Txting: not destroying English after all

An article in today's Scotsman on texting says that (gasp!) it isn't destroying English!: a new study has shown that far from being a scourge of grammar and correct spelling, users of instant messaging and texting are actually much more likely to use the Queen's English than the abbreviations that annoy purists. Several quotes:

A new study has shown that purists' concerns about grammar and spelling being killed off by new technology are misplaced.

Research by two linguists at the University of Toronto into the language used on instant messaging (IM) systems found that abbreviations made up only a tiny fraction of the communication and that even younger users were getting most of their grammar right....

The study of more than 1.5 million words of IM conversations found that just 2.44% of all the words used were text language, and almost all the abbreviations referred to laughing, such as "haha," "LOL" (laugh out loud) and "hehe". The study called the frequency of the text language "miniscule."

I've said it before and I'll probably say it again: spelling isn't grammar. Vocabulary isn't grammar. LOL isn't worse than radar or scuba, or Milton's "Why deign'st thou.. thou o'er earth bear'st sway" or Latin inscriptions such as

IMP CAESAR
DIVI NERVAE F
NERVA TRAIANVS
AVG GERM DACIC
PONT MAX TR POT
XIII IMP VI COS V
P P
VIAM A BENEVENTO
BRVNDISIVM PECVN
SVA FECIT
for

Imperator Caesar
divi Nervae filius
Nerva Trajanus
Augustus Germanicus Dacicus
pontifex maximus tribunitia potestate
XIII imperator VI consul V
pater patriae
viam a Benevento
Brundisium pecunia
sua fecit.

It's just spelling.

The article then quotes a couple of linguists. Sali Tagliamonte, professor of linguistics at Toronto:

"They are using 'shall' and 'must' in instant messaging like they use 'gotta' and 'I'll' in conversation. They're doing things your grandmother might do, and at the same time they're saying 'LOL'. They demonstrate very clearly that their grammatical skills are intact, and they very effectively mix it with other types of language."

Dr Robert Millar, senior lecturer in linguistics at Aberdeen University:

"Texting and instant messaging are not the first forms of communication to be accused of destroying language and grammar. It happened at the time of the telegraph and telegram when many criticised the use of telegram language. Abbreviations like gr8 have been used in language for centuries – there are examples even from the time of Egyptian hieroglyphics."

It's good to see someone writing a sensible story on "those kids and their language" for a change.

PS - they also quote April McMahon, professor of English language at Edinburgh University:

"There is no doubt that this technology is helping people maintain contact in a way that they would not have in the past. Emailing and texting are just so easy and convenient, and you can bash off an email to someone in a few minutes. They are causing us to have far more conversation with each other and opening new ways to stay in touch, and we are using them.

"I know that some people are nostalgic for the age of having a scented envelope picked up from the home and being with the recipient by two o'clock that afternoon, but I think most of us value the convenience of email and text messages."

Delivered on the same day? I remember reading about that in novels - there was an Agatha Christie once that hinged on having to deal with a letter that came in the last delivery of the day instead of the second one! - but I'm not "nostalgic" for that. I never had it. Cripes, there was a time when my area of the USPS had the worst service - including in the Territories - and it could take a week to get a letter from across town! Nostalgic for the physical letter - especially the scented one? Maybe. But nothing stops those from being sent, does it?