Why
are capitalism and social media to blame when the topic of language comes to
mind? The answer is simple: capitalism depends on communication, and during
times like this, communication depends on technology. What depends on all of
these factors though, is language. Language, defined by the Webster dictionary,
is “any means of conveying or communicating ideas.” (dictionary.reference.com).
It wouldn’t be ignorant for one to say that language is devolving, but they
would be sorely mistaken. Is language itself devolving, or is it the way we use language? Are people actually
afraid that using harmless phrases such as “ttyl” at their leisure are going to
cause the phrase itself lose its meaning? Will the phrase itself be disregarded
as a whole, which will inevitably cause us to become mumbling robots, losing
all means of communication as a whole? The obvious answer, is no (but that
would be kind of cool).
From
ads on twitter to discussing global marketing, capitalism and communication
depend on each other and have evolved thanks to the presence of one another.
According to Colin Sparks, “Web content is shaped by the dominance of business
with the result that “it is the discourse of business that dominates
cyberspace” (Sparks). Language is the backbone to the uproar of social media in
the 21st century in the presence of capitalism in America.
While
I believe language isn’t devolving as a whole, I do believe that in grammatical
terms, it should be taken seriously- especially in educational settings. Saying
things like “i luv jj howard her bookz r supr rad xD” for satirical purposes in
your AP language class is one thing, but allowing students to write on their
tests using “text-speak” as opposed to proper English is another. Schools in
New Zealand have lowered the standards of language by using shortcuts as
opposed to writing out words and sentences, “ New Zealand's Qualifications
Authority said Friday that it still strongly discourages students from using
anything other than full English, but that credit will be given if the answer
"clearly shows the required understanding," even if it contains
text-speak.” (USAtoday.com). Writing with abbreviations instead of the actual
word itself isn’t only ridiculous, but counterproductive.
The
purpose of abbreviations, in my personal opinion, is to allow us to portray our
thoughts conveniently, which sometimes results in using “lol” a little too much.
In language itself though, abbreviations have a purpose. When referring to a
village consisting of four houses, the author of Language in Thought and Action states, “Since this is much too
complicated to say each time, an abbreviation
must be invented. So we choose the noise, house.
Out of such needs do our words come- they are a form of shorthand. The
invention of a new abstraction is a great step forward, since it makes discussion possible,” (Hayakawa).
I think one would be entitled to think that what Hayakawa was trying to say is
that abbreviations simply make discussion possible.
Although
people can point fingers at social media for the devolving of language, the
conditions we live in today have put language to good use. From global
marketing to labeling in order to avoid repeating ourselves, language should
get all of the recognition for successes of the 21st century.
Works
Cited
Calabrese,
Andrew, and Colin Sparks. Toward a Political Economy of Culture: Capitalism
and Communication in the Twenty-first Century. Lanham, MD: Rowman &
Littlefield, 2004. Print.
Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com, n.d. Web.
27 Aug. 2015.
Hayakawa,
S. I. Language in Thought and Action. New York: Harcourt, Brace &
World, 1964. Print.
"Officials:
Students Can Use 'text Speak' on Tests - USATODAY.com." Officials:
Students Can Use 'text Speak' on Tests - USATODAY.com. N.p., 13 Nov. 2006.
Web. 27 Aug. 2015.
