'How Modern Technology Affects Language Essay\r'

'Language and spoken communication argon the almost important intangible things we have as humans. Having the ability to communicate abstract ideas with former(a)s by making sounds with our mouths is what sets us a subroutine from other Earth-walking animals, and is quite incredible when you think nigh it. However, when the times c precipitatee, quarrel changes right with it. We argon now in what is called the â€Å"Age of engineering science” and the major increase in office of the internet, mobile devices and TV has created a undivided spic-and-span set of wrangle that ar being looked at as insalubrious to traditional language. I do non think the language of late media is subvert communication but lot, and the idea that it is helping comes from a yield towards adolescenter people.\r\n state are generally afraid of change. So it’s understandable why somebody who grew up talking a accepted bearing, would be quick to be against the behavior a new gener ation was talking. former(a) people feel as if the vocalizes that new media have introduced to our culture are â€Å"slang” and are making us dumb because it’s taking over the traditional way of speaking and report English. If e actuallyone had this mindset, we would still be speaking manage Shakespeare. In the video â€Å"Tweets, Texts & Myths” by Professor David Crystal, he disproves the common myths of forward-looking vernacular. Crystal talks about how this â€Å"new” language is non really employ as much as believed, and that they do not hurt people’s ability to write and communicate in a formal setting. Through a classroom study, Crystal found that those students who utilize the language of new media the most real received higher marks on written assignments. So perhaps new language is not hurting, but in fact helping.\r\nA big part of the movement against the new language that jalopy media and technology have created is a bias towards younger people, who are the ones that use it the most. flock fail to realize that just because psyche is young, does not mean what they are doing is wrong. any group of people has