Is txt anthr lngage?

  cga 09:34 28 Aug 2004
Locked

I am sure someone will correct my title. I don't speak text very well.

What is the relevance here?

Recently I have seen a number of questions posted on the help forum that are a stream of jumbled words with little or no punctuation and not sorted into logical thoughts.

I am sure there is a sensible question in there somewhere but trying to sort it out is just too hard work - so I pass on.

OK - so I have set myself up here. I am certainly not perfect and I am not asking for perfect spelling or precisely correct English.

All I am saying is that a clearly defined problem makes it easier answer.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 10:43 28 Aug 2004

The year is 2004 and language moves on. Reading Old English mnauscripts from 1100-1250AD would be equally as incomprehensible and punctuation is a relatively recent addition to the English Lang.


G

  cga 12:26 28 Aug 2004

I might have expected such a comment from you.

I would counter that, while language is a living thing, it is about communication. That implies using language that your target audience understands.

Old English manuscripts from 1100-1250AD would be equally incomprehensible to most people as most of the Txt gibberish. In both cases you can make some of it out if you work hard enough at it - but that does not make for efficient communication.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 12:41 28 Aug 2004

Text messaging is basically a shorthand and I would guess that most people using it can easily understand it...therefore it is an efficient way of communication as it is also quick. people who do not use may find it difficult to comprehend but it is not aimed at them.


G

  cga 13:05 28 Aug 2004

If you read my original post again you will see that my concern is about this creeping out of phone text into general wriiten communication.

So, yes, it is aimed at the general populus in the cases I refer to.

For communication to be effective both the communicator and the recipient must able to understand.

Lets not be over the top about this. I am not saying I cannot understand txt nor am I 'deploring a fall in standards'. I am just saying that it makes it hard work reading a shorthand language that is not in general use - and, in terms of this forum, I skip such items as too hard work to understand.

  Andybear 14:15 28 Aug 2004

I'm with you all the way, I too skip postings written in 'text' shorthand. Apparently in some schools, if 'text' shorthand is used in exams, then they're marked down.

Gandalf - manuscripts is not spelt 'mnauscripts'. Pitmans also have a form of shorthand, learned by secretaries the world over. If people learn/use it then they can understand it, but not all people do, therefore they can't understand it. As regards your comment on text shorthand 'people who do not use may find it difficult to comprehend but it is not aimed at them' I thought this forum was open to everybody? If people can't understand what's being written in a particular posting then obviously they'll skip it.

  It's Me 15:30 28 Aug 2004

It is no wonder that one of the biggest grouses from employers, is that the new young prospective employees cannot comunicate. I am shocked that any teacher would tolerate any form of writing in exams other than good English; marked down indeed, zero or a negative mark is more appropriate.
Incidently, I do realise that you are simply reporting, and not advocating it.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 18:48 28 Aug 2004

'Gandalf - manuscripts is not spelt 'mnauscripts'...my life is complete as a) I never knew how to spell mnauscript and b) now that you are the spellmaster.

G

  Diemmess 21:06 28 Aug 2004

Grrrh - I don't know what will become of "British English"

If that Microsoft expression is not enough to make someone as stuffy as I am see red, Text-speak is a whole lot worse.

Look at the millions spent on communication, particularly in computer-based industries like Government Information,P.R. and Advertising.

Text-speak is the written equivalent of an insolent grunt like that awful TV teenager "Kev."

Bad spelling, syntax and formatting are all forgivable, but not the trendy, clever-clogs attitude some think it is.

Well, I'm well past my three score years and ten so ...... I'll support the CGA approach.

  wallbash 21:54 28 Aug 2004

will first say that as a father to two teenage daughters, tex (ing) ?? is now part of their culture . like it or not (im not keen ) But in the right place serves a purpose. If a youngster poses a question and drifts into his/her form of short hand to get his problen across, if I could help, I still would. Better still if he/she answers my problems (in tex) and I understand it,Great.But if I couldn't understand, I would fail to help. But that would also occur if the words were in Dutch/French/ Flemish etc.

  Mysticnas 22:56 28 Aug 2004

I was reading this thread, and turned to my brother, a GSCE Science teacher, and ask him what he/they do if such work is handed in...

he just burst out laughing... he said "Getting them to write at all would be an accomplishment!"

but on a serious note, he tends to hand work back littered with red marks, where he's circled bad grammer and spelling, and keeps doing so until the work is handed in written in correct grammer.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5 review

Alice Saey's mesmerising animation for Dutch singer Mark Lotterman

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

Comment booster votre iPhone ?