In George Orwell’s essay “Politics of the English Language”, Orwell argues that the English language is in ruins. What is to blame for the collapse of the English language? The answer simply lies within technology. Technology in many ways has a adverse effect on the English language. Young kids are now allowed to carry cell phones with texting being their main source of communication. Often times these kids butcher the English language through their text messages. They use improper grammar and often times do not punctuate at all. Technology such as texting, facebook and instant messaging work hand in had in the destruction of the English language. Technology has not made people more efficient, but rather has made them lazy. Text messaging is a technology that contributes to the great decline of the English language. The English language is often butchered through the use of text messaging. In Orwell’s essay, he states “An effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form” (446). Main stream society is too lazy to correct any grammar and punctuation in a text message, leading to the assumption that it is not important, after all it is only a text message. Thus, this shows the English language is in decline, when society is to lazy to take a few extra second to correct spelling and punctuation errors . One would not be able to write the same way in an academic essay as they would in a text message. If one would do so, that student would receive an F. No English teacher, or for that matter any teacher, would be thrilled nor impressed reading an essay filled with these common texting erors. Another way society is contributing to the deterioration of the English language... ... middle of paper ... ...ine because of technological advances. As Orwell states in his essay “Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets rid of these habits one can think more clearly” (446). These bad habit are speaking in text speak instead of proper English. In past centuries we have fought great battles, now we unite against new enemy, the enemy of improper English. Works Cited Brockenbrough, Martha. “Does IM Make U Dum.” The Concious Reader.Ed. Caroline Shrobes, Michael Shrugrue, Marc DiPaolo, Christian J. Matuschek. Longman: Boston, 2006.148-151. Print. Orwell, George. “Politics and the English Language.” The Concious Reader. Ed. Caroline Shrobes, Michael Shrugrue, Marc DiPaolo, Christian J. Matuschek. Longman: Boston, 2006. 445-447. Print.
Orwell, George. “Politics and the English Language.” George Orwell: Critical Essays. London: Harvill Secker: 2009. 270-286. Print.
Writing, according to an article in Times Magazine titled “Is Texting Killing the English Language” by John McWhorter, is an art that has been around for about 5,500 years. Since writing is deliberate and takes more time to compose, it’s usually better thought out and sounds more sophisticated. Speech, on the other hand, is more of an “unconscious” practice.
Communication between people is on the decline, also causing dehumanization. Newspeak, the soon to be official language of Oceania was designed to take away even the possibility of free thought. "The whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought" (Orwell 52). The ministry was using speech to create a thoughtless society. "Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller." When hearing this excerpt from the book texting comes to mind. Not only is it eliminating basic human communication, but eliminating grammar and sentence structure. According to the Pew Research Center today eighty percent of cell phone owners text, up from fifty-eight percent in 2007 (Pew np).
In the essay, George Orwell –the author –makes a well-thought out argument about the deterioration of the English language and the careless manner in which it is used in politics. Among the many mistakes and offenses made within English language Orwell lists, the writer argues against the use of pretentious diction, which is the use of excessive or unnecessary (and incorrect) words used in place of more simple words. Orwell contends that pretentious diction is especially harmful to English politics (and the English language, in general), because the political terminology and jargon that is used makes writing difficult to interpret, vague, and slovenly. Orwell also explains how different words may mean different things to different people and how important it is to use simple, concrete words so as to communicate the correct message to other
Modern language is, “ugly and inaccurate”, as George Orwell describes it in Politics and the English Language (510). George Orwell’s Politics in the English Language informs readers of this trend. Orwell uses the following quote to raise questions about where this problem may have first started occurring: “It is clear that the decline of language must have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to bad influence of this or that individual writer” (510). Written language has suffered a decline in the manner in which it is presented due to economic and political factors that Orwell noticed during his lifetime. Orwell’s discussion on economics and politics makes us think about what conditions lead
Despite the warnings of Orwell through both his essay and dystopian novel, bad English is still used today, and could be argued to affect more English than it did during Orwell’s life. The consequences are also just as he predicted, those who control the language are able to wield control over the thoughts of others. The usage of poor quality English by media has he effect of making the recipients of news more detached from events and as a consequence, more self-focused. The clumsiness and foolishness imposed by bad English ultimately degrading thought, politics, culture, and society is what Orwell had foretold. This is the English tragedy that is disregarded, modern thoughts of “English” are not of language but of the English Queen.
