Information technology seems to have developed into a threat to the traditional systems of being learned and cultured. It is true though that every generation looks at a generation that follows as more corrupt and lacking in manners. This is more pronounced in language more than anywhere else.
Many people do not know how to spell properly since computers spell-check for them. Take for example the word accommodation which is usually misspelt since many ignore the double c and double m. Not only that; give a spelling quiz to a few colleagues or friends and ask them to spell words such as restaurant (which is usually misspelled as resturant) embarrass (which is usually misspelled as embarass) or a word which is as terrible in spelling as what it denotes: diarrhoea.
Spellcheckers were supposed to just that: check spelling. They have now developed into spellers; automatically correcting our bad spellings in word processors. This has led to the degeneration of our spellings with computers taking over and our brains becoming more and more like that of illiterates.
We do not only write using computers. The last 15 years have seen an explosion of cell phones with a keyboard through which persons can exchange short messages. This has led to the development of the infamous short message system (sms) which has been previously described by Sutherland as ‘bleak, bald, sad shorthand which masks dyslexia, poor spelling and mental laziness’. This bleak and bald system was the subject of a graduate student of mine’s research about two years ago. Ms Balibi Modibetsane study was novel and radical and very much unlike anything that had been attempted. She had posed a simple question for herself: What is a word in text messages? Like many simple questions, it was difficult to answer and methodologies of addressing it appeared complex. We resolved to use lexical computing and borrow strategies from corpus linguistics. The problem of defining words is well known in general language study and has engaged the minds of language researchers for many years. For instance, do the following constitute one word or four different words: walk, walking walks, walked? Is mother in law a word or three words? Modibetsane’s primary data was a corpus of short text messages from mobile phones of students and friends collected over a number of months. In total she collected 23,084 running words, corpus linguists would call them tokens, that is, entities separated by spaces on both sides in writing.
The study revealed that writers of text messages are faced with challenges such as the small screen of the mobile phone, a tiny keypad, the limit on the number of characters to type for each message, the need to communicate cheaply and the desire to engage in a speedy ‘dialogue-like’ mode of communication. It is these challenges which she argued motivated the use of abbreviations, initialisms, clippings and acronyms. The writers use different strategies such as omission of consonants, omission of vowels, and numbers to stand for complete words to address these challenges. Although other distinct individualized forms of writing were observed, writers of smses ensure that the resultant word is recognizable either by pronunciation or spelling as a replica of a longer conventional word. The general principles seemed to be, to ensure that the resultant word was comprehended by the reader.
The study found that in text messaging a word could be a number e.g. 2, 4, 8, 9; a combination of a number and alphabets e.g. 2niet, 4give, 4get, 9t, b2n, sum1; a single alphabet e.g. b, r, c, u; a string of consonants without vowels e.g. nyt, msg, knwn, smbdy; a full conventional English or Setswana word, e.g. love, take, bolelela; Vowels were omitted in words as in: Lv (love), nyt (night), nxt (next), tchrs (teachers). There was also omission of all vowels except the initial vowel in words: assnmnt (assignment), exms (exams). An omission of the vowel -e when it appears in the final position: abl (able), cultur (culture) was observed as well the omission of -e when followed by x- in orthographic spelling: xactly (exactly), xcept (except), xcuse (excuse), xpct (expect). However vowels in the central segment of a token were retained: abandnd (abandoned), intrtainmnt (intertainment), disqlified (disqualified). Where there was a consonantal cluster one of the consonants was omitted: kil (kill), killin (killing), kisin (kissing), leson (lesson). An alteration of the final -g in tokens with -ing ending: agin (ageing), agreein (agreeing), and allocatin (allocating). The research also found that the form of a token adopted during shortening is affected by the sound patterning and pronunciation of the word shortened. The writer ensures that the resulting shortened token remains similar to its long version. For instance when a token has a nasal ending, the ÔÇôg in the orthography is left out. This is because the [n] can be used to represent the same nasal sound while the [g] appears superfluous. In tokens such as xtreme (extreme), xcuse (excuse) and xplain (explain), [x] represents three English phonetic sounds [e, k, and s]. That is why it is possible to leave out the [e] since it is phonetically found in the pronunciation of the orthographic [x], making the preceding orthographic [e] superfluous.
The study found that text messaging uses numbers in a way that differs from their conventional usage as numerals. It revealed that numbers can be used as follows: 1. They can stand for complete words such as: 1 (one ÔÇô the nominal pronoun), 2 (too), 2 (to), 4 (for), 4 (fore). It was discovered that a number is used to represent a full word only when the pronunciation of that particular number is close or similar to the pronunciation of the word replaced. 2. Numbers can be combined with alphabets to form alphanumerical tokens. The study revealed that in alphanumerical combinations, a number can be used to replace the initial, central or final syllable of a word. The segment replaced by a number would be similar in pronunciation to the numeral. This is to ensure that the identification and comprehension of the word is not tampered with. Modibetsane’s study reminds us that technology though attractive; does have its disadvantages and challenges.
Technologists are not necessarily pedagogists and may care less about good spelling. Parents, teachers and examiners however do, and see texting as a thorn in the flesh ÔÇô a penmanship for the illiterate.
