Slashdot Log In
"L33T" Speak Invades Schools
Posted by
michael
on Thu Sep 19, 2002 10:52 AM
from the reminded-of-megatokyo-t-shirt dept.
from the reminded-of-megatokyo-t-shirt dept.
Masem writes "NYTimes reports on how common chat room/IM shortcuts (such as 'u' for you, 'r' for are, etc) are creeping into the classroom and homework assignments from those teenage kids that spend a significant amount of time in chat programs. This is giving the teachers headaches in trying to grade the assignments, much less understand them because of the techno-generation gap, and to try to prevent further abuse of the language, have begun penalizing students for using the net slang. Students sometimes don't even realize they use the chat room shorthand until it's pointed out to them, because that method of chatting has become second nature to them."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
"L33T" Speak Invades Schools
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 1546 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Interesting)
same story, different decade...
the world was going to go to hell in a handbasket when:
* kids started using calculators instead of slide rules
* kids started typing homework on PCs with spell checkers
* kids started using the 'net as their research source, rather than the library
really, now. it's an interesting sign of the times, but then again, there have always been kids who've used the vernacular in their writing, whether it be poor grammar, slang, or whatnot.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
* kids started using calculators instead of slide rules
* kids started typing homework on PCs with spell checkers
* kids started using the 'net as their research source, rather than the library
All of these things have degraded the efficacy of educating our children. Shouldn't teachers do their best to discourage netspeak in assignments?
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
Spell checkers are not bad if they do not have to rely on them.
Same with the net sources, must be a 'reliable' source.
One thing that wasn't mentioned - contractions weren't allowed at one point, but now they most definately are.
I do not think that netspeak should be allowed in assignments, but like it or not they will probably get into the language just like contractions have.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:4, Insightful)
i don't think efficency has decreased any, it's just that a greater number of less capable people are being introduced to school systems in the US at a greater rate than we're comming up with ideologies as to how we're going to teach those who are not the socially elite that have been in schools for centuries.
For the record, I was commenting on the efficacy of education, not its efficiency.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a calculator is used in place of learning, instead of in place of unneeded repetition, it harms the education. There were 8th grade students in my Middle School who couldn't multiply on paper because they were provided with calculators, as to not slow down the rest of the class.
If a spell-checker is used to correct the mistakes without the user realizing they are mistakes (this is why AutoCorrect is evil) then the user never learns, never corrects the behaviour. A student may rely on spell check instead of learning to proof-read. "John the ate hamburger alter noon non Sunday whiff Jane." This sentance is full of real words but means nothing.
The Internet as a reasearch tool is both good and bad. If the student has been taught how to identify good sources, then it speeds the research process, and does not hinder the report. If they have not been taught, they will take "Crazy Al's House of Historical Info" word for the "fact" that Paul Revere was a cross-dressing minister. The Internet has no Dewey Decimal system, and students have to be more alert when performing research online.
"L33T" speak, as the article calls it, has no such beneficial effects within the classroom. Shakespeare, Mark Twain, even Plato probably used local vernacular when talking with others and in their writings, but this is lazy short-hand. To compensate for the inability to type quickly, the unwillingness to practive, an impetuous attitude toward learning basic activities such as spelling, and an overall disinterest in anything but the moment, "L33T" is as pathetic a waste of time as in AlTeRnAtE CaPiTaLiZaTiOn. Further more, the failure to recognize the difference between social and structured situations shows a degredation in the quality of our "social graces" for which many fingers have already been pointed, not least at education and parenting.
Some chat typing can be considered onomatopoeic, such as "kewl" and "schweet", where the spelling more accurately describes the pronunciation of the word. This should still not be used outside of social chatting/dialogue, but it is a slightly different facet of the problem.
--
I'm too young to be this jaded.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:4, Interesting)
Regarding multiplication: Calculators break, or the batteries die. And I'm the only person I know who carries a calculator with them at all times.
The answer to a person being unable to function without their tools is not to make the tool more pervasive. This goes for calculators and spellcheckers (which don't correct the missuse of 'to' and 'too' -- do you check for this yourself?).
On "IRC speak": I have no problem at all with them using shorthand in appropriate situations. You're taking notes in class? You're talking on AIM or IRC? Fine. Use shorthand. In fact, I recommend that they learn -real- shorthand (you don't think these idiots invented it, do you?), as it provides more comprehensive rules for abbreviation, rather than a small number of replacement words.
The problem is that they were unable to recognize that they were using this shorthand, or when it was inapporpriate to do so. Reports in English class (which shorthand IS NOT) should be in English. Actually, in school the secondary objective of any report (whether in English class or not) is to teach effective writing, and thus should also be in English.
It's like people who use a lot of slang. All of the heavy-slang users I've ever hung out with know it's slang they're using, and can stop when the situation warrants.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
* kids started using calculators instead of slide rules
And they lost the grasp of how arithmetic works, and the value of being able to do simple computation in their head. The use of a calculator is nearly effortless, and so why bother being able to subtract $121.49 from $349.41 in your head, when you can just punch it in a calculator. And we wonder why the number one reason for college dropout is bad credit, because they can't even keep track of 3-digit spending. Don't get me started on scientific calculators, which help students forget that 3+4*5 does not equal 35.
