by A. Jacobina Poulsen

Created on: March 28, 2009

Is text messaging threatening the future of the English language? The answer is yes, it absolutely is. Is text messaging ruining real communication? No, it can never do that, because communication is not limited to the spoken or written word. Communication is simply the transmitting and subsequent understanding of ideas, thoughts and opinions. Regardless of what form that communication takes, if the ideas involved are effectively transmitted to another, that communication is real.

The cave art at Lascaux is communication. Here, prehistoric man scrawled out the essence of his life in rudimentary paintings and left them to speak to us in our day, some 16,000 years later. These painted scenes communicate in a very real manner. All the expressive arts - music, painting, dance - are forms of communication.

Text-speak developed originally out of necessity, not out of laziness. Text messages have a length limit, usually between 140 and 160 characters. They can also be expensive when sent by mobile phone. Different text messaging plans have different limits on the number of text messages allowed per month with a surcharge for texts that exceed that set number. Therefore, communicating the maximum amount of information with the least number of characters possible made necessary the abbreviations and alternate spellings we now know as the language of text-speak.

That's right, text-speak is a language. Text-speak dictionaries and tutuorials abound on the Internet. The problem with the language of texting occurs when it finds its way into other media and people attempt to exchange the abbreviations common in texting for the established usage of English. Upholding the use of English is our responsibility in these cases.

A decision in 2006 by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority to allow students to use text-speak on exams was met with mockery and horror. That same year, assurance was given by the Scottish Qualifications Authority that examiners would allow credit for text-speak answers on exams, if the basic idea was correct. In those decisions these educational authorities admitted that real communication of ideas could be accomplished with text-speak, but they utterly failed to uphold the academic standards that it is their duty to represent.

Most public school systems in the United States require two years study of a foreign language as a requirement for gradution. Learning and speaking another language is considered a sign of intelligence and is not only admired but also may be a great boon in many careers. Text-speak as a secondary language, used under the right circumstances and only in the appropriate communications media, is not something to be discouraged. Replacing English with text-speak, on the other hand, must be prevented.

The beauty of English lies in its tens of thousands of words which enable the writer to convey the most subtle shades of meaning. Text-speak will never match the versatility and importance of the English language.

Text-speak, if treated as a separate language, or as an extension of language, facilitates communication. It transmits information, thoughts and ideas in a way that the recipient can understand. Whether we like it or not, that is real communication. We must be careful, however, not to allow it to become the next generation's sole form of communication.

Learn more about this author, A. Jacobina Poulsen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.