Does Texting Affect Grammar? Absolutely, May 2012 Study Confirms.

[RadiationTherapy]

RT's take: I am not concerned greatly about this for several reasons. The easiest being, of course: language evolves. Others include the constant existence in most languages of slang, dialects, poetry, creative abbreviations, and the various purposes and reasons they arise. The purpose of texting - quick, essential messages - is also served by abbreviated communication, though I do not personally do that.

I have worked at a university for 10 years and been a student as well for the past 4. I have known many young people who are intelligent, well-spoken, who write well, and do not demand to feel "special". Most are not entitled, lazy, or treasure their "participation" trophies from little league. That's to say nothing about the 24/7, life-long access to instantaneous information with which anyone at any point in life can use to improve their education or repair their grammar should the need arise.


One blogger's take:"While texting has caused consternation among educators and parents since the 1990s for distracted writing as well as driving, changing communication technology historically has changed the way people speak and write over time. That journalistic standard, the inverted pyramid structure (write the most important thing first, the second most important thing second, and so on) developed in the telegraph era, when reporters' stories often were cut off mid-transition. Similarly, the need to respond quickly and briefly in text messages—and the outright character limit in social media like Twitter—puts pressure on students to cut out any unnecessary sounds. In fact, some studies have found students who text frequently are better at spelling and identifying homophones, as they have to, to turn "great" into "gr8."

Furthermore, contrary to Mr. Cingel's experience with his nieces, many people can understand words spelled phonetically or in even more mixed-up ways, and teenagers can view tech-speak both as a shortcut and a means of expressing identity—particularly if it's a little hard for parents to make out."

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/inside-school-research/2012/07/duz_txting_hurt_yr_kidz_gramr_.html

Original Research Publication: (abstract) The perpetual use of mobile devices by adolescents has fueled a culture of text messaging, with abbreviations and grammatical shortcuts, thus raising the following question in the minds of parents and teachers: Does increased use of text messaging engender greater reliance on such ‘textual adaptations’ to the point of altering one’s sense of written grammar? A survey (N = 228) was conducted to test the association between text message usage of sixth, seventh and eighth grade students and their scores on an offline, age-appropriate grammar assessment test. Results show broad support for a general negative relationship between the use of techspeak in text messages and scores on a grammar assessment, with implications for Social Cognitive Theory and Low-Road/High-Road Theory of Transfer of Learning. These results indicate that adolescents may learn through observation in communication technologies, and that these learned adaptations may be transferred to standard English through Low-Road transfer of learning. Further mediation analyses suggest that not all forms of textual adaptation are related to grammar assessment score in the same way. ‘Word adaptations’ were found to be negatively related to grammar scores, while ‘structural adaptations’ were found to be non-significant.

http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/05/10/1461444812442927

4 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Texting Affects Grammar and Spelling: I Find This Linguistically Detrimental
	3 (75%)
	Texting Affects Grammar and Spelling: I Find This Linguistically Neutral
	1 (25%)
	Texting Affects Grammar and Spelling: I Find This Linguistically Positive
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. LOLcats have done it as well.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. "Or repair their grammar should the need arise"

Seriously?

One doesn't realize the need has arisen until dealing with the consequences of it, such as not getting the job one hoped for due to inarticulate communications.

"I can type gud if i ned to, lol."

Text-ese sucks ass.

[RadiationTherapy]

3. Of course I am serious. I'm sorry, but I am not going to imagine every semi- or illiterate adult

a finished educational product. There are many problems and shortcomings in education and I support lifelong learning.

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. Learning is a lifelong process, sure.

Yet there's something to be said for learning (and applying) the rudiments of grammar prior to having children of ones own.

"Spelling? Grammar? Sure, I might need to learn that stuff someday."

[RadiationTherapy]

5. I don't understand your implication here. Are there not already people who make it into adulthood

with varying gradations of grammar and spelling facility? Some do well, some less so, but there are many variables in life when it comes to surviving and thriving. The communication technology available today makes information, education, and reformation accessible to huge numbers of people, 24/7. I believe the acceleration of knowledge due to the internet more than makes up for the few grammatical conventions that may be broken by excessive compression of ideas via texting. Also, grammatical conventions are not, necessarily, tied in with effective communication - though many are - and so breaking some conventions may not result in less effective communication.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. There's a vast difference between having a suboptimal grasp of language...