* kids started typing homework on PCs with spell checkers
And they lose the ability and preference to proofread the things they write. My wife asks me how to spell just about everything. She is incredibly brilliant, but has very poor spelling skills, because she has never had to remember how to apply spelling rules. Simple things like "I before E..." are lost when Word automagically corrects thier to their. And then those people show up on the web, where there is an obvious lack of spell checking. I am as guilty of this as the next person.
* kids started using the 'net as their research source, rather than the library
And they joined an entire generation of people who believe "If it is not on Google [google.com], it does not exist". If I were truly clever, I would post a Latin Descartes-like translation of that phrase, but since it isn't on Google, it doesn't exist.
Re: Descartes might have said... (Score:5, Funny)
Pie Jesu! You cannot render your thoughts into simple Latin? What is the modern education coming to, then?
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maths isn't supposed to be about just doing calculation with numbers, it's supposed to concern problem solving. Humans can be creative - computers can calculate - we're better off cooperating!
And we wonder why the number one reason for college dropout is bad credit, because they can't even keep track of 3-digit spending.
Thinking economically isn't as much about numbers as it is about being able to prioritize things correctly. That's much more important.
College Writing Course. (Score:4, Insightful)
One of the people that wrote in the class wrote a 3 paragraph rough draft that was half a page long.
Paragraph 1 he said the V-chip was bad. Paragraph 2 he explains the V-chip, and in Paragraph 3 he says the V-Chip is good.
I filled the whole back of his page explaining to him how this completely defeated the purpose of doing a rough draft, because I couldn't tell which side he wanted to take.
Kids have far, far greater problems than throwing in occasional 'l33t speak into their writing. The general apathy towards school is the main problem with them being undeducated.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which, of course, is the entire reason for having teachers grade papers. So the students can learn the difference.
Different modes of expression are like tools. I can cite examples of apparently perfectly intelligent people who use a crescent wrench where I would use a hammer or a screwdriver where I would use a pry bar. It seems perfectly natural to use one tool vs another to me, because I was taught (in some cases by experience) which tool to use in each situation. Furthermore, the process of learning to use a hammer for tasks appropriate to a hammer hasn't impaired my ability to use a wrench for purposes appropriate to a wrench.
Re:Kids these days... (Score:5, Funny)
Its true. Instead of smiling, I thought I heard one kid at the mall say: Colon! End Parenthese! Tilt head!
Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)
It might be second nature... (Score:3, Insightful)
It will help you in aspects of life that have nothing to do with computers (yes, they do exist!)
Re:It might be second nature... (Score:5, Insightful)
Replacing words in dictionaries is a constant, ongoing process. The word "D'oh!" was completely unknown to the English language five years ago; today it can be found in most major dictionaries.
Spellings, historically, have changed slowly but steadily; it's interesting to read a little Chaucer and wonder just how many steps it took for "soute" to become "sweet".
Meanings tend to change a little faster. For example, there's an early-20th-century piece of literature (whose name escapes me today) that includes the sentence "He fagged his way down the road until he was knocked up." meaning "He walked until very tired." Obviously, connotative meanings of those terms have rendered that sentence completely obselete.
It's an inevitability that text-messaging will make an extremely rapid impact on the English language. It would not surprise me in the slightest if, 150 years from now, the correct spelling of "you" actually is "u".
Re:It might be second nature... (Score:4, Informative)
And to think.... (Score:3, Funny)
When will they come out with M$ w3Rd 31337 ?
Good for teachers (Score:5, Insightful)
Good! More power to them! School assignments should be written in grammatically correct English, using proper spelling. This requirement might be lifted for certain creative writing assignments, but in general, this is what schools should be doing.
Re:Good for teachers (Score:5, Insightful)
And language serves a far more important purpose than to merely allow us to communicate with each other. Language allows us to communicate with our past. (Okay, it's strictly a one-way communication, but communication nonetheless.) I can go back and read things that were written five hundred years ago because the modern English language hasn't changed too much in that time. But going back much further than that, things get difficult.
Here's a version of the Lord's Prayer published in 1611.
Our father which art in heauen, hallowed be thy name.Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is in heauen.Giue us this day our daily bread.And forgiue us our debts as we forgiue our debters.And lead us not into temptation, but deliuer us from euill. Amen.
The most notable difference is the use of the letter "u" where we would use "v." Other than that, this passage is totally legible. It's slightly under 400 years old.
Here's the same prayer in Middle English, dated around 1384. (Apologies to anybody whose computer doesn't display the thorn, the eth, or the ae dipthong correctly. If somebody wants to go through there and add HTML entities, be my guest.)
Oure fadir at art in heuenes halwid be i name;i reume or kyngdom come to be. Be i wille don in here as it is doun in heuene.yeue to us today oure eche dayes bred.And foryeue to us oure dettis at is oure synnys as we foryeuen to oure dettouris at is to men at han synned in us.
And lede us not into temptacion but delyuere us from euyl.
This version is pretty radically different in spelling some word choice, but it's fundamentally recognizable. But look at the same prayer dated circa 1000.
Fæder ure u e eart on heofonumsi in nama gehalgod tobecume in rice gewure in willa on eorðan swa swa on heofonumurne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us to dægand forgyf us ure gyltas swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendumand ne gelæd u us on costnunge ac alys us of yfele solice.
