Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Positive effects of social media on language
Negative effects of social media on language
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Positive effects of social media on language
In John McWhorter’s argumentative speech “Txtng is killing language. JK!!!!” he uses logical and emotional appeals to showcase his argument. He begins by explaining the roles of speech and writing in language, stating that there is a natural amount of bleed between the two linguistic methods. Throughout the speech he compels his audience by using primarily logical appeals, such as since it is typical to “speak like you write” then it must be possible to “write like you speak.” John McWhorter uses historical knowledge and linguistic research, building a logical claim that texting is creating a newer advanced level of digital speech.
McWhorter uses logical appeals to defend his claim, and his facts come straight from his extensive research. He begins by
…show more content…
Through his research he conducted that in relation to a twenty four hour period, writing would not be present until 11:07 p.m. McWhorter uses the historical reference of the Gettysburg Address to explain that in past eras it was common to speak as you would write. When speeches were given to an audience the speaker would make his points in formal language, coinciding with how they would write. McWhorter states that if it is possible to speak as one would write, it is possible to write as one would speak. He states that once you have a handy device in your pocket you can write like you speak because there is another person on the other line readily available to interpret the message. This form of communication would not be appropriate for any other era because they did not have an easily acquired device like the cell phone. He states that texting is a whole new way of writing for young people and that since they are able to use texting alongside normal writing they have become
Michaela Cullington, a student, wrote a paper “Does Texting Affect Writing?” in 2010 for an English class. The paper is an examination of texting and the belief that it negative effective student’s writing. Cullington goes into detail about textspeak- “language created by these abbreviations”- and their use in formal writings. She organizes the paper in a way that is confusing to understand at first (pg. 1). At the end of the paper, she discusses her finding in her own research which comes to show that texting does not affect writing. But this is contradicting to the information she received from the teachers. The students and the teachers were seeing differences in the use of textspeak in formal writing. Cullington has good support for her
The mighty river flows through the mountains with liquidity and nurture providing life for all those who wish to take a sip from it. Yet the river is powerful in its own force destroying even the largest rocks, crumbling them into small pieces. People may be able to stop the river for a short time or even dry it up but the water always comes back in one form or another, every dam is bound to fail. Some people have been able to harness the power of the river, redirecting the mighty water making it flow in constructive ways. Similar to the river, language is influential. Its true power is not seen by the naked eye but by those who study it, those who use it as their ally in a war of linguistics. In Martin Luther King Jr.’s letter, Birmingham City Jail he is able to use all three rhetorical appeals to prove that demonstrations lead to negotiations and benefit for both sides of an argument.
A few years back, there was some concern over the fact that texting may be affecting the writing composition of teenagers. John McWhorter from Times Magazine wrote, “Is Texting Killing the English Language” on this very phenomenon, with the rhetorical aim to persuade people that this wasn’t the case. In the article, McWhorter refers to historical texts to persuade his audience, middle-aged
Three years ago, linguist John McWhorter spoke at a Ted Talk conference about whether texting is killing language and went so far as to question the definition of language itself. His video, “John McWhorter: Txtng is killing language. JK!!!” distinguished to the reader the difference between writing and speaking and how texting was one in the form of another. Texting, he said, is a way of writing as one speaks, or specifically fingered speech, rather than as many believe, a mutilated version of the English language. According to McWhorter, texting is becoming a second language for many people, and those who do text are actually, in a sense, being bilingual. Texting itself is not very different from a foreign language, other than for its strong
He uses many assumptions and “what if” scenarios, but doesn’t give numbers or facts to back up any of those claims, which could have made his argument much stronger.
George Orwell’s essay, the Politics and the English Language, portrays inaccuracies associated with writing. He explores examples of poorly written sentences. He appeals, “Language as an instrument for expressing and not for concealing or preventing thought” (Orwell). The main points of his essay consist of writing clearly and honestly in order to accurately represent what the writer is intending their audience to understand. Orwell focuses on the reasoning for the decline of the language due to political and economic reasons. This reaffirms the necessity to simplifying language as opposed to complicating it in an effort to appear intellectual, respectable, or powerful. Outdated metaphors, extra or pretentious words added for the sake
Is it true that the use of utterances and linguistic functions in verbal communication, wherein the comprehensive communicative act, comprise more rhetorical power than the written word? Why people generally prefer face-to-face interaction to discuss significant issues rather than using electronic media at our fingertips? “Why do people meet in debating chambers to make rules and reach political positions when they could surely more easily handle the complexity of the issues and the large amount of relevant data by exchanging documents and be done with it?” (Furniss, 2004, P. 1) This article will help you in deciding if the spoken word has more rhetorical power
Williams claims that errors of grammar and usage are the most complex topics, which have been easily misunderstood by many people in our world today. Whether the grammar has to do specifically with literature or not, it has always obtained errors. William notably supports his claim by giving specific examples of professionals who have stated grammatical errors according to what they think is “right.” William also provided some personal experience and textual evidence to express credibility and accuracy of his argument. William’s argument is effective because the main points he focused on with evidence were powerful and stood out to the audience. The real life examples that William demonstrated to the audience gave a strong base to his argument because he showed how grammar errors actually exist in our society. He made it evident that the audience had their eyes opened to topic that had been ignored in the past. William achieved his argument by providing real life situations and by looking at various researches that analyzed the existence of errors in grammar. However, the ways that William could have made his argument more effective is by not having comments that seemed too self- indulgencing. Also he could have taken out evidence like the graphs that didn’t make
While preparing for one of his college lectures, Dennis Baron, a professor and linguistics at the University of Illinois, began playing with the idea of how writing has changed the world we lived in and materials and tools we use in everyday life. This lecture slowly transitioned into “Should Everybody Write?” An article that has made many wonder if technology has made writing too easy for anyone to use or strengthens a writer's ability to learn and communicate their ideas. Baron uses rhetorical strategies in his article to portray to his audience his positive tone, the contrast and comparison of context and his logical purpose.
