(I’m cross-posting this at several places, so apologies if this is the second or third time you’re reading this.)

(I also apologize if this isn’t quite on topic. I post and lurk at a variety of forums and email groups, and I’m sticking to the “general topic” areas as much as I can. Still, if I’m out of line, moderators can nuke as they see fit.)

I am writing a term paper for my Advanced Grammar class about how internet language (aka Netspeak) may be a new form of language or just random jargon and misspellings. (Write what you know, eh? [img]tongue.gif[/img] ) I have enough sources about language and about the internet; what I’m really looking for is input from the internet community. That’s where y’all come in. :D

I have several thoughts on the subject, and I’d be interested in knowing y’all’s thoughts on the subject. I’m also on the lookout for interesting material for a possible quote in my paper, so if anything looks usable, I’ll message the author privately about using it. (I won’t take without asking and without permission--that’s not fair.) I have to turn in by December 3. Other than that, debate, discuss, and rant on whichever of the following topics however you wish:

1: Do you feel that the internet has cheapened language, by volume of material, quality of material, etc.?

2: Do you think that chatroom/forum shorthand could be considered an entirely new form of communication?

3: Can a person communicate differently online through forums, email groups, etc., than he/she would in real life? In tone, subject matter, etc.

4: Can a person's use of grammar, syntax, etc., on the internet affect their spoken and written language off the internet?

Enjoy. [img]smile.gif[/img]

1. I'd say the internet has definitely cheapened language, by lowering quality. Spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and grammar rules are routinely broken by posters. Sometimes people are trying to carry on a "real-time" conversation, but don't know how to type quickly, and sacrifice quality for speed. The same problems happen when a person tries to respond to a highly emotional subject, and they're too angry or excited to properly format their message. I don't think people who know English as a 2nd, 3rd, etc. language fit into this category, because they simply don't know all the rules. People who learned English as their primary language are supposed to know them (in theory anyway ;) ).

2. Sure. It's another dialect of the English language.

3. Yes, people can communicate differently online vs. verbally. I know people who can carry an intelligent, literate conversation face to face, but their emails read very differently, mostly because of the above mentioned punctuation and grammar problems.

4. Written language, definitely. Emoticons & abbreviations are the same regardless of where they're written. I think it changes spoken language very little. The *only* examples I can think of are people pronouncing acronyms like "RTFM!"

1. cheapened? well kinda i guess.

2. it is a new form of communication. it is the same as cellphone because we want to save money on SMS. its also like abbreviation ex: street= st saves time and typing.

3. yep... just look at stalkers and hackers and spoiled kids who think they are gods in the net :(

4. i dont know about that.

1. In someways, but through the internet now a massive ammount of new information is avaliable so i guess it depends on the subject being written about.
2.yep
3.deffinatley.
4.it sometimes happens to me, especially when i'm not thinking and i'm writing an essay or something i tend to out of habbit, use "u" instead of "you".

1. Depends where. On forums etc. yeah, very much, on professional news sites etc., not very much. By quality of material - volume alone does not cheapen it as long as it's good quality.

2. Probably, yeah, since it doesn't follow rules of other languages :D

3. Definitely.

4. Written, probably, since you get into habbits of writing shorthand. Not really spoken, I can't imagine anyone saying things like LOL instead of laughing :D

Are you including language used in sms, Pirengle? I think that is along the same vein; in fact probably is even more of a 'different langauge' than netspeak. There's also a difference between chat language and language that is used on message boards as well. The former is always a lot more brief and succinct than the latter, which is more similar to offline language.

I think it has both cheapened and strengthened language. Yes, the language used isn't always accurate or grammatically perfect. However, I think people are using written language a lot more! A large proportion of communication is now written rather than spoken. I know before I became an online person I didn't write nearly as much as I do now. It also encourages people to read more. Incidental reading is a huge source of vocabulary and learning of spelling and grammar - which is both a good point and a bad point about the internet, as of course we are exposed to both the good and the bad in those departments. Any sort of exposure is a positive however, as we are encouraged to use our minds and our concentration which is less required when using oral communication.

I would also say that if the internet has 'cheapened' language, it is only cheapened on the internet, rather than being spilled into other written communication offline. Where we are using written language offline, it is usually in a more formal sense so more care is taken with spelling and grammar and the use of abbreviations doesn't occur.


Not really? Abbreviations are not an internet invention, witness things like etc, eg, ie and so on which are common even to formal publications (eg in scientific journals). The speed at which written language is required online, almost as if a spoken conversation were occuring merely requires that some shorthand is used. So I would say it's not 'new' per se, but just an extension of an old practice.

Yes definitely. Especially in mediums where instant responses aren't required, like message boards or email groups, a person can deliberate for a long time about how they want their responses to sound and what they will contain. I notice it even in chat, when you say something and the other person starts to respond then deletes their typing and starts again - in person hey just would have said the first thing they thought of, even if they regretted it later ;) . Although I think if a person is going to create any meaningful relationships their persona has to be at least partially real. Even online it is hard to maintain lies about something as fundamental as your personality if real friendships are being contemplated.

Maybe. But I think that generally, spelling, grammar etc mistakes made online are either typos, which are commonly made offline as well, for example I was reading an report I handed in this semester which I reread many times and found a typo ;) . You see spelling and grammar errors everywhere - in newspapers, brochures, ads, signs. This has been the case well before the internet became so commonly used. And if they are not typos, they are genuine errors, which will be made offline as well. However they are not 'caused' by the internet, but are just witnessed in both online and offline writing. The use of words like 'ur' or 'ppl' I would say are unique to this form of communication and so would not affect writing offline. I would say that internet writing contributes to the continuation of already existing spelling or grammar errors, as the increased amount of writing people are doing may reinforce an error, but no more than if they were writing a lot of letters by hand or something.