Pretty much incomprehensible.
I would say that your typical "1337-speak" version of the Lord's Prayer would resemble the 600-year-old version more than the other two: it would be fundamentally comprehensible, but only after certain letter substitutions are made by the reader. A more exotic rendering using constructions like "sux0r" (although I know "sucks" doesn't appear in the Lord's Prayer; bear with me) would quickly start to resemble the 1000-year-old version.
So there's a good argument to be made that the kind of writing we're talking about here is surprisingly close to becoming another language entirely.
Re:Good for teachers (Score:5, Funny)
0ur F47h3r, wH0 4r7 n h34V3n, h4110w3d b3 7HY n4m3, 7hy k1ngd0m c0m3, 7hy wI11 b d0n3, 0N 34r7h 4s i7 iS iN h34v3n. G1v3 u5 th15 d4y 0ur d4i1y br34d, & f0rg1v3 u5 0ur tr35p45535, 4s w3 f0rg1v3 7h05e wh0 tr35p455 4g41n5t u5.
Granted, im not even remotely versed in lamespeek.. but thats about how it would look.
Re:Good for teachers (Score:5, Funny)
Well, that's just a character-substitution. To really translate the language, you'd need to update the older idioms.
(For instance, see how 1384's language "And foryeue to us oure dettis at is oure synnys as we foryeuen to oure dettouris at is to men at han synned in us" - which my layman's re-reading works like this: "And forgive (to) us our debt that is our sins, as we forgive (to) our debtors that is to men that have sinned in (against) us" - states explicitly the theological notion that sin is debt, whereas this notion had become implicit by 1611's wording.)
So - The Lord's Prayer, theology mostly intact, but rendered in 2002 'leetspeak:
Plus character substitution: (Score:5, Funny)
Now if that's not as incomprehensible as old English, I don't know what is.
Re:Good for teachers (Score:5, Funny)
So should Slashdot editorials, but how likely is that?
Re:Good for teachers (Score:4, Insightful)
Indeed, I recently moved to the US and was surprised that so much has a, shall we say, innovative spelling, Ez(easy), Lite(light), Thru(through), Kar(car), Kare(care), da(the) etc etc are very common mostly everywhere.
The english language is most definitely a living thing, and with several versions of it it's no surprise to me that kids have a hard time with spelling and grammar. There's english as taught in school, english as a less strict spoken language, english used with heavy slang, the bastardized english you see in ads and on billboards etc etc, just how are kids supposed to learn which is acceptable at a given time?
Re:Silly Silly... (Score:4, Funny)
Jethro at Harvard (Score:4, Funny)
It seems there was this very bright but somewhat uncultured young man named Jethro who grew up on a farm in the rural South. Because he scored well on his SATs and graduated from his simple country high school at the top of his class, he was pleased to find himself accepted into Harvard University. On his first day on campus, he took a stroll to acquaint himself with his new surroundings. At one point he stopped and asked a typical, blue-blooded Harcard upperclassman for directions.
"Excuse me, mister," Jethro asked with a Southern drawl, "but can you please tell me where the library is at?"
"See here, young man," the upperclassman scoffed at him. "I don't know about what they do in East Hayseed, Tennessee, but here at Harvard one does not end a sentence with a preposition."
"Oh," Jethro replied, "then allow me to rephrase the question: Where's the library at, asshole?"
Re:Silly Silly... (Score:5, Insightful)
I slightly disagree. It also matters that ideas are conveyed clearly to the intended audience. These kids need to learn that 31337-speak does not communicate clearly to the general public (or, perhaps more to the point, to their college-educated, non-technical teachers).
In particular:
The question that these kids need to ask themselves when writing, for homework or for anything else, is, "Will my mom/dad/aunt/uncle/grandma/grandpa understand what I'm writing here?"
Strictly IMO. ;)
Re:Silly Silly... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, but you see, this is a false dilemma. "Conveying the ideas accurately" and "Proper use of English" are not independent, or diametrically opposed. Instead, they are fully congruent. The only way to conveying the widest spectrum of ideas accurately to the widest spectrum of recipients is to use proper English.
To deny a child the ability to communicate in proper English is a horrible crime; it artificially limits their range of expression and the number of people they can communicate with, to the detriment of both the student and the potential recipients (using the naive model that "communication is good", which is good enough for these purposes).
There are some stupid rules in English, but over time, those tend to be eliminated or chaged. (Re: The increasing acceptance of "logical quoting [tuxedo.org]" by academia.) Most of the rest are there for good reason, which is that they reduce the ambiguity inherent in the language.
When a child is communicating with someone that they share a social circle with, they can communicate much more quickly by using conventions used by that social circle. In computing, we make heavy use of acronyms. In the IM environment, most people contract their speech a lot. The problem is that once the child leaves that environment, they can no longer do that and still "convey the ideas accurately to the recipient". We require a lingua fraca that everyone can be expected to know and communicate, or communication will degrade and finally break down. (This is not supposition; this is basically the mechanism by which new languages form. Look at the similarity of Spanish and French. Now look where those two countries are on a map. This is not a coincidence.) That lingua fraca is Classic English.
By having this "Classic English", we restrict as much as possible the possible ambiguities and downright mysteries about the language. (For instance, remember the first time you saw "brb"? Did you really know what it meant? Would someone who has never used a computer have any clue at all?) This is a good thing.
