Need some help

[NeoJed -TR-]

Alright so I am stuck on topics to write for this English paper that im typing. The topic was really broad it was "language and something" so you just make a point about language and argue the point. So heres my thesis

Developments in technology, such as text messaging and instant messaging, have forced a regression of language among society overall, teens in particular.

Anyone have any ideas on some points I could argue, I have already talked about how technology has caused the birth of an abbreviated language and right now im talking about how the media has also caused the regression in language.

 

[Valiant Fluffy]

You have a point a lot of people's grammar is a lot worse, but there are some people like myself who try to use good grammar when talking seriously on the phone (texting)

 

[HardHat]

Would you call it a regression of language? The 'English' language has been evolving for the last few hundred years. If you were to use the word 'ice' or 'cream' in Shakespeare's time, they might understand. Put the two words together, and they wouldnt have a clue what you're talking about.

Abbreviations such as 'u' and 'tho', may not look correct today, but in a century or two, who knows what the English language might look and sound like.

I think there was a study done, teens who truncated words down to how they sound were not doing it out as a sign of laziness, but rather, creativity. Dont remember where i read it, probably wrong. It was something along those lines.

 

[Bas.B]

Interesting topic Neo. I think it's amazing how people used to be able to pick up foreign words through trade, I mean things like herring and kiosk, even without the technology we have today.
(Herring comes from Dutch 'haring' and kiosk is Turkish )
Hope I helped ya

 

[Major Payne]

Abbreviations such as 'u' and 'tho', may not look correct today, but in a century or two, who knows what the English language might look and sound like.

Oh god please never let it come to that.

 

[Spitfire'd]

Maybe think of it this way. I sincerely believe that people from the middle ages would not understand our dialect. Even if we both spoke English there would be such a difference that there would easily be a communication barrier to overcome.

So 1000 years from now what will communication be like? Will it be more important to be grammatical or will it be more important to speak in a way that everyone can understand, even if it isn't as articulate as someone would prefer?

 

[xplag]

Maybe think of it this way. I sincerely believe that people from the middle ages would not understand our dialect. Even if we both spoke English there would be such a difference that there would easily be a communication barrier to overcome.

I'm studying a bit of middle English now, and it's just a tad closer to Modern English than Old English. Here, let me give you an example (from Sir Gawain . . .):
Fro riche Romulus to Rome ricchis hym swythe, With gret bobbaunce that burghe he biges upon fyrst.
Yeah, that was a little off topic... but that was just to show how different English was about 900-700 years ago.

And Neo, as for your paper, I think you should narrow the focus of your thesis by showing a decline in the use of proper grammar and speech. Maybe write a brief background about why people text/IM the way they do (time constraints, less keys, etc.) and how this has carried over to everyday tasks. And you could write about how this decline, while brought on by text/IM, is worsened by the lack of proper education (write that the No Child Left Behind act is ridiculous and prevents kids from learning properly, your teacher will love you if you write that, and I'm not joking).

Sorry, I get excited about unrestricted topics...

 

[Gunning]

These might help:
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3816314.ece

http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2006-11-13-text-speak_x.htm

 

[Coriolanus]

I can definitely see where you're coming from in the whole regression thing...

I mean, consider the Middle Ages. It was more important that you got the pronunciation correct than the spelling, because it was a mainly phonetic language. The standardization of "correct" spelling is only to breech regional boundaries. Consider where in the Faerie Queene, Spenser uses the word "bloud" and then 4 or 5 stanzas later uses "blood".

So if you think about it, it's less about spelling and more about conveying the idea of the word itself.

 

[Bas.B]

Isn't it so that the word 'I' is written with a capital because of all the regional dialects were different, and this was the only 'correct' way to spell it? I mean, I've seen: i, I, iye, Iye, iy and Iy, and I haven't read that many old English litterature.

 

[RobInactive]

Although i don't study english anymore, just wanted to say that i certainly think that in 200 or so years time SOME of text speak and internet speak will become part of our language, its not all negative, alot of people talk about the "decline" of language caused by this, but imo it's rather evolution of language. Its more simple and faster to say than long words, the supply meets demands if you will, just like the recent popularity in fast food over the past 100 years, because busy people don't have time to cook ect. In the same way communication via technology is suited to the demand, of which is driven by speed. And this will have a knock-on effect as people start using it in their senteances too.

Also you might note that this technological revolution of language may die out. It is largely caused by the unintuativeness of the phone and pc keybaord, the slow input methods have encouraged people to write shorter. But technology is increasing at such a rate its very hard to predict the future. Perhaps in the future we will all have vocie recognition on our computers, and perhaps this will see an increase in language skills? Perhaps a birth of extreme text speech will prodceed, or perhaps we might all be using stylus to write and such language may go down a different path. I really think that technology will have a major impact on our language, but you must consider the fact that input technology for communication may changes in ways none of us can predict, and such, completly revolutionising the way we communicate and its effect on verbal/real world speech will be totaly unprodictable.