to think that people who complain about textspeak are

[milliemoosmum]

pompous, pedantic, dinosaurs who cannot accept that the English language constantly changes.

And as for people who pretend they don't know what it says when they clearly do....don't get me started.

Anyone who corrects anyone's spelling, punctuation or grammar or complains about textspeak (unless correcting someone who corrects others to point out that they are not perfect) just makes themselves look like a massive arse.

Discuss.

I can't use or understand text speak and loathe it...I guess I am a pedantic dinosoar (at 29). Oh well!

A pendatic dinosaur who has just got up and can't spell or type.

If language is ever evolving and it's purpose is to communicate then textspeak is not effective as many people don't readily understand it. It just seems lazy to me, does it really take that much effort to type 'great' and not gr8, or people and not ppl etc. We already have a number of acceptable abbreviations I'm not sure we need too many more.

I don't like people using it on MN and would make a very quick judgement about the person using lots of txt spk.(lazy, probably can't spell,) I wouldn't take much notice of her posts tbh.

It's ok on twitter because you only have 140.

You are being unreasonable. (see what I did there? I avoided YABU - which is acceptable "text speak" on this site - ie, it is in the acronym list, there is no doubt what it means, if you can find the acronym list)

I must say, when it comes to the English language, I am more of the Prescriptive persuasion of linguistics than Descriptive. Which I know is possibly oldfashioned, and dont cater for the fluidity of language and change that language goes through.

Text speak is invented shortening, and you pretty much shorten it as you want, by leaving out syllables, and most notably leaving out vowels. Which to me renders it
pretty incomprehensible!

I think it is must be easier for native speakers of english to understand it. But for the sight impaired who are dependent on screenreaders to read forums, it must sound like somebody choking on hot potatoe!

In addition textspeak is usually used by people who struggle with English, I think before you use textspeak you should, at least, have mastered the written word.

Text speak presumably evolved for the reasons above/below: to avoid the high costs of sending text messages. Just because a practical manipulation of shared language evolved to allow ease of communication through text messages, doesn't mean it should in any way replace the beauty and subtleties of our language as a whole.

My problem with text speak used outside of text messages is that it's not only literally reductive. I'm so sorry is much more expressive than soz m8 or whatever it is.

On the occasions that I laugh out loud or shed a tear or nod in agreement on MN, it's never when a post is in txtspk. I cannot read it, it doesn't scan properly and I choose to ignore it.

I'm a dinosaur though.

With the dawn of many "top up £X a month and get free unlimited texts" deals, many people aren't counting the pennies when they send text any more, so text speak is getting more and more redundant.

YABU. Text speak is fine for texting, but I don't like to see it elsewhere. I like the written English language and find it harder to read when peppered with slang, text speak and abbreviations (not saying I don't do these things myself though!)

Op;

On MN; txt spk = you are abit thick.

I've always been one of those who uses full punctuation, spaces after full stops and all, in text messages. I don't get what letters you would leave out when 'text-speaking', they're all there for a reason!

Most phones have predictive text these days, so isn't that just as quick to use as text speak?

Textspeak is horrible.

It is NOT a natural evolution of the language, it is a type of shorthand created to try to reduce the cost of speaking via text message.

It is no longer needed for that purpose so it should GO!

Yes, language evolves over time - naturally, slowly and that's normal. A word here, a spelling there...

This is not the same thing at all. It was bang - I tried to type a sentence in 'textspeak' and I couldn't manage it.

There is no need at all for it. It is ugly and confusing and it is not an evolution of language - it is destroying language.

What MrsChemist said. I have to decipher it. DH is hugely dyslexic and has serious trouble deciphering textspeak. So do colleagues of his who have English as a second language. Thankfully it appears to be dying out as predictive text spells things out properly and technology evolves.

It's not evolution of language, it's illiteracy and quite sad, I think, to see people not learning how to write so that the English-speaking world (including those who know it as a second or subsequent language) understand them.

You know you're so right. Because as a society, what we really, really need is to get even dumber. We're not quite at the lowest possible denominator yet, and if we are trying to race to the bottom we really should abandon all control of the English language and make it a total free for all.

I mean, isn't it wonderful that the average person has a vocabulary one quarter of the size of their shakesperean counterpart? We should make that smaller and get rid of pesky things like vowels and so on.

WHN WE AL TLK LKE THS IMGN HW WNDRFL OUR LTRRY AND SCL FTR WLL BE!!!!

I dont understand why people who use it say it's easier and makes typing a sentence quicker. Ive tried to do it and find I have to think how to spell a word ive probably been able to spell correctly since I was 6. So a sentence takes me twice as long to type!
Also what's quicker and easier about changing the spelling of a word and it has the same amount of characters as the original spelling?? for example, "like" I notice is often spelt "liek" it's no fucking shorter!

Hecate I agree, it's not evolution it's annihilation!

MMM - I think I agree. It seems to be one of the many 'netiquettes' around MN which dictates who is part of the 'in crowd' and who is 'out'. And I speak as one who uses non-text speak. I've seen the 'disability/dyslexia' argument bandied around a few times but not once have I seen it backed up by someone who actually has a disability or uses software.

Even worse is the double standards - some posters with bad spelling or grammar are positively adored but if you txtspk yr qn, you can expect the full wrath of MN on your head. I'd say it is childish but I fear it is worse - nasty playground bully tactics.

BTW, thanks for posting this thread. I asked something similar on another thread recently and got utterly ignored - not sure if it was considered bad 'netiquette' but, if so, no one had the decency to tell me that.

I agree! Soon, we'll have lost language completely and be reduced to grunting and waving our arms about. Then we will truly have hit the bottom! we'll then rediscover fire and start again from scratch

Making a few changes, hopefully

yabu. text speak is not language changing, it is lazy.

i don't complain about textspeak, but i don't bother trying to read posts with it because it takes too much effort, tbh.

as for correcting, well, i don't have a problem with that, either. it's only in the UK that it's not routinely done. try living in France or Germany and see how often you're corrected! you get over that fast and see it as part of their wanting to help you respect their language and culture by using it properly. i don't see it as rude, but doing me a favour helping me become truly fluent and part of their community and society.

It makes a little part(a very pretentious part maybe) of me want to cry...but then I am an English teacher!