Okay now I have a question for you ;) . When I quoted your post all your inverted commas were done in code - & # 8 2 1 7 ; !! How come?

<font color=gold>
Cheapened? Raped is more like it. The reason is understandable though: it takes a lot more time to type in what you want to say then actually say it. And that rush doesn't surface on forums, but it does in chat rooms, where lines are sprouted out by the tens. You gotta read everything and reply to most of it, which leads to a huge lag in typing it in. Therefore, Netspeak becomes a much shorter version of normal language, often resulting in hideous grammar and spellings and abbreviations.
</font>
<font color=gold>
No. Those who do it because of time/speed issues should try to be grammatically correct more and the kids who do it to look interesting will hopefully outgrow it. Proper english should be the singular language that people on the net speak. The why is followed in point 4
</font>

<font color=gold>
If I understand this one right, I'd say no. People simply use different means (smileys) to express there feelins, thoughts on subjects.
</font>

<font color=gold>
Absolutely! It's simple conditioning: if the kids use slang/Netspeak more often than they use proper english, they will automatically use the Netspeak more than english. I've even caught myself using netspeak on tests I made at school. I got flamed by the teacher who didn't understand what I was saying. Yeah, it's addictive and all to easy to mix 'good' and 'bad' language.
</font>

[ 11-21-2003, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: Zuvio ]

Sorry it took me so long to post back. I've had to do this at several other forums over the past few days. :rolleyes:

"Them" meaning what? Native English speakers are supposed to know the rules? (Not picking--just curious.)

2. Sure. It's another dialect of the English language.

Do you think the Internet encourage people to have lax grammar skills?

Is this a habit you picked up with increased Internet communication?

Not exactly sure what SMS is, and Google doesn't either. Care to explain? [img]smile.gif[/img]

I've been getting a wide spectrum of answers with this question. Several people think Internet communication affects offline writing, and several people think it does. Have you ever composed a message offline in Netspeak of shorthand?

I composed my post in Microsoft Word so I could catch all my typos. ;)

So you don't think emoticons and phrases in asterisks (*sigh*) do a good job of conveying tone? Just asking. [img]smile.gif[/img]

What you do mean when you say "flamed"? And were there any other instances where you used Netspeak offline? In what context did you use it? And how well was it recieved?

Actually, I think emoticons and asterisks do a very poor job of communicating an actual feeling and often give the illusion you are communicating your emotions effectively.

For example, if I type *sigh*, does that mean I’m exasperated with you, or does it mean I’m content? Both are situations in which a person could sigh. However, the infliction you make when you sigh often gives the interpreter volumes of information. In addition, using these forms of representation relies on everyone having exacting definitions for what they believe these terms to represent. Language often changes with location, inhibiting the use of these expressions over a written medium.

As previously stated, body language and tone infliction make up a significantly large portion of communication. Without verbal and visual aids to accent the medium used to communicate, you have a broken form of communication at best.

As for the second point you quoted me on, that was a statement made by Zuvio. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Not exactly sure what SMS is, and Google doesn't either. Care to explain? [img]smile.gif[/img]
</font>[/QUOTE]Text messaging on a mobile phone.

I've been getting a wide spectrum of answers with this question. Several people think Internet communication affects offline writing, and several people think it does. Have you ever composed a message offline in Netspeak of shorthand?
</font>[/QUOTE]No never. As I said, I think most offline written language is formal, as in reports for work or school essays etc. There may be a small incidence of specifically internet shorthand in informal writing, but for the most part I think they would be separate. Most of the abbreviations would be not relevant anyway - for example I can't really think of any time when the longhand of IIRC or AFAIK or IMHO would be appropriate in 'formal' language use, so the abbreviations wouldn't be used either.

[ 11-24-2003, 05:27 PM: Message edited by: Aelia Jusa ]

<font color=orchid> I can understand the angle that some people may be coming from, about the quality of language going downhill over the internet. But I do not quite agree that the internet is to blame for it; it is the user who is responsible for his/her choice of words, and the internet is but a venue for him/her to express himself/herself. Had there not been the internet, I am quite sure that this aspect of the person would have been revealed in some other form (for example, through SMS, as others have pointed out).

I also agree that it is mainly at the chat rooms where netspeak takes place. But again, my view is that it reflects on the sentiment of the person at that point in time, more than anything else. The person is probably on the impatient side at that point in time - wanting to rebut a point, defend his/her view or share some juicy secret, feeling relaxed and not caring a whit about proper grammar or spelling, in the mood for creativity (it might be considered 'cool' to invent a new acronym)... the list could go on.

As for whether a person could behave differently online and in real life, of course! Too often have we heard jokes about people who felt let down by each other when they finally met face-to-face. I like to think that there is some basis for these jokes, since no one would really invent these if there had not been a real life experience by some remote person.

Lastly, I think it is possible for a person to engage in netspeak even off the internet. If I had made a few good friends over the internet and decided to write to them using the good old-fashioned way, I might easily inject a few acronyms (especially those that we use often), but out of choice. I would do it, because I felt that these would enhance our familiarity with each other, and not because my standard of language had subconsciously been eroded.</font>