Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Living


'Dis maks my teacha cry'

Cell phone text messaging spawns debate on 'ryt' and wrong

Like every other electronically hip American, Denise Karpelenia will dash off the occasional text message. But, unlike many of those cell phone-packing writers, Karpelenia has trouble accepting the literary conventions -- "4" for "for," "U" for "you" -- that make up much of the medium's lexicon.

"My colleagues and friends laugh at me because they know if I'm going to do any texting, I'm going to have to text in complete sentences," says Karpelenia, the Clark County School District's coordinator for secondary English and language arts.

Besides, Karpelenia adds, laughing, "if it takes me two hours to text one sentence, I might as well talk to them on the phone."

Call it textspeak, this odd but useful assemblage of symbols used routinely by thumb-typing people -- most of them youngish -- for quick communication. As an adjunct language, textspeak is practical, concise and, often, really creative.


Most Popular Stories
  • BRUSH WITH WEALTH: LOOK BUT DON'T TOUCH
  • KEEPING COOL: SWEAT CITY
  • STILL SEXY, STILL CLASSY: Never a Grind
  • RESTAURANT REPORT
  • TASTE OF THE TOWN: Readers looking for favorite things
  • Busting Out
  • FEAR AND LOAFING: MOVING VIOLATION (Mover)
  • LIFE ON THE COUCH: Socialite Kardashian is reality shows' common denominator
  • Problems in '1776' lie with director
  • Hospice patients receive wish for final encore



  • It's only when textspeak creeps into other, more formal types of writing that it can drive a language purist absolutely batty.

    William Kist, an associate professor of education at Ohio's Kent State University and author of "New Literacies in Action: Teaching and Learning in Multiple Media," knows of no study examining whether texting affects students' writing proficiency, but he notes that alternative forms of writing are not new.

    For example, says Kist, who's also a consultant to the National Council of Teachers of English, viewers of Ken Burns' Civil War documentary may have noticed the many alternative punctuations and spellings used by letter writers of the time.

    Still, textspeak is a departure from what most Americans would consider standard English, and that can be disconcerting for some. (Exhibit A: Before an interview, Kist is compelled to ask why so many reporters have been calling him to talk about the topic in recent months.)

    Kist wonders whether parental discomfort about textspeak may be related to a long history of equating standard spelling with literacy.

    The general public, he says, "really buys into the idea that if someone is not spelling correctly, according to standard English rules, that means they are illiterate and not prepared for the job market and maybe even substandard intellectually."

    There's no consensus in the academic community regarding textspeak. Some teachers say text messaging is a form of writing, and anything that prompts students to write is good. Others argue that textspeak isn't the sort of writing that will endear students to either teachers or future employers.

    They do agree that although not widespread, textspeak increasingly seems to be making its way into schoolwork.

    Michelle Peterson, an English teacher at Green Valley High School who is hardly old -- 27, she has been teaching for four years -- admits she was "astonished" the first time she saw "U" in a paper as a substitute for "you."

    "I don't think it's new," Peterson says. "Even when I was in school, I think kids still tended to write in the vernacular. They're going to write the way they speak. And slang has always made its way into papers."

    But, maybe because students spend more time online these days than they used to, "I do recognize it a little more and more," she adds.

    Peterson has noticed a few trends. Freshmen tend to use it in papers more often than upperclassmen, and Peterson finds it more often in drafts of papers -- at that stage, she can point out to a student how textspeak is not suitable for schoolwork -- than final versions.

    Meanwhile, Karpelenia has heard from several district English teachers that students are not capitalizing letters, they're using text symbols in their writing and it's impacting their state proficiency exams.

    In fact, if there are practical consequences to the use of textspeak, that's a biggie: That, under the pressure of taking the timed English portion of the state exams, students may accidentally revert to the conventions of textspeak even when they know it's not appropriate.

    The standard tack for an English teacher is to explain to students that different forms of writing are suitable in different circumstances. Writing for specific audiences is, Karpelenia notes, a topic covered in the district's English curriculum.

    "A lot of our teachers will tell students, 'You may use whatever format you like when you're outside of the classroom, but for education purposes, we expect you to use academic language,' " Karpelenia says.

    At the college level, "I can't imagine there are any instructors who are accepting or tolerant of any kinds of abbreviation in formal writing," says Patrice Hollrah, director of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Writing Center.

    "That's the whole nature of academic writing," she adds. "There are no shortcuts. You don't abbreviate things."

    Karen Laing, an English instructor at the College of Southern Nevada, makes it clear to her students that linguistic shortcuts and substitutions always are unacceptable. However, she has noticed that e-mails from students in her online courses sometimes do lapse into that kind of language.

