Let's Speak About Text

     None of us are completely innocent when it comes to using text speak, at least once in our lives we've used a cheeky "lol" or the occasional "2nite". Sometimes they come in handy when we need to send a quick message if we're a bit short on time, but should we start to protect the English Language against the dangers of new technologies and their new words and grammars?


     A lot of people are under the impression that text speak has come from the young people of today, originating through the use of more social media and texting, but actually, this isn't quite true. Granted it has become significantly more common, but actually, the abbreviations within text speak have been around for hundreds of years which Professor David Crystal mentions during an interview. It's hard to believe that the common language we use today when sending messages and writing tweets was actually around long before we even had all this social media. This means that abbreviations weren't created by kids from the last two decades. 
     Crystal also states that not all text messages are full of abbreviations, in fact, only 10% are, so it hasn't completely taken over modern communication. 


     The main problem we have now is whether or not text speak and modern technology is destroying the English Language, and will these new words that come from new technologies ruin it? 


     In some opinions, using text speak makes the user seem less intelligent, although, this isn't quite the case. People who purposely use text speak and abbreviations actually have to know the words first so that they then know the abbreviation, since text speak is mostly popular by people who think using it will make them sound cool. Upon knowing the word, they have to know which letters to remove in order to make it the abbreviation. 
     When students were asked whether or not they would use text speak or abbreviations in exams and essays, the students responses indicated that it would be silly as they would lose marks, and actually, Crystal found that people who use text speak are actually more academic than those who do not use it, which goes against what most people would think. 
     However, this research was conducted quite a few years ago and so isn't exactly necessarily relevant to the youths of today. Whereas kids then might have known that text speak would make them lose marks in essays, if kids today have access to phones and other forms of social media at a younger age, then they are likely to become too used to text speak and actually not know how things are meant to be spelled. This could then cause confusion when actually needing to write properly.


     Messages do look nicer when they are actually written properly using correct grammar and punctuation as this means that it is a lot less likely for people to become confused by not knowing what some aspects of text speak mean, by using regular English, people are able to communicate in a way that makes sense to everyone and this overall will be much better for everyone overall. 

God Save The Queen's Received Pronunciation

     "It is important that we teach children that, to get on, they must speak Standard English with an RP accent."

     Every single place on Earth will have people speaking with different accents, it's just the way that it is. So why should we try and get everyone to pretty much talk with almost exactly the same style? Granted it would make life significantly easier if everyone spoke in almost exactly the same way, but surely this would also mean that no one would be their own person. 
     No one can help their accent, my accent will differ immensely from someone who is from the North, and neither one of us and help that. It's just a fact. But should people really get hate from the accent in which they speak? After all, from where they are from, their accent is normal, and ours is the odd one. But how far are we willing to discriminate someone based on their accent? 
     Richard Spillett wrote an article on how workers are having to 'posh up' how they sound in order to avoid discrimination. Within this article it states:

 "Prejudice against certain accents is the 'last taboo', according to Manchester University linguist Dr Alex Baratta, who says people are made to feel 'fake' when they have to 'posh up' while talking.

Dr Baratta is calling on employers to promise that job applicants' accents will not be used against them in the same way as gender, sexual orientation, religion, age and race are ignored.

He said: 'We should acknowledge that any form of workplace discrimination, to include accentism, should not be tolerated in a society which seeks to be more inclusive."

     Is it really fair to make people feel like they have to change their voice in order to feel like they belong, to feel like they're safe? Is this really the kind of message that we want to be sending out to children? That in order for them to fit in and be a member of a specific group, they have to change the way they speak? 

     Another article by Victoria Woollaston talks about how "Scousers have the 'least intelligent and least trustworthy' accent - while Devonians have the friendliest"

     The article shows the percentages that each accent has in regards to friendliness. But by the logic of this article, Received Pronunciation isn't the most friendly and so shouldn't be the accent we try and get everyone to speak. In fact, the best accent that would be most likely to help people get along would be the Devon accent, or even Liverpool. 

     It would seem that everyone has their own opinion on which accent is the nicest one. But it does seem a bit silly to start questioning people's intelligence and friendliness based entirely on their accent, you can't hear someone's voice and instantly decide whether or not they're intelligent.

     Overall, it isn't important that we teach children that in order for them to get along they must speak with Standard English with a Received Pronunciation accent because there are plenty more important things that should come into consideration for children to get on. Being a part of a group does not entirely revolve around your voice or how you speak, it is simply just how you are, how you treat people. 

     Having a voice that is deemed as 'posh' doesn't make you more important than anyone else, but there is this misconception that having a posher accent gives you more prestige and can be very intimidating for others, making people with posher accents have perceived power. It is because of this perceived power that we believe that if we do not share this accent, we are inferior. But again, is this the kind of lesson that we really want to be teaching children?