In his article, "Meeting the Paradox of Computer-Mediated Communication in Writing Instruction," Stuart Blythe discusses, among other things, the unique features of language as it's used in online communication. He says, "Linguistically, CMC can be characterized as a hybrid that sits somewhere between talk and writing" (119). Indeed, CMC has no real world equivalent. While chat room communication may take on some characteristics of a face-to-face discussion, it has some distinct differences. For example, we lose the benefit of non-verbal cues that we rely on during a face-to-face chat. However, it's not the same as any other form of written correspondence either. When we send an instant written message to someone, we expect a reply in pretty short order - usually in a matter of seconds. Also, the typing demands of instant messaging are creating a new type of virtual short hand - lol, brb, U, etc. The pressure of matching the response time of verbal communication with typewritten communication actually seems to be reducing written words to their essential communicative cues. One could make a fairly convincing argument for the case that what is occurring here is really the formation of a sort of pigeon language. Rather than this being a language developing out of the communication needs of speakers of differing languages attempting to interact, we have a language drawing on several modes of communication to meet the needs of an entirely new and unique mode of communication.
Indeed, I have already seen several instances of virtual language interference in the writings of my freshman, here at BG and elsewhere. Some of them occasionally lose track of the mode they are working in and use abbreviations like "U" instead of "you" or "B" instead of "be" in their academic writing. While this was pretty alarming to me when I first encountered it, I have to admit that I find it kind of fascinating at the same time. It's amazing to witness and even participate in all of these new communication circumstances as they act on language and force it to do new things. Many argue that this kind of language on the net - and its increasing appearances off the net - is diminishing the richness of the English (or other) language, but I would argue that the expressive potential of language is actually increasing. Before CMC, language never had to do what it is doing now; the truncated expressions and other emerging features of CMC are not rotting away the existing expressive power of language, they are simply adding new expressive techniques to meet the needs of new mode of communication.
While Blythe does briefly touch on this in his article, David Crystal's book The Language of the Internet provides a more thorough and insightful study of this emerging language of the Internet.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Joe,
You're discussion about instant messaging and first-year students' writing habits reminds me of an NCTE article about text messaging and how it's negatively affecting student writing. I can't remember the name of the title or author. I know that doesn't help, but if you research on NCTE's web site, technology specifically the use of text messaging is a major concern among teachers. If I find the article, I will post it for you. Anyway, I remember reading some of the article to my students, and it promoted discussion about language in various forms and its use depending on the situation. I also asked them what they thought about the article, and they disagreed with the author, as do I. But, it was interesting to hear what the students had to say about technology in the classroom, and the scholarship that's out there about it.
Cool! Thanks for the tip; I'll check into it.
Crystal's book is a cool resource. I often tend to think of the distinction as a type of grammar, and indeed, there seem to be internet grammars emerging that don't typically carry the same weight in academic contexts. It seems to me, however, as rhetoricians, we can find ways to help our students understand the audience differences that make text messaging emoticons and acronyms appropriate in one context but not in another. Regardless, I find the idea of using texting or IMing in the classroom a possibility for contact with our students that we wouldn't normally have, especially in the case of IMing for virtual office hours.
Post a Comment