speaking world has much greater issues than a few missing letters.

Numinous

And I wasn't just going for the number switching. Taking your examples and giving it the Portuguese Pact treatment, "knight", "philosophy" and "George" would turn into "night", "filosofy" and "Jorge". "Filosofy" isn't that bad, but "Jorge" would give many problems and "night" even more.

I'm all for modifying or deleting words/spellings that aren't that much used, but doing that with everyday words is just asking for trouble, like saying "In the night, I'm now now that I'm a night that nows by fat that he's fat."
You think that's confusing? Try passing that has the accepted orthography overnight. And BAM, you have the Portuguese Orthographic Pact. Now you know how it feels...

For leetspeak/textspeak to pass as evolution of the English language, first everybody has to make contact with it, be familiar with it and then when they accept it, then it can pass as a correct way of spelling. In the Portuguese language case, every language modification took centuries to settle, because that's the natural way language progresses. Now with the advent of the internet, it might take fewer decades, but it will still take a LOT of time before the massive acceptance of the language modification that leetspeak/textspeak is.

Yes and no. Our version of leetspeak/textspeak (ptês) is widely popular in teenagers, but nonexistent in other age groups. Even young adults that once used ptês in their teens drop it quickly. The only word that thrived in the overall population with the advent of the internet was "duh". Now everyone uses it, and it's not like Gratuitous English just to look cool, it's an everyday word.

__________________

Human Rasengan

I would have to say yes. text talk has a big negative affect on people and their ability to read and write and therefore comprehend. English for one is an evolving language and this new influx of text talk is bad .. even I am guilty of it at times .. typing dat instead of that and the like.

__________________
for those of you who don't understand.. I'm coming from an illogical perspective so your logic won't fit my argument .. it'll only give you a headache.. remember ..belief doesn't require a co-signer There Is A Fine Line Between Genius And Insanity , I Have Erased This Line ! If I were you I'd hate me too.. I am the HUMAN RASENGAN!!!

The power of despair is great in you.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zlzx4...&feature=share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3qkz4WfOto

LOL I'M DYING BACK HERE

Sensei-Q

Sometimes we do it intentionally, when the situation calls for it. Like, when using Chan's "hurr durr" in combination with l337 on a butt-hurt person on this forum.

__________________

KillerNN

Destruction, text language in general is pretty stupid. As Mal said, "you" is only 2 letters longer than "u". It was understandable when mudhut phones had retarded texting, but with all the Droid, QWERTY keyboard and such out today it shouldn't even be used. I mean, we all throw out a "lol" once everywhile, or mak fuN 0f H0W KyF tipue$. I understand when people don't capitalize letters, and use proper grammar, okay.

but wen u typ lik dis i wnt 2 thro mi keybord at da scren nd kil u thru interwebZ
or when qirls:;;-findd thee n33d to tawkk lykhh diss.--:;
or FuCKllNG dUM8@$$ L337 sP3@K
it is so unacceptable.

When I'm on FB and see these things, I RAEG on the inside.
And to people that hand in papers like this, if I was a teacher I would throw that shit away as soon as I saw a txt tlk "error".

tl;dr- Destruction.

__________________

Miburo

I agree with my fine comrade, Mal, on this one. Since he's smarter than the rest of you. And because he's right. There is no reason to alter the English language to such a degree, since it's already well-established and fully functional as is.

Not only that, but it's possible for both leet speak and formal English to exist at the same time. Just as shorthand writing/stenography does. It serves a similar purpose to shorthand. I'd say they're pretty equatable.

And I personally don't see much of a point in doing it on things like forums, unless I'm mocking someone, but I use it pretty hard on my shitty prepaid cell phone. Since texting on that thing is a bitch. I could see it being useful in online games where you need to communicate with others quickly. So it's not bad because, yeah, it's got it's uses. But there is no reason why it should replace standard English for most things.

Sensei-Q

Well, when you see someone talking l337 out loud, you know shit's fucked up. And this is happening in the US.

__________________

Mal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Human Rasengan I would have to say yes. text talk has a big negative affect on people and their ability to read and write and therefore comprehend. English for one is an evolving language and this new influx of text talk is bad .. even I am guilty of it at times .. typing dat instead of that and the like.

It's not the way these people type or speak that causes poor reading comprehension, it's their complete disinterest in reading at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KillerNN Destruction, text language in general is pretty stupid. As Mal said, "you" is only 2 letters longer than "u". It was understandable when mudhut phones had retarded texting, but with all the Droid, QWERTY keyboard and such out today it shouldn't even be used. I mean, we all throw out a "lol" once everywhile, or mak fuN 0f H0W KyF tipue$. I understand when people don't capitalize letters, and use proper grammar, okay.

I disagree. I would rather see words shortened and numbers thrown in than improper capitalization and horrid grammar. Word spellings are not nearly as important as the core structure of the language.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sensei-Q Well, when you see someone talking l337 out loud, you know shit's fucked up. And this is happening in the US.

Please just stop replying to this topic. Your input is unnecessary.

KillerNN

To be honest, I would rather see neither of them.

but i would rather see this -
den c dis

I understand what you are saying.

__________________

ACt

I think just saying "English is fine and it doesn't need to change" is the easy response. The thing is, English has rarely been a stable language and I would argue is far more adaptable and alterable than most other languages. Words are constantly being added and forgotten and with them spellings, conventions and grammar (and punctuation - but that's another topic altogether. Quick - use an interrobang!).

Numinous started on an example that I'll point out:

Night vs nite, or similarly, light vs lite. Now, the second case in both is an easier spelling and simpler form for learning. I'm not certain, but I think these spellings began in marketing -- the second case particularly to avoid regulations on diet products. Whether or not you agree, I have seen these spellings in work by students.

Anyone over 15 probably remembers learning with blackboards and chalk, paper and pencil etc. It was manual and slow. Today, computers, cell phones and electronic whiteboards are taking over the classroom and kids are constantly surrounded by faster means of learning. This will affect language learning and I'm not certain it can be fully curtailed.

Other points I've thought of are changes towards prefixes and suffixes. The classic one I can think of is:

Preventative vs Preventive. Both are fully acceptable and even over my short life, preventive has become more and more dominant in the language. I prefer preventative. It doesn't change the meaning but when you start applying it to the misuse of nouns, adjectives and adverbs for ease ("I learned English real good."), it is easy to see the effects of a reduced English.

And this is completely ignoring the subculture of unnecessary word creation and non-word use. (anyways, alright, nonexecptance, irregardless, etc.)

Fight it or accept it?