... and the belief that it's irrelevant because I'll pick it up l8r mybe.

[RadiationTherapy]

21. Yes, but can you explain the significance and value of that difference?

[lumberjack_jeff]

29. Sure. It's like this:

Knowing that Costco sells toilet paper may be useful in an academic sense, but knowing that this bathroom contains some is useful in the practical sense.

The need for the knowledge can't always wait for the delay necessary to acquire it.

[redqueen]

20. This.

It isn't the texting that is causing the problems. People will learn and follow rules of spelling and grammar or they won't. Texting is a side issue. My daughters text a lot and the one who texts more (by an exponential factor) seems to have the better writing skills. Both straight a students, so maybe that skews my even smaller sample size, but still. I never use abbreviated text speak when texting, and neither do my kids, so I have to wonder if the text speak stuff is really that widespread.

I'd like to see the methodology they used.

[RadiationTherapy]

23. I didn't read in its entirety, but it seems they accumulated the data about texting frequency

and then administered a grammar test aimed lower than the grades the students actually were in. 268 students were sampled, but it seems this research was done when the PhD candidate was an undergrad.

[zzaapp]

6. I'm glad this came up.

First off, being the contrarian that I am, I've purposely avoided
all forms of "social media" Twitter, Face book, I don't even know
how to text very well. To my point, I can't help but notice how addicted (?) people are to their cell phones. The other day in a bar at happy hour, there were about 20 people sitting around the bar ( all age groups, sexes, nationalities) and at one point,
EVERY person at the bar was either texting, Tweeting, or something. What ever happened to interacting face to face
using the fine art of conversation? Just an observance.

[RadiationTherapy]

10. Well, I certainly agree that there is a lot of cell phone use and that some people may feel

compelled or addicted to using them, I wonder about the primate urge to communicate in general and how/why/when it ought to be resisted. It is an interesting topic for me. Communication is a fundamental component of humanity as is technology, so the two have been entwined since cave-painting. Of course, face to face communication, the art of conversing, body language, and facial expressions are also fundamental and communication technology - thus far - eliminates certain parts of it. I wonder though, is it so different from books, magazines, TV shows, letters, painting, or music? Of course, all of these things are available to some extent through one's phone, but none of them involves direct human interaction. Is the act of reading my phone very different from reading a book or listening to a song in a bar and looking off in the distance at no one in particular?

[zzaapp]

14. good points all

And please don't get me wrong, I am not virulently anti-tech.
I use technology everyday in my business, and it is a very useful
tool. I guess maybe I'm just old and set in my ways, but it seems to me, that after a long day of talking through machines
people would relish personal interaction.

After all, study after study has proven that a negation of all
physical/emotional contact can drive even rats crazy. As a matter of fact, I still think that this tactic is used in situations of torture.

To your point re: books/ magazines.....very astute observation.
I will have to think about that one.

[RadiationTherapy]

22. I will point out, unscientifically, that holidays and weekends are the "slowest" days on my own FB.

I am of the opinion that people are supplementing their non-intimate communication with FB/Twitter/text and not necessarily replacing intimate communication.

The book/magazine analogy came to me in a doctor's waiting room. I was browsing on my phone and this woman sort of scowled at me as she scooped up several pop magazines to read. It occurred to me we were doing the exact same thing.

[zzaapp]

25. sounds very logical.

"I am of the opinion that people are supplementing their non-intimate communication with FB/Twitter/text and not necessarily replacing intimate communication."

[HopeHoops]

7. OMG! I dno wt ur tlkn bout! Dat has 2b fak.

[KurtNYC]

8. It messes with grammar but it encourages users to be concise.

The best test of linguistic communication is whether or not it was understood as intended by the writer.

[RadiationTherapy]

13. I agree with you on all points. Grammar pertains more to style than effectiveness of communication.

With some grammar rules being excepted of course.

