Scotching the myth

Just about every new technology that has been introduced has been criticised for its potential to corrupt, dumb-down or otherwise undermine society. A recent speech by the Open University's Martin Bean highlighted the fact that from the slateboard to the Internet, the doomsayers have been warning us that we are at risk and that innovation is to be feared and new technologies avoided.

Reading the recent interview of the celebrated language scholar David Crystal reveals that there is a tension between the expectations people place on the use of new technologies and their actual use. Crystal dashes the myth that young people's literacy skills (and in particular their ability to spell correctly) are being weakened by texting through SMS on mobile phones. It is true, he says, that there is some abbreviation used in texting, twittering and other forms of messaging where space is limited (in his new book entitled the Gr8 Deb8 he acknowledges this phenomenon). But this type of txting, he argues, is a pragmatic and context specific ploy rather than a sea-change in the way people are writing. He goes on to expose the hoax essay in which a student was purported to have written a holiday account completely in txt-speak. 'Squeeze text' has its place, is the message, but it won't damage our ability to communicate in more traditional ways. We have always had abbreviated versions of text says Crystal:

"And so the point to make to adults who are criticizing the situation is to say, "You actually did precisely the same thing when you were a kid, except of course you didn't have a mobile phone to do it on." There's the old example, "YY UR YY UB IC UR YY 4ME" ["Too wise you are, too wise you be, I see you are too wise for me"]. As soon as you mention it, adults will say, "Oh yes, of course," and it gives them a bit of a shock to realize that in fact most of the abbreviations aren't new at all."

Alistair Creelman's summary of the interview is particularly useful:

"Teenagers, argues Crystal, are able to cope easily with different registers of language and realize clearly when texting language is appropriate. Interviews with many teenagers reveal that they can't believe how anyone would use texting abbreviations in school work. It simply doesn't belong there and they all realise that. In addition, by analysing large amounts of text messages Crystal found that only around 10% of words were abbreviated at all, thereby deflating the whole debate."

According to Crystal, txting is not going to end the world as we know it, and the tower of literacy is not going to come crashing down around our ears. My view is that children use new technologies to find new ways to communicate. They don't lose the ability to communicate in more traditional ways. They simply find new ways, and in effect, some are actually more adept at communicating than their parents, because they have so many more channels at their disposal. So teachers and parents can now rest easy and worry about other things. Now all we have to do is stamp out the grocer's apostrophe...

Related posts:

Iz txting uhfecting r students? (Writaholics Anonymous)

Image source (edited)