Classic English is and should continue to be the only acceptable mechanism of communication within the academic environment, with appropriate extensions as necessary for certain special-purpose uses (such as our vast library of acronyms). This is because Classic English is the only English that maximizes the ability to communicate the broadest selection of ideas accurately to the broadest selection of people. Anything else is a disservice to the student.
Re:Good for teachers (Score:5, Insightful)
Schoolteachers have one of the most difficult (and important) jobs imaginable. The job demands a lot of patience, kindness, diligence, and hard work. Do you know any schoolteachers who work 40 hours a week? Most of them spend their evenings grading papers and reading essays. And let's not forget that schoolteachers (along with firefighters and members of the military) are the most consistently underpaid professions in the American workforce. Despite that, lots of teachers find themselves using their own money to buy supplies for their students that could not be procured with the school's regular budget.
Most teachers aren't teaching because they couldn't (or can't) get a job doing something else. They teach because they love it, and it's what they want to do. A guy I used to work with quit his job and went into teaching high school; he now makes less than half of what he was making before, but he is much happier and is doing what he always wanted to do. Most of these folks could make a lot more money if they wanted to, but choose to remain with the low salaries and the misbehaving kids and long hours because they find it personally fulfulling.
That's not "pathetic." That's honorable. What's pathetic is people like you who haughtily look down your nose at people who are performing what is arguably one of the most important roles in a modern, civilized society. If it hadn't been for these "pathetic" teachers, you wouldn't be having this conversation right now.
Incidentally, if you think that replacing "you" with "u" and "people" with "ppl" represents a valid and useful evolution of the English language, then I'm going to have to side with the creationists.
Simple really, (Score:5, Insightful)
But if kids are using 'u' as you and 'r' as are you should fail the work they've done. That is the only way they are going to learn, even "better" perhaps would be to make them write the word 10 to a 100 times.
it's not that tough... (Score:5, Insightful)
So if you get a failing grade... (Score:5, Funny)
I could see making that mistake with you were typing a document, but if you actually write "r" instead of "are" in long-hand, you need to get the fuck out of the house more often.
Cop out (Score:3, Interesting)
--trb
It's not just in schools (Score:5, Funny)
A Note From Your Son's Teacher (Score:5, Funny)
U g0tz a k1d d4t 41n7 d01n h1z w3rK r1t3, b1zn0tch! h3 k33p t4lk1n L1k3 h3 41n7 g0tZ n0 c3ntz! WTF? U = p3n1s 1n U aZZ!
sux0rz 2BU! h0p3 y3r br4t g3tz h1z NUTZ ch0ppa 0ff!
-Mr. Demarcus
History Department
j00 m155p3|+ "NUTZ"..... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:A Note From Your Son's Teacher (Score:5, Funny)
#!/usr/bin/perl
@P=split//,".URRUUxR";@d=split
p{@p{"r$p","u$p"}=(P,P
);pipe"r$p","u$p";$p++;
$P:close$_}%p}p;p
until$?;map/r/&&, %p;print$d[$q]
translation into proper english (Score:5, Funny)
D33r MrZ. butts3x0r
Dear Mrs. Endlove,
U g0tz a k1d d4t 41n7 d01n h1z w3rK r1t3, b1zn0tch!
Your son is not completing his assignment correctly, ma'am.
h3 k33p t4lk1n L1k3 h3 41n7 g0tZ n0 c3ntz!
His manner of writing indicates a lack of formative education.
WTF?
I wonder why this might be the case?
U = p3n1s 1n U aZZ!
My experience tells me this is usually the result of poor parenting. For instance, a child's mother may spend more time with her husband or boyfriend than with her child, robbing him of important life lessons.
sux0rz 2BU!
The results of a bad upbringing reflect negatively on the responsible parent.
h0p3 y3r br4t g3tz h1z NUTZ ch0ppa 0ff!
Your son may find it difficult to complete his assignments at school, and may experience ridicule from his peers.
I can't say this comes as a surprise (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I can't say this comes as a surprise (Score:4, Funny)
How about this one: At my HS, we were required to memorize Areopagitica (sp?) by Milton. I didn't. I remembered the last name (Milton). So he took about 5-10% off per missing word. After filling the entire margin with Xs (the guy had a very strong OCD) he gave me my final mark (drumroll): -378%
Beat that!
In job applications too. (Score:5, Interesting)
Needless to say he told them to rewrite it (after getting a copy).
Bart Simpson (Score:5, Funny)
LOL is not a word
LOL is not a word
LOL is not a word
LOL is not a word
LOL is not a word
LOL is not a word
Break out the yard sticks (Score:5, Funny)
Could someone post the article here? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Could someone post the article here? (Score:5, Funny)
INGRAINED - Eve Brecker, 15, of Montclair, N.J., uses instant-messaging shorthand unconsciously in essays.
Or my version:
STUPID - Eve Brecker, 15, of Montclair, N.J., is a fucking idiot. Although she chats to strange men late at night, she can't be bothered to remember to use spell check.
Fail them -all-. (Score:4, Insightful)
The Internet is the greatest form of human communication ever developed, to cheapen it by using poor language out of a willful choice is just sad.
