DON'T BLAME TEXTERS
By Julie Yap Daza
SMS (short messaging service) or text, they say, is killing English and doing it faster, I say don't worry.
English has been dead a long time; we just didn't give it a proper burial.
It's only a theory, but I dare stand by it because in the absence of real, solid data based on empirical
knowledge, I can't argue, without being a linguist, that text is a language all its own - a language
independent of English, therefore text can't be responsible for its demise.
The language of text on call phone is the language of abbreviations, a language so personal, yet so casual,
that it is easily shared with another person who belongs to the same ethnic or social class as the sender of
the message.
The abbreviated words are subjective inventions done without consideration of rules of grammar or
syntax, only of phonetics and spur-of-the-moment convenience, that they defy being classified as English.
From a friend, I learned the short cut for "I am" as "M." From another person, I learned to spell
"someone" ac "soml." Of course, by that time I had learned that "R" means "are" and "U" stands for
"You". As everyone who has ever texted knows, there are more than five ways to text "Thank You".
Every word in the English language lends itself to abbreviation, from "apple" to "zebra," so you can
imagine what texting in Tagalog with its repetitive prefixes and suffixes sounds like!
The people who murdered English before the invention of the cell phone have already done a good job; so
don't blame the deterioration of English as a second language to them.
Which brings me to the second point of my theory. Those of us parents and teachers who fret over the
death of English at the hands of murderers lose sight of the fact that the texters, who are not comfortable
in English, are not likely to spend their precious pesos communicating in an unfamiliar language, when
they could so gladly text in Filipino or Ilongo or Kapampangan. In other words, the continuing killing of
English will not be carried out by today's generation of non- English-speaking youths or adults. If English
is in danger, it will not be because of them.
And while it may be true that word in the national language tend to be long and kilometric, certain words
make a point more effectively and hit directly when texted in Tagalog, words like "cgue" (short for sige)
and "na" as in "tmv na" (to mean "tomorrow might be a better time") and "sana" (to mean "hopefully" or
"I wish"). Who says we cannot be bilingual in texting? English and Tagalog, and now a third language,
SMS.
When I tested my theory on an instructor handling a collegiate course in Scriptwriting, he provided the
good news that his students, writing in English or Tagalog as the spirit moves them, "are card-carrying
members of the text generation," but believe it or not, they write so well in English and Tagalog.
Questions:
1. What is the selection all about?
2. What are the claims of the author?
3. Were the claims supported by valid and reliable evidences?
4. Do you share the same views with the author on the topic?
5. What makes your views different from the author's views?
6. What makes your views similar with the author's views?
7. What is your personal take on the issue discussed?
Answers:
1. The selection is about the impact of text messaging on the English language and whether it is
responsible for its demise.
2. The author claims that English has been dead for a long time and that text messaging is not responsible
for its deterioration. She argues that text messaging is a language of abbreviations that is independent of
English and is easily shared among people of the same ethnic or social class. The author also argues that
non-English speaking youths or adults are not responsible for the killing of English and that bilingual
texting in English and Tagalog is possible.
3. The claims are not supported by valid and reliable evidence, as the author admits that it is only a theory
and lacks empirical knowledge to support her arguments.
4. Based on that, I believe that the author presents an interesting perspective on the topic and raises valid
points about the role of text messaging in language use. However, I also think that the use of text
messaging and social media has contributed to a decline in formal written communication skills, and it is
important to recognize the difference between informal and formal communication and to develop strong
written communication skills in both contexts.
5. My views differ from the author's views in that I believe that the use of text messaging and social
media has led to a decline in formal written communication skills, including grammar, spelling, and
punctuation. While text messaging may not be solely responsible for the deterioration of the English
language, it has contributed to a culture of informal communication that values speed and brevity over
proper grammar and syntax.
6. My views are similar to the author's views in that I believe that bilingual texting is possible and that
non-English speaking individuals are not solely responsible for the decline of the English language.
7. My personal take on the issue is that while text messaging may not be solely responsible for the
deterioration of the English language, it has contributed to a culture of informal communication that
values speed and brevity over proper grammar and syntax. It is important for individuals to recognize the
difference between informal and formal communication and to develop strong written communication
skills in both contexts.