“Our generation doesn't ring the doorbell. They text or call to say they're outside,” this line is from one of the well-known social networks, Tweeter, which shows how the way of communication has change in this modern life. According to 2013 statistics by Business Insider, in United States alone, smartphone owners aged 18 to 24 send 2,022 texts per month on average — 67 texts on a daily basis — and receive another 1,831 texts (Cocotas). Nowadays, technology such as text messaging has practically replaced traditional face to face communication among the society primarily in young generations because texting allows messages to be sent fast and effortless. In order to quickly type what they are trying to say in text messaging, people are frequently using textspeak; the language created by using abbreviation rather than complete words. Based on this phenomenon, David Crystal, an honorary professor of linguistics at the University of Wales has published an article entitled ‘2b or not 2b?’ in the Guardian on July 5, 2008 comes out with the research and studies that state texting can actually improve the literacy of children and create creativity of writing. However, by observing more critically, texting do decrease a person’s ability to switch between textspeak and the normal rules of grammar and adversely affect formal writing and conversational skills.
In the article, “Does Texting Affect Writing?”, the author Michaela Cullington conveys her speculation that texting does not correlate to how students write formal essays. At the beginning of the article Cullington introduces the term texting and the convenience texting brings. Later expressing her concern that the texting language “Textspeak” is actually affecting students writing; then contradicts these views by using primary and secondary sources (news articles, books, her own surveys and research). In addition, she uses an anecdote to tell of her own experience with texting and writing. Together with other evidences and research put together, she uncovers the debate between textspeak and formal writing. On the basis of her research, she concludes that the state of texting does not interfere with writing or writing abilities.
George Orwell’s essay, Politics and the English Language, first published in 1946, talks about some “bad habits”, which have driven the English language in the wrong direction, that is, away from communicating ideas. In his essay he quotes five passages, each from a different author, which embody the faults he is talking about. He lists dying metaphors, operators, pretentious diction, and meaningless words as things to look out for in your own writing and the writing of others (593-595). He talks about political uses of the English language. Our language has become ugly and the ugliness impedes upon communication. Ugly uses of language have been reinforced and passed down in the population “even among people who should and do know better,” (598). Ugly language has been gaining ground in our population by a positive feedback mechanism.
Text messaging has become a norm in our generation, as technology rapidly advances and gives way to more efficient forms of communication in a fast-paced world; and many are skeptical about the influence this new form of interaction is having on our society, especially with our younger generation. David Crystal, a professor at the University of Wales, writes “2b or Not 2b?” in support of text messaging. He insists, despite those who underestimate or negate the beneficial influence text messaging has on language proficiency, that “there is increasing evidence that [texting] helps rather than hinders literacy” and that the fairly recent form of communication has actually been around for a while and “is merely the latest manifestation of the human ability to be linguistically creative and to adopt language to suit the demands of diverse settings. In contrast, Jeffery Kluger argues in “We Never Talk Anymore: The Problem with Text Messaging” that text messaging is rapidly becoming a substitute for more genuine forms of communication and is resulting in difficulty among young peoples of our generation to hold a face-to-face conversation, engage in significant nonverbal expression, and ultimately build effective relationships with family, friends and co-workers. Both writers’ present valid arguments, however, my personal experience with text messaging has led me to agree more with Crystal’s view on the matter. Text messaging is indeed having a positive effect on society by making frequent texters primarily aware of the need to be understood, as well as offering betterment of spelling and writing through practice, and reinventing and expanding on a bygone dimension of our language through the use of rebuses and abbreviations.
Since the Industrial Revolution, technology has permeated and become an integral part of our everyday lives. In fact, a life without technology seems almost impossible to imagine. Almost everyone, around the globe, has access to technology in one form or another. Consequently this type of technology has become ingrained into our culture. Its roots are so deep that it is now peculiar to see someone without a smartphone than with one. Consequently, smartphones and the Internet have radically changed the manner in which we communicate and how we communicate with one another. Our speech has metamorphosed so much from that of our grandparents that it almost seems like a foreign language due to the incorporation of slang and “text talk.” With the sudden surge of email, blogs, and instant messaging that occurred within the last couple of decades, the impact that technology has on our linguistics has become more pronounced. Technology has helped to bridge the gap between people by allowing us to communicate as easily as we breathe. On this note, one would think that the dawn of the Era of Technology would give birth to a renaissance of the English language but, instead, the converse is taking place. With such widespread prevalence of technology such as smartphones and computers, the degradation of the English language is a problem now more than ever.
Step onto any college campus and take a look around. You will find clumps of students standing around in circles, phones in hand, typing away. What is it they are doing? Texting. Ever since the first text message was sent in 1993, the use of text messaging as a means of communication has spread like wild fire, especially amongst the adolescent generation. And with this new form of communication a new language has appeared; text-speak, the shortening of common words into abbreviations and acronyms (Drouin 49). While texting and the text-speak language seem to have been welcomed by many, what affect is this new technology having on the way we communicate? Is it possible that texting is negatively affecting our ability to use formal written communication, or is this idea just a myth perpetuated by negative media attention? And what changes has texting brought to the way we communicate person-to person? Are these changes positive, negative, or perhaps a mixture of both?