If anyone talks like that to me offline, I will call them a fucking idiot. To their face.
But what will the /actual/ 1337 speakers do? (Score:5, Funny)
EliteFellow: Ah-ha! My aiming skills are unmatched. I have such prowess it is as though I own you.
TricksterMan: Not so! Network latency has inhibited my natural reflexes!
EliteFellow: You deserved your comeuppance, you have been jealously guarding the Quadruple Damage for some time now without moving elsewhere!
I think that would scare me more than leetspeak, really.
Re:But what will the /actual/ 1337 speakers do? (Score:5, Funny)
Lanthorn: Fear and cower before my peerless accuracy, and precision, betwixt which you fell, a corpse, at my feet.
Nest: Ai! The decided lack of random access memory on this server acts like a fetter upon my facile grace. Niether you nor your comrades-in-arms, shall besmirch my gleaming armor with foul bullets this time.
Lanthorn: Cur! It is not your place to foul the air with your odious exhalations. You were poised stationary over the Quadruple Damage item, as poacher who uses bait lurks in the blind. I however on manuveur outflanked you and dispensed a rocket into your postierior.
Slang is not english. (Score:3, Funny)
It cracks me up to think there are people who believe that just because something is birthed of the internet it is devine. Be it music piracy, netslang, software piracy. I remember when I was an IRC junky I had to re-learn how to spell when it came back to the real world. Not to sound like an old geezer but people need to speak plain english, or whatever language you may speak. For those quick to point out my mispellings kiss my a** i'm a recovering undernetoholic.
Grade appropriately! (Score:5, Insightful)
I hate to sound like I'm trying to protect the "King's English", but chatroom slang became such in an effort to be able to convey ideas through typing at the rate of talking, and it should be kept to chatrooms. The last thing we need is a generation (gee, I'm sounding old at 26) of kids hitting the Universities thinking "ur" is a valid re-contraction of "you're", and "u" can easily replace "you".
Maybe teach typing... (Score:5, Insightful)
Additionally, the traditional abbreviations were for "online phrases." When wat the last time you used "away from keyboard - AFK", "be right back - BRB", "laughing out loud" - LOL, "rolling on the floor laughing - ROTFL", etc., in a real life conversation?
These abbreviations are more reasonable for phrases that would only be used in an online conversation. By that logic, "oic" is an acceptable abbreviation for "oh, I see", given that you only use it to convey an online emotion.
I feel like the best thing would be for teachers to penalize, penalize heavy, and encourage students to STOP using online conventions online as well. If people would write in more reasonable English, communication would be easier.
I find people nitpicking over typos, spelling errors, and grammatical errors strange. However, none of us (unless we are slashdot editors *grin*) should STRIVE to butcher the language.
Better command of the standard language improves communication. Has anyone whose ever held a job or been in an adult relationship ever thought "communication skills are over rated?" Most business and interpersonal problems stem from miscommunications, anything that helps that is a Good Thing.
Alex
My Wife is a High School Teacher (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. My wife has no trouble marking down anyone who uses "U" instead of You or "R" instead of Are. Teachers face no dilemma here; students do.
If you as a student cannot use proper grammar and spelling, then you are transferred to a remedial course. If you are still unable to use proper grammar and spelling, then further testing is completed in order to determine if you have a "learning disability."
If you're lazy and refuse to use anything but your "chat-speak," then you'll fail English and High School... then no more chat room, because the only jobs open to you won't pay enough for you to afford an Internet connection.
Learn to type! No, really! (Score:5, Interesting)
But then it hit me. It isn't laziness, but the lack of any real typing skills. Shorthand is simply a result of trying to be more efficient in transmitting your thoughts. Repetition of anything will develop into normal practice. This is evident in the ubiquitous and pervasive slang we have.
For me, I've been essentially a touch-typist since about the 9th grade and it only takes me a few hundredths of a second more to type YOU instead of U. My girlfriend however is a one-handed hunt and peck type. She also uses every short-hand substitute I've ever seen.
Perhaps it should become a requirement to teach kids to touch-type at an earlier age. This would not only facilitate more productive computer use but should also help foster proper language use by obviating the need for this type of shorthand.
sedawkgrep
It's good to see . . . (Score:4, Interesting)
That teachers are taking a stand and slapping kids down for getting lazy (or stupid!) is a good sign. That most of the comments on
Imagine:
Dangers of "chat" speak (Score:5, Funny)
"will u cum to camp next year?"
"please cum"
Some things should be fixed before they go too far.
What some people... (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, in a 'chat room' for Asheron's Call, where people would meet up when the server was not working, there would be many people using this 'leet speak', asking repeatedly for information. By simply using correct capitalization, punctuation, and spelling, I could often get many of the people there to heed my words as if I was a person of authority. Some went so far as to ask how I became employed at Microsoft - I was just a regular user like them, but my choice to use English correctly made them assume that I was someone who knew what they were talking about.
I try to encourage people to use the best spelling and grammar as they can when online. I just cannot 'respect' someone who can't be bothered to type "are" ('r') or "you" ('u') because they want to save themselves from typing two characters.
Try the above sometime. Use your best grammar and spelling and notice how others react to you.
(NOTE: I don't recommend this during intense-gaming situations.. "Help! I am currently in coordinates N7 being att... Uh oh, they have shot me with the... Aw, crap..")