[Johonny]

9. I agree with your take

Language is constantly in motion. While people want language to stay still and follow past established rules there is no indication that it will. I just don't find the result surprising.

While today a teacher may find it annoying to read work filled with WTF, LOL, and a reader 100 years from now may find it odd written language does not use these things.

[RadiationTherapy]

11. I hope WTF, LOL and 'smilies' are not filling papers written to teachers

but I agree with your assessment. I can read Hitchens with ease, but when he tells me to read Hobbes, I can barely mutter through a page or two. hahaha.

[justabob]

15. you'd be surprised

I worked as a tutor for a short time a few years ago. As part of that job, I had to work a shift in the writing lab at a local college. Those kids would bring in papers that were chock full of text-speak. The students would balk when I told them they needed to include ALL the letters of each word when handing in a college level essay or paper. Really.

[RadiationTherapy]

24. Thank you. I find this startling but able to be overcome.

It reminds me of helping professionals clear out their jargon from speeches.

[justabob]

26. yes, there are worse things

Spell check can solve a lot of that particular problem on its own. As for grammar/punctuation, even as a former tutor, I have a hard time keeping up with all the effing rules and I hate commas a lot.

I can't help but think we are headed toward a sort of modified pictographic language and/or glyphs with all the changes via text-speak, emoticons, and ubiquitous logos. Perhaps there will be a sort of two tier language system with one style for Everyman, and a more traditional written script for formal, or high end uses.

[RadiationTherapy]

28. My eyebrows were jumping reading your second paragraph; Marshall McLuhan popularized this idea and

the internet is making it happen. Facebook is a close proximity of a type of telepathy. In other words, it is facilitating the sharing of experiences through text, images, video, and audio. Of course, it still has a temporal dimension to it, but I can imagine technology - uninterrrupted - leading us to be able to instantaneously share full sensory experiences. Maybe someday even emotional experiences. I realize many think of the Borg and 'hive-mind' and loss of individuality as a consequence, but there are many paths and forms such technology could take.

Anyhow, I fully agree: in the short term, a more global, visual (and/or "audio pictographs&quot language will emerge.

[justabob]

30. I have seen him referenced a lot

but have never looked into any of his work. I should. My time as a tutor really startled me as to what's coming down the pike, as did my experience with Facebook when I finally joined up after much resistance. I know everyone hates it, and it certainly isn't perfect, but fb was kind of a revelation for me for the reasons you mention.... sharing of experiences of all kinds with people near and far, more or less in real time.

The idea of fully sharing emotional experiences scares the hell out of me though, as does the idea of a hive mind ala the Borg. I do see the benefit of it, but I would need a way to separate sometimes. Just the idea of it makes me shake a bit. I hear what you are saying though, and the internet is definitely making it happen in its way. It's fascinating and it could be really great, but I do worry.

[randome]

12. I used to believe in 'gramatically correct' language. No more.

The world moves at a faster pace and we need to keep up with it. Now I fully embrace whatever communication model is 'in vogue'.

I have teenaged daughters so I need to be able to communicate with them.

Good typing skills are a must these days. Fortunately, I type around 75 words a minute.

Or, as Mitch Hedburg once said, "I type a hundred and twenty words a minute. It's in my own language."

[Initech]

16. I want to scream at people who use "u" and "ur" instead of you and your.

If they're trying to be funny that's one thing but otherwise -

[randome]

17. I get tired of DUers who think 'Series!!' or 'Hugh' are still funny.

But to each their own.

[SheilaT]

19. I don't text, almost never post anything on Facebook

-- the only reason I even bother with a FB account is to stay in touch with a handful of people out there, including my two sons.

I do find that it takes me much longer to read a text message of some kind than something where the words are spelled out in full, because I have to figure out what's being intended.

And while I'm not a teacher of any kind, I do expect that younger people may not understand that the real world expects actual, grammatically correct, full sentences.

[Bake]

27. Capitalization, too!

There's a big difference between "helping your friend Jack off a horse" and "helping your friend jack ..."



Bake