Both linguists argue against the typically negative view that most people have on technology, as well as it's influence on language in recent years.
In a TED talk from February 2013, American linguist John McWhorter stated his relatively unique perspective on the affect of technology on language. He doesn't agree with the idea that technology is having a detrimental affect on language. McWhorter rather argues against it, by stating that 'textspeak' and writing are two different things. He stresses that over many generations, people had the tendency to speak like they wrote, but the ability to write like one speaks did not become a seamless process until technology came in. In this way, he proves that technology has come to suite our needs when communicating, such as the need to communicate quicker, as we tend to do when speaking. (And therefore textspeaking)
British linguist David Crystal also views the issue in a more opposed and positive way in comparison to a majority of linguists. Crystal perceives 'textspeak' to be a language of limited punctuation, excessive abbreviations and excluded letters. He states that these characteristics are a result of the limitations that technology brought along with it, causing its users to communicate more efficiently and therefore suiting our needs to do it quickly. Crystal also comments against any negative statements in regards to the affect technology has on the performance of children at school, arguing that it should be seen as a way to practise language rather than destroy it.
Both Crystal and McWhorter address the issue in a more positive way, stating that technology is a way to suite our communicative needs. Yet, they both view the idea from a different perspective. Crystal believes that 'textspeak' is a result of our communicative needs, evident in the way we have manipulated standard writing. In contrast, McWhorter argues that textspeak is detached from writing, and is the ability to write like we speak (Faster), which is a developing language of its own.
In a TED talk from February 2013, American linguist John McWhorter stated his relatively unique perspective on the affect of technology on language. He doesn't agree with the idea that technology is having a detrimental affect on language. McWhorter rather argues against it, by stating that 'textspeak' and writing are two different things. He stresses that over many generations, people had the tendency to speak like they wrote, but the ability to write like one speaks did not become a seamless process until technology came in. In this way, he proves that technology has come to suite our needs when communicating, such as the need to communicate quicker, as we tend to do when speaking. (And therefore textspeaking)
British linguist David Crystal also views the issue in a more opposed and positive way in comparison to a majority of linguists. Crystal perceives 'textspeak' to be a language of limited punctuation, excessive abbreviations and excluded letters. He states that these characteristics are a result of the limitations that technology brought along with it, causing its users to communicate more efficiently and therefore suiting our needs to do it quickly. Crystal also comments against any negative statements in regards to the affect technology has on the performance of children at school, arguing that it should be seen as a way to practise language rather than destroy it.
Both Crystal and McWhorter address the issue in a more positive way, stating that technology is a way to suite our communicative needs. Yet, they both view the idea from a different perspective. Crystal believes that 'textspeak' is a result of our communicative needs, evident in the way we have manipulated standard writing. In contrast, McWhorter argues that textspeak is detached from writing, and is the ability to write like we speak (Faster), which is a developing language of its own.
No comments:
Post a Comment