Analysing and responding to the two articles ( comparing bth articles) - Essay Example

Texts communicated over the pagers were finally given the form of SMS during the 90s with a restricted length of 20 characters only. Not until 2001 texting rocketed as GSM companies finally made their way out on charging for these SMS and then arriving at lowest SMS package rates. Texting has been given an affirmative agreement that it helps and improves literacy rather than hindering literacy and shattering the roots of English language that has been previously regarded as the penmanship for the illiterates by John Sutherland, University College London in his research paper back in 2002.

As the critics to the use of texting John Humphry has been blaming SMS for savaging the English language and destroying the vocabulary, there are others as David Crystal that recognizes the fact the Texting has added a new dimension and it’s not at all a disaster to English language. Moreover the short abbreviated words such as “xlnt” for “excellent” and “gd” for “good” were seen before in a dictionary of abbreviations by Eric Partridge back in 1949, there were no text messages there.

Many texters really don’t disrupt the words and vocabulary in fact as the length of the text increases the standard orthography and information also increases and that is dealt with intelligence. T9 dictionary is also reserving the standard orthography and the new texters (particularly older and conservative people) go in line with this while texting. They find it quick, simple and easy that way. Moreover the use of institutional messages is all around us that adhere to the traditional orthography standards and refuse to depart from them at all.

They forbid the use of abbreviations and even the templates stored in the cellular phones use for quick messages are in complete proper English. According to American and Norwegian studies the use of abbreviations is relatively low that is 20% and 6% respectively. The point arises how it is ruining the roots of English language. So for those who say SMS has been raping our vocabulary is so much mistaken as they have been nurturing the misconceptions and they are just not ready to give technology an edge.

The critics realize the fact that a text is farther cheaper and saves time as it costs relatively far less than that of a voice message. The voice messages may last for ten minutes but you can easily go through a text message in less than a minute. That is time saving! A text definitely has distinctiveness associated to them. None of the texts are linguistically novel. This practice has been in there for centuries when the early computers used the informal texts centuries ago and also the same texts used in chartrooms before the onset of GSM texting services.

The critics regard the missing of punctuation mark between words as a very destructive phenomenon to English language and they frequently associate it with the arrival of texting. That is hoax. Many of the texts include alpha numeric for their completion. For instance, “2” for “to” and “4” for “for”, “C” for “see” and “u” for “you”. These rebuses are not a new thing. Some people take this as disrupting the communications but they forgot that while solving Christmas puzzles and even short hand used same abbreviations at various times so why associating all this to texting failures only?

Many words such as “