shd txtspk b ok on frm

[gooders060981]

Proper English must also be more helpful for those non native posters using the forum who might find the txtspk confusing eg Ze Stade Fan, shedhead1

LOL!


And I did laugh out loud, which is the qualifier for me writing it. If I ever find something so funny that I roll on the floor laughing, I'll be sure to use ROFL as well.

This should show just how "out of touch" I am, I alway thought LOL meant lots of love!

[CoalvilleBob]

Are you sure you checked Merriam-Webster's? They don't seem so sure.

Merriam-Webster, Inc. Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, 1994. ISBN 0-877-79132-5. pp. 21–2:
acronyms A number of commentators (as Copperud 1970, Janis 1984, Howard 1984 and according to Apple Inc.) believe that acronyms can be differentiated from other abbreviations in being pronounceable as words. Dictionaries, however, do not make this distinction because writers in general do not:

Bob, you're confusing me. Isn't that what I said, i.e. an acronym is a word made from initial letters whereas an abbreviation is merely a collection of initial letters?

But that distinction is only made by some commentators. Dictionaries and writers in general do not make that distinction. Therefore it seems unreasonable to contradict Dailywaffle.

I hope he can forgive you.

[billybudd]

Absolutely not!

another day and I'm agreeing with Bill , it can't go on

[JonJon]

Isn't life full of spooky conicidences*? The word-a-day website (as recommended by Michael Rosen of the excellent Word of Mouth programme on Radio 4), has 'acronym' as today's word. While acknowledging the difference between true acronyms and initialisms, it concludes with the following;
'I’ll worry about specific labels for the different types when I’m called upon to write an academic treatise on the subject. For ordinary conversation and informal writing, I’ll go on calling them all acronyms.'
(But he is based in America, so we can't trust it too much)

http://tinyurl.com/7mxpsm


* No, it's not.

[IsraeliTiger]

So, breaking stereotypes as I go, I'm an 18 year old who *hates* text speak. If a friend sends me a message in text speak, I ignore it and then next time I see them, tell them to use full English. That goes for text messages, emails, message boards, anywhere. If I wanted to have to work in order to understand what people were saying, I'd move to America.


(only joking Americans partly)

[Bill W]

Textspeak has its place and that is for use on mobile phones. There is no place for it on this forum. If a person has the time to fire up their computer, log on to this site and decide to submit a post, then they have the time to construct a post in English.

Anyone who uses textspeak outside of their mobile phone is basically too bone idle to use proper language. Bill asked for our thoughts and these are mine. I'll now sit back and wait for all the witty ones amongst you to reply in textspeak as always happens when this topic is raised.

Fascinating Belper Jon, that no-one did!

There was some wit but none in text speak that I noticed.

[Darc Tiger]

I have been known to use minor textspeak on here.

I dont see the problem if it is still obvious what its intent is.

eg. If I put a 2 or a 4 or a u instead of respective words. I feel it is ok if it is obvious what it is saying and what context it is used in.

But not whole posts with missing vowels, letters and words etc.etc.

[dailywaffle]

Therefore it seems unreasonable to contradict Dailywaffle.

Wise words.
The usual is in the post.

[johnh]

Personaly, I would say no. English is one of the greatest and richest languages in the world with over 600,000 words; most people (me included) know/use less than one twentieth of that. Text speak is a bastardisation of our wonderful language and I for one refuse to use it. It's a sign of a lazy, feeble mind IMO (irony). Spelling and pronunciation is a different matter.....

[CJ]

interesting that more than 10% of people who view this thread actually respond. that's high. You've touched a nerve, Bill!

[Moose]

Just be glad that no-one on here uses 'leet speek'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet_speek

[watsonjm]

I cudnt disagree more! if u want young ppl 2 get involved with the club and stay fans wen they start paying themselfs u may have 2 get used 2 txtspk! times are changing with txtspk now allowed in many university course works and some A level schools its only gonna get more prominent.

Get with the times people!


and lets be honest, what a petty topic that cudnt b less related to rugby, bill I'm disappointed

[G.K]

Textspeak has its place and that is for use on mobile phones. There is no place for it on this forum. If a person has the time to fire up their computer, log on to this site and decide to submit a post, then they have the time to construct a post in English.

Anyone who uses textspeak outside of their mobile phone is basically too bone idle to use proper language. Bill asked for our thoughts and these are mine. I'll now sit back and wait for all the witty ones amongst you to reply in textspeak as always happens when this topic is raised.

I'm wi yew me duck, us Derby folk 'ave ta stick together an' uphold Kings English!

[bigted]

i dont see a problem with "txtspk" if you trying to alienate the younger generation then keep going because thats the way your going. its obvious that you dont know many of us even if your a teacher (bill). people have the right to write in the way you want. no one would be moaning if it was another language completely and it could be. dont forget english is based on a group of different languages.

and just the fact that someone had to make a topic just to argue about this is just silly pethetic and just shows how close minded some people can be.

[h's dad]

Personaly, I would say no. English is one of the greatest and richest languages in the world with over 600,000 words; most people (me included) know/use less than one twentieth of that. Text speak is a bastardisation of our wonderful language and I for one refuse to use it. It's a sign of a lazy, feeble mind IMO (irony). Spelling and pronunciation is a different matter.....

How do you think it got to 600,000 words? Because they got made up and added for whatever reason and now it's happening to suit new technology. Sorry but you've used your own argument against yourself.

(Assuming (irony) applies only to IMO and not the whole post)