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.
In the essay “From Ancient Greece to Iraq, the Power of Words in Wartime” by Robin Tolmach Lakoff, Lakoff discusses the fact that words are a tool as well when it comes to wars. She talks about the differences between our natural want and ability to kill things, and the mental training soldiers receive to make it easier for them. Lakoff talks about the practice of dehumanizing the “enemy” through nicknames that make us feel superior then our foes, and the repercussions of using this type of language. In the essay by George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language”, Orwell talks about the decay of the English language, especially in political writings. He discusses the fact that when it comes to writing, political being the main focus, it’s
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.
Maybe part of my opinion is based on spite: If I had to learn all the dos and don’ts of modern English, so should you. But I think it’s more then just that. I can see the writing on the wall and it’s not looking too bright. Dumbing down the language to simplest terms can be a very dangerous thing. Don’t believe me, flip through a copy of Orwell’s 1984 and you’ll see how Big Brother has developed a “plainspeak” directive. In fact, I’m not alone in this belief. In Sven Birket’s article “Into the Electronic Millennium” he discusses the devolution of modern language: “The complexity and distinctiveness of spoken and written expression, which are deeply bound to traditions of print literacy, will gradually be replaced by a more telegraphic sort of ‘plainspeak’” (70).
“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.
As we have seen, the English language has undergone a drastic transformation from its origins in the 5th century AD. The modern form of English is continuing to evolve and in the future, we may see English evolve to a point where it is unrecognizable to today’s people. The role of English in the future is uncertain, but if the world continues in the direction of globalization, English will certainly remain a global language for inter-cultural communication.
Text messaging is damaging our literacy and communication skills as a society. Calling someone on the phone or writing them a letter is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. There is a new language that is being learned and not taught across the globe. It is the language of Textese, and it has quickly consumed the lives of millions across the world. There will always be the protector of language arts. These are the shrinking number of people everyone knows, that will continue to handwrite letters and sign them with proper English and etiquette. It may be as simple as picking up the phone and calling a friend or relative. It may be even simpler than that, in that people put forth an effort to talk to the person sitting next to or across from you and engage them in a conversation. Texting and textisms have become so common and widespread that using proper English, correct spelling, and full sentences is also becoming a thing of the past. People that constantly use text and instant messaging may have difficulty with literacy and expressing themselves in writing form. The research shows that text messaging has deteriorated how we communicate and express ourselves because textisms have become an easier and quicker form of communication that has affected literacy in children and adults.
The English language has evolved and changed to become the language it is today. The first manuscript writings of Beowulf are almost incomparable to the language used in novels like Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. The language has not only evolved but also diversified to become what it is today. As it reached new parts of the globe, new influences helped shape and change the language to reflect the lives and experiences of new speakers. The English language encompasses many different backgrounds, dialects, accents, and variations and would not be the dynamic language it is without every alteration it has had over the last fifteen hundred years.
English has established itself as a world language. Like no other language English dominates different aspect of our lives. These aspects are culture, politics, finances and many others domains related to public and international life. I will have a look at some scenarios such as English losing the status of a world language or English becoming a so called dead language. I will consider English not only as a world language, but also as a language of culture. In fact, I will have a closer look at English as a vehicle of culture and international relations and how these two provide scenarios for the language itself. Another scenario treated in this essay will be the scenario of English replacing all the other languages. In the end I will see if the English language has a future or if like so many other things its future is not predictable, because our world is in a constant change.