My sister-in-law (Score:4, Insightful)
"Hey! I got a msg 4u. It's gonna be 2-cool 4evr!!!
I can't decide if that's more annoying than my sister and father, who still, in spite of my best efforts to educate them, haven't figured out the basics of the capslock key, new paragraphs, and punctuation in email.
chat room slang in homework? (Score:4, Funny)
CQ DX DE WB3IZT (Score:5, Interesting)
This may date me a wee bit, but I received my Amateur Radio License back in 1977, when I was 14. I had my novice ticket, so I was limited to CW (Morse Code) over the air. Since CW is a very slow way to communicate, there are many accepted abbreviations and codes. For example: FB OM NO QRM ON UR SIGNAL W9TACO DE WB3IZT Translation : Fine business old man, there is no natural interference on your signal. Your turn, W9TACO (the other person's Ham call), this is WB3IZT (my call).
I would never had dreamed of writing any school work using "code speak" much less expected to get credit for it. "L33T 5P33K" is the same way -- it may be fine on IM or in chatrooms, but it does not belong on school work.
BTW, I know W9TACO is not a valid call sign...if I need to explain it to you, forget it.
Of Course They're Penalizing Them (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of us don't even use that kind of slang on the internet. The truth is that it was created by people who either cannot type well or who type lazily. Those of us who understand that effective communication is important realize that typing in complete, correctly spelled, and well formed sentences with correct puncuation gets our ideas across in a more accurate way.
Of course, that doesn't mean that we have no spelling or grammatical errors -- it simply means that we try to communicate our ideas using grammar that is correct. It also creates less confusion for us, because we don't have to remember in what context we're writing and "turn on" or "turn off" our grammar rules.
RP
My MUD speak has invaded my chatrooms (Score:5, Funny)
Oh well,
who sort
I guess that's what we get for living online these days.
l
sc
This annoys me to no end. (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose, what bothers me the most is that it just looks and feels retarded. I remember thinking back to first grade, when we were all still learning how to spell. Sometimes it took a while for it to kick in that YOU is not spelled U just because they sound the same. Or SUN/SON, etc etc. With first graders, its an acceptable faux pas. To do so intentionally when you clearly know better is at the height of moronic. I understand the need/desire to abbreviate long words sometimes, but u for you, r for our/are and the extra retarded ur for your, just makes NO credible sense.
And while sometimes I'm willing to write off this stuff as the juvenile swill from those "Damn teenagers", when I see people in their 20's+ doing it, it just makes me sick.
Well, sick is perhaps too strong a word. It just makes me feel artifically intellectually superior to them, and I no longer want to spend my time conversing. Of course, there's always the chance that my assumptions are correct... and perhaps that explains it.
Ok, rant done. Moderate as you will.
-Restil
Its very simple, folks. (Score:3, Interesting)
However, in a formal setting - and by formal, I mean the workplace, any education setting (As a teacher, or as a student), or the media (newspaper, magazines, etc.), a standard basic form of the language is necessary so that the average person can understand what is being said or written.
This means leaving out slang that specific to an activity, ethnic group or region. (IE: Netspeak, ebonics, or southern "American"). It also includes spelling, grammer and basic editing for clarity of thought.
-Notes-
*Slashdot is -not- a formal setting, so put that red pen away now and stop correcting my spelling. I don't care enough to hit the spellchecker.
*AVERAGE person. Not "Drooling moron", not "Ignormus who never bothered to pay attention in school.", and not "Non-speaker of the language."
No place for text message style abbreviations (Score:4, Interesting)
The other thing that comes hand in hand with the abbreviations are the lack of punctuation, capitals, or grammer. I have had entire e-mails with no capitals or full stops. It takes a long time to work out what is going on. And people claim they couldn't be bothered using the shift key (or whatever). Surely it takes more effort (if you ever learnt to type properly) to remember to not use the shift key?
I have kicked people off a mailing list I administer because they don't make any sense for the reasons above. I don't reply fully to e-mails, I just tell them to send it again so that I can understand it.
I also find that the people who send the mails like that tend to be quite stupid. I got an e-mail along the lines of:
"do u knw abt undergorund rails"
That was it. I asked what he meant by underground rails. The reply was like this:
"undergorund rails in croydon"
I again asked what he meant by underground rails in Croydon, as it is quite ambiguous, and the area very large. Response:
"my dad told me"
At this point, I wrote an e-mail explaining how much easier it would be for him to just type properly and explain what he meant. I think he wanted me to tell him all I knew about underground features in the area, but I couldn't be bothered because of his attitude.
Yes, there is a place for them on phones and SMS as they aren't easy to type on (even with practice, you can't do 80wpm on a numeric pad). There is also a place for acronyms, such as LOL, BTW, BRB etc. because they actually save a lot of time.
I can tell some bastard is going to send me SMS speak mails now just to wind me up...
Language change (Score:5, Interesting)
English doesn't do that. English does have an elite that decides what is in the standard language, but that elite is the collection of writers, editors, and lexicographers who work with the language in the modes of cultural production. So, what Standard English is is decided by a literate elite, but membership in this literate elite is open to anyone based on merit.