    Concern about textspeak doesn't end in the academic world.

    "What employers are telling us is that they want students to come out of high school and college ready to write and to have excellent writing and verbal skills," Hollrah says. "We are charged for preparing them for that."

    In fact, she adds, it's useful for teachers to approach the subject from that perspective.

    There's probably something else at work here, too. Call it the Fogey Factor.

    Hollrah notes that young people always have created "their own language, their own lingo, their own way of communicating to set themselves apart."

    But, most of the time, she says, they're smart enough to know that there's a time and place for it.

    "So I'm not concerned about the language," Hollrah says. "It's alive and it's changing."

    Actually, Kist says, "I think the general public is more upset about it than English teachers are. It's certainly the position of the National Council of Teachers of English that these alternate spellings and punctuations actually open up an incredible opportunity for a dialogue (with students) about the English language."

    Contact reporter John Przybys at jprzybys@reviewjournal.com or (702) 383-0280.



    Leave Your Comment 10 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Laura (again) wrote on March 01, 2008 11:37 AM: Wat wrong wit all u? I txt all my bffs n aks u y u tink me not gun git gud job? M smart1 LOL!

    Time yourself: How long does it take you to read and understand this--and I mean every single word?

    (How old are you...?)




    Now time this...which is also two and a half lines:

    What is wrong with speaking properly? You need to learn Standard American English to succeed.


    Laura wrote on March 01, 2008 11:31 AM: When written in incomplete sentences and even incomplete words, text-speak sounds like a casual dialogue. As an English teacher, I find it coming into students' writing and it bothers me. Not only do many students not know the proper time and place(medium) for texting, they are not actually learning academic writing as quickly. Teachers spend too much time correcting spelling and sentence fragments in order to simply understand the writing (break the code), while style and content simply are getting put on the backburner. While texting saves time when communicating on-line or by cellphone, it actually wastes time in certain contexts, because it sometimes even fails to get the message across to an older audience.


    mp wrote on February 27, 2008 09:29 AM: I am jealous. I wish I knew textspeak. It reminds me of Old English. So much simpler that this amalgamation of words from all different languages. I love the shorthand.


    austin pirkle wrote on February 27, 2008 08:46 AM: sometimes i find my self writing like i text and its wierd but i dont think affects my writting in lit.


    Language Lover wrote on February 26, 2008 08:39 PM: There is a time and a place for everything. While we encourage the development and use of academic language/Standard American English in formal written assignments, we should be cautious about shutting down students who use textspeak. Their practice of textspeak, like other dialectical forms, may be associated with that adolescent desire to "be different" or set themselves apart from the "norm." So it may play a role in their identity development. But once again, there is a time and a place... How about allowing textspeak in note taking? It is another way of shorthand that proves useful in interview situations, jotting down important points from films, etc. Then moving along from brainstorming and notes to formal writing, provide support for translating into academic language as it allows for detailed explanation, description, and critical thinking. Let's not be afraid, folks!


    Dr. Bob wrote on February 26, 2008 08:01 PM: No abbreviations, i.e. no shortened forms? No, wait, what was it i.e. stood for again? How about pp. in citations?

    Duh. Of course formal writing accepts shortened or abbreviated forms, e.g. the use of i.e., e.g., etc.

    I of bholdr, ya tink? Or maybe only hoary Latin abbreviations are allowed.

    Alas, where's a good professor of Hebrew poetry to make up a bunch of prescriptive rules when you need one, e.g. Lowth?

    P.S. Don't know Lowth? Sorry, check your history of the English language at the door. Then come back.


    Russ Hunt wrote on February 26, 2008 04:29 PM: Sigh. "I can't imagine there are any instructors who are accepting or tolerant of any kinds of abbreviation in formal writing . . . . That's the whole nature of academic writing. There are no shortcuts. You don't abbreviate things."

    GMAB. This is just the kind of mindless "rule" that has destroyed real education for centuries. We say things that just flat aren't even close to true, and nobody calls us on it. Split infinitives, anyone? Prohibitions of first-person pronouns? What could possibly be the point of saying that academics don't use abbreviations?


    Ebonified Texter wrote on February 21, 2008 12:03 PM: Wat wrong wit all u? I txt all my bffs n aks u y u tink me not gun git gud job? M smart1 LOL!


    BC in MS wrote on February 21, 2008 08:35 AM: This isn't unique. Advertising copy writers tinker, and deliberately break grammatical rules. Newspapers have deliberately dropped letters from certain words, and bureaucrats make up words. It's phonetics gone wild.


    Lee wrote on February 21, 2008 06:40 AM: If teachers aren't upset by this then they are clueless and incompetent.