Holland 1

Final Exam The Evolution of Language through Social Media While the evolution of language is a fairly natural process, this change in language is consistently being called the killing of the English language. In the electronic age today, questions such as whether or not instant messaging and text messaging are eroding language are repeatedly brought to the table. How do new genres like texting, IM, or Facebook reveal new social dimensions in language use? Popular media says that LOLs, OMGs and smiley faces amid the lack of capitalization and punctuation marks are working their way into the everyday language of Generation Y thus destroying the English language. However, the evolution of language is a natural, changing process, and it is one that may not be as destructive as the popular media portrays it to be. The increased use of technology and media use has changed not just the minimalistic grammatical changes, but the overall attitude of language allowing us to look at the bigger picture. According to an article from the Educational Leadership publication from 2009, a study was performed that showed that acronyms, abbreviations, and even misspellings are infrequent among college-aged students despite the linguistic strangeness of online lingo that journalists seem to sensationalize. This study showed that out of 11,718 words of a college students instant messaging conversation, only 31 words were online lingo abbreviations, and only 90 were acronyms (of which 76 were LOL) (Baron, 2009). In college context, however, college-aged students tend to know the difference between online lingo and the accepted English language across the curriculum. While some students may accidentally slip a new aged acronym (btw,

Holland 2 omg, smh) into a school essay, a study by the Pew Internet and American Life Project confirms that even middle school and high school students understand what kind of language is appropriate and in what context (Lenhart, Smith, & Macgill, 2008). Moreover, as an English major who hopes to become a secondary education teacher, I have high hopes of the preservation of language as we know it. However, I am not in agreement that new technologies are butchering the English language, but rather encouraging creativity and allowing flexibility with language in a way that was not before possible. Although I am specifically an English major, I am a large advocate for introducing new languages into the curriculum particularly in the United States. This new age technological language is something that will help language in itself grow, not squander it. For example, I communicate with students around the world through technology such as Facebook and Twitter. Although we may not speak the same language, I can understand when he or she posts a link that has the caption LOL or OMG. Somehow, this use of language in the social media has become universally understood and at a rapid pace. The use of acronyms into everyday language is actually not as common as one would think despite the expeditious growth of social media. While I often hear OMG in conversation with college students (particularly with the female gender), I do not necessarily associate this acronym with the breaking down of language. It is not like OMG is that much easier or more efficient to say than Oh my gosh, but rather it is lingo people have picked up from shows like Gossip Girl or Clueless. What was supposed to be satirical has become a common day form of speaking. However, these neologisms need to be put into perspective. Infusion of written acronyms into everyday speech is a common linguistic process-- RSVP and ASAP are a few more lexical shortenings that have made their way into general usage. However, because these

Holland 3 acronyms are not related to the social media or Generation Y, they are not criticized with as much scrutiny as words like BRB are, a more modern acronym. An alternate criticism about this new age social media spin on language is the increased compound of words. Ten years ago, emails used to be called electronic emails which switched to e-mail and is now more popularly referred to as email. However, this occurrence has been relevant for ages. For instance, looking at the word newspaper. Historically, newspapers were called news papers. Eventually, when words are used as often as new paper once was, they will become hyphenated, and if popularity increases, ultimately the hyphenated word will become a compound. URL addresses essentially make all words compounds. For instance, when I want to go online shopping, I can type in nordstromshoes into the browser (no capitalization, no spaces, no www or .com), and I will instantly be redirected to the Nordstrom shoe department website. I use compounds on the internet and websites because it is easier and it allows me to. However, in the real world, or in contexts in which I see an importance to differentiate between nordstromshoes and Nordstrom (space) shoes, I will make that distinction. The use of media and online devices allow me to shorten, to abbreviate, in a way that I would not in a more formalized setting. However, if I were to compound certain words in the real world, would it necessarily be an obstruction to the English language? One of the larger concerns over the increased use of technology and social medias is the diminished concern over spelling and punctuation. Students today have spell-check and search engines which automatically correct ones spelling. Iphones are finishing ones sentences, and now a thesaurus or dictionary is at the tip of ones fingers. It makes one think that learning how to spell is almost anachronistic. Sometimes, on websites like Facebook, I see your, youre,

Holland 4 ur, and yer used interchangeably. I cannot help but wonder to myself if these Facebook users are doing it purposefully or if they just simply do not know better or care. At the same time, I cannot judge them because I understand the point that they are getting across. As the 2009 article Are Digital Media Changing Language points out, these effects on vocabulary and sentence mechanics are actually fairly minor because new words enter languages all the time, and even Oxford English Dictionary reveals that lexical practices evolve so much that yesterdays oddity may be todays norm. However, despite how minor I portray the grammatical and lexical changes to be, the article points out a shift in the overall attitude of language due to social media. Ever since the movie Clueless came out and Cher was putting her two hands up in a shape of the letter W casually, but with attitude, saying whatever, I have been convinced there is a shift in the attitude that goes with language. Language is a rule-governed behavior that are constructed by people and their behavior. Girls my age aspired to be Cher, and with that, words akin to whatever and the increased use of like were abruptly put into our vocabulary. Many people today use the word abbrevs in place of abbreviations or legit instead of legitimately. While this appears to be an easier, more efficient way of saying a term that essentially means the same thing, it may also show the shift in attitude, the attempt to conform into a language that is cool (depending on the audience). Often times, I will walk into a party and hear college-aged students speak in a language I barely recognize. However, these are all well-educated, intelligent students. Are they using these arbitrary terms in their essays? Their interviews? I believe the answer to be no.

Holland 5 Generally, the critical attitude regarding the use of proper English terms has lightened. For example, as a future teacher, I am encouraged to use a green pen instead of a red pen and to make as few marks as possible. Today, teachers are more concerned with the larger picture, not necessarily the small grammatical errors. It is important to remember that it is not just the students who are using this technology such as Facebook and Twitter, but teachers and adults as well. My father can work an iPad faster than I can work a proper computer. He is more quick to abbreviate than anybody my age. I see this shift not as a generational thing, but as part of a revolution of language due to technology that enables us to think about the larger picture and become less concerned with normative, prescriptive grammar. Students may have more of a lassaiz-faire attitude towards grammar simply because their computers, their media devices, and their teachers are allowing them to. In a sense, while this may decrease certain linguistic features, it increases human expression and acceptance of languages. It allows readers to focus on the importance of what is being said not how it is written. However, I cannot conclude my argument without at least acknowledging the fact that grammar does matter in different contexts. This shift in language is simply part of a cycle that all normativeness in language goes through. I foresee terms like BRB becoming less popular instead of more popular depending on how the media portrays them to be and whether or not students pick up on them or decide they are uncool. So much of language is the attitude that goes with it. Right now, multiculturalism, acceptance of different dialects and languages, abbreviations, and acronyms are definitely becoming more accepted and incorporated into the educational curriculum. However, similar to politics and taste in music, change will continue to occur no matter how hard one drags ones heels. Not everybody is going to jump on the band

Holland 6 wagon and this is okay, too. Language will always be changing, and technology is simply the catapult for that change today. With this increase in acceptance of todays language and writing, who knows what tomorrow will bring?

Works Cited

Holland 7 Baron, Naomi. "Are Digital Medias Changing Language?" Educational Leadership 66 (2009). Lenhart, A., Smith, A., & MacGill, A. R. (2008). Writing, technology, and teens. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.