But that is not all. Beneath that "high brow" crowd who write literature and scan literature for new usage, there are hundreds of thousands of idiomatic communities speaking and using untold varieties of English. These are not "Standard English," but they are living, breathing, socially functional dialects of English. From time to time, a writer of genius emerges from such a community and brings new usage, idioms, and ways of speaking into that "staid and stuffy" elite. Those portions that speak in new ways, ways that other communities of English find useful, get taken up by the English speaking world at large. Then we find these new usages showing up both in other dialect communities, and in the elite world of "Standard English."
Thus the world of Standard English is reactionary, conservative, and resistant to change, but this is as it should be. This is the force of stability that allows us to read (albeit with difficulty for some) six hundred year old Elizabethan English, like Shakespeare, and should allow English speakers six hundred years from now to read Toni Morrison or Neal Stephenson. At the same time, the vernacular throbs with creativity. Vibrant and electric new words, phrases and idioms crackle into being every day. Most are lost. Some appear only in the margins, in the throw away dialoge of television scripts, or in idiom spoken by characters in novels; mere markers in the history of the language. Some, however, merge into that conservative realm where they join such everyday poetry as "being blue," or "flight of stairs."
I've studied only a few of the world's languages, but so far English is my one true love. Latin and French have their charms for me, but English owns my mind. I treasure both the stodgy elite (which anyone may join; all one must do is add to the great literature of the English language -- no problem!), and the endless, almost frantic, creativity of everyday speakers of English.
Bearing in mind all of the foregoing, schools are not there to institutionalize the random creativity of English. That takes care of itself. They are there to be sure that we all have access to the stodgy collection of Standard English, so we may get our random creativity past the reactionary gatekeepers of the language. All good literature simultaneously reveres the language and subverts it. The most striking example, to me, is "Huckleberry Finn," the first novel with real American voices in it, as opposed to a bunch of Americans speaking more or less just like British speakers of English. Reverence and subversion.
Basic English (Score:4, Informative)
An interesting "fork" of the English language is Charles Ogden's Basic English [basiceng.com]. Basic English is like a Esperanto for the real world. Ogden wanted to create a small, consistent, non-redundant subset of the English language that would help foreigners quickly adapt to an English-speaking country. His languages contains just 850 English words of use in everyday conversations. He claims that it takes seven years to learn polished English, seven months to learn Esperanto, and only one month to learn Basic English.
I wish someone would do the same for other languages, such as Spanish. I guess you could just translate the Basic English dictionary to Spanish, but that does not address consistent grammatical rules like Ogden's book did when designing Basic English.
Language Migration (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an American, and I'm studying linguistics (amongst other things) in New Zealand. It's an interesting place to study linguistics, because New Zealand is one of the very few places (if not the only place) where there is a fairly complete aural record of the evolution from it's roots in the United Kingdom to it's modern form.
Language is a hard target to pin down. Even in countries that try to limit linguistic migration (such as France) can't slow it down significantly, even in times without huge revolutions in communication. English is one of the fastest changing, and most diverse languages on the planet, and it only takes the space of about two generations for the "proper" high culture forms of the language to change significantly.
A major shift in communication technology makes the changes occur much, much faster. The advent of radio made western urban American English the "proper" form of American English in the span of about five years. National broadcasters go through an enormous amount of training to develop that accent, as do politicians and other public figures. Listen to Clinton's speeches at the beginning and end of his term, or even how George Bush's (much ridiculed) accent has started to change.
It's expected that the Internet will have the same effect on written languages that the radio had on spoken languages. Interestingly enough, it wasn't until the advent of the newspaper that English spelling (both American and British) became more or less standardized across large geographic regions.
Ironically, the first place to hear about a significant change in language is in the editorial / opinion sections of news papers
Anyhow, I suspect that the practice of using 'oic' and 'l8r' in written English will expand dramatically over the next decade. Distasteful? Perhaps. But keep in mind that there's only one standard for language: the de facto standard.
{LOL} (Score:3, Funny)
Note on a students assignment:
"Learn to FSCKING spell!!!1!11!".
Oh, the irony.
Can this affect how our brains work? (Score:3, Insightful)
An interesting meme I wanted to throw down is that language is more than just communication, it's a formal way of constructing ideas not only for communication to others, but also in our own minds; Much in the way that mathematics has it's own language for the formulation and transmission of concepts.
If common English starts to lose it's formal structure and we descend into some kind of Taxilinga, I will be worried that the ability to formalise and construct logical thought patterns will be lost to some people (I guess it probably already is lost to people who say 'like' and 'know what I'z sayin' 4 times a sentence
I'm hanging on to Queen's English until the day I die either way
Real problem with education is the late start (Score:4, Insightful)
The long and short is that kids today are too easily learning things before the education system can get to them. There isn't a typing class until high school in most areas. Hell, I see many kids around seven that type 30+ wpm. They learn to read online via chat rooms, websites, and other methods before they are assigned Dick and Jane or Pug. Then, the intelligent children are asked to slow down so those without computers can catch up without feeling embarassment. This is sad, and it is why many Asian and European countries continually kick the US' ass in youth aptitude.
Let the kids that excel do just that. While I think "net speak" should be counted as incorrect English for papers submitted, the knowledge the kid posesses to use the chat rooms, computer, etc., should be commended.
I can sympathize (Score:3, Funny)
I can understand where these students are coming from.
When I was in elementary school, I found a secret decoder wheel in a box of... (checks box on shelf) Lucky Charms. I got so used to using it that I began encoding all my homework without thinking about it. My teachers didn't mind so long as I provided them with a secret decoder wheel of their own.
I was reading about encryption when I was in high school, and I would inadvertently switch into encoded mode, change the binary text to ASCII and write the corresponding binary string of numbers. Boy, was my English teacher mad when I turned in 20-page-long handwritten short essays... especially when I explained that the key was "mrs<omitted>sucks"
Still, the unencoded version used proper spelling and grammar, so there wasn't much she could do about it -- except send me to the principal's office. If these kids want to protect their intellectual property by encoding it (in their case, they're using L33t speak), they should at least adhere to proper grammar and spelling.
</sarcasm>
Bullshit. This is about POWER! (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Using numbers instead of letters is not a time saving technique. It's complicated and current keyboards make it a 'stretch'. (Those 3,4,5 and 7 keys are waaay off the 'home' row!) Indeed, 'leet' speak is used specifically to set people apart and stand one's turf in an age where being something apart from the establishment is really important. Though, it's so bloody juvenile! It's akin to spray painting walls with your 'tag' and by whatever a tattoo or piercing once denoted before such things became just another dipshit lemming affectation. (Hint: When more than 5% of the population adopt a trend, it slips from 'cool' to 'pathetic' really fast. Might as well wear a fucking Nike swish at this point. --Too bad those tattoos are permanent, eh?) Anyway, 'Leet' speak is about conveying attitude, and means nothing beyond that. Most of it will pass same as all that cute jargon from the fifties, daddio, --and the 1910's, what what?
In any case, I don't think anybody uses 'leet' speak for real anymore anyway. It's turned into a square-ball's old fogey conversation topic, (yes, I'm talking to you). All the original users have moved right the fuck on.
2) Sure, language is whatever written or spoken sequence is good for getting ideas across. So 'U' instead of 'You' is fine. It works. We all get it, so get over it. However, those who use such simplifications exclusively are doing themselves a disservice because. .
3) POWER is the invisible factor here.
Twit-child who honestly doesn't know how to spell 'You', or who doesn't know when or why to capitalize, or who simply doesn't know how to construct words and sentences according to classic spelling and grammatical rules, is quite simply not going to get the respect s/he needs from the professional world in order to gain power in the higher rankings of society.
The fact of the matter is that there are millions of people who, upon receiving any correspondence littered with 'new & improved' spellings, are going to judge the sender ignorant, lazy and kinda slow.
The way things stand today, by knowing how to command written language with power and agility, one will ALWAYS have a much more successful time in dealing with banks, landlords, schools, government and businesses, -and all their fellow humans in any kind of written forum. Despite the logic behind new language validity, the impulse when one sees 'newspeak' is to think, "Fuck you, Loser." --And while you may want that on occassion, (there is power in everything), it's retarded not to be able to switch styles at a moment's notice. Why limit yourself?
So learn your ABC's kids. If not, chances are somebody will do worse than hurt you, (which they'll certainly try to do as well!). --They'll laugh at you with hate while you sink.
Lacking the facility to read and write properly is a one-way ticket to lower-class slavery.
Fantastic Lad
So What? (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if anyone reading Slashdot remembers the snafu over "Ebonics" from a number of years ago. Sometime in the 90's a school board in Oakland decided that it might be a good idea to recognize African American English(AAE)as a language spoken by a large percentage of its student body, and to educate teachers on how to effectively communicate with students. The Media(tm) had an uproar over it, and assailed them for trying to teach "Ebonics" as a foreign language. Much like Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders was trying to "teach children Masturbation", but I digress. I don't remember much about the incident as a teen, but I do remember the overbearing attitudes of my white peers and neighbors, which seemed to center around something like
"Why can't those damn black kids speak proper english like us?"
Linguistically speaking, AAE is a structurally and intellectually valid language, featuring complex syntax, pronunciation and grammar rules just like any other. I don't have the time or the resources to go into it, so I'll point you here [ucsc.edu]. The truth of the matter is that the culturally and economically elite have been using standardized language to assert their hegemony over society for years, and the same true in America as it was in the initial triangle between Oxford, Cambridge and London. Students in America are teased, ridiculed and insulted for the use of valid dialects in ordinary speech. If you're a white American reader, chances are spectacular that you grew up speaking standard English in the home. Well, how convenient for you. The real point of an English class is not to get students speaking standard English natively or ordinarily, but simply to afford them the ability to use it when necessary (Higher education, job interviews, etc etc). The Oakland schoolboard's original idea was to make it easier for this to occur; teachers would be able to show comparisons between AAE and standard English, and help students learn what they need to change where and when.
Instead our educators(and much of the slashdot readership)assert their supposed superiority by scoffing at the "idiocy" and "childishness" of non standard language features. So while I'm not going to make any claims that l33t is a full featured language, perhaps teachers should try teaching children what it is, why it exists, and how it differs from standard English. Encourage kids to learn and use a standard dialect for specific skills, but don't simply punish them as though their deliberately trying to pollute the language. Sometimes I think gradeschool needs basic linguistics classes just so kids can learn why their English teachers are being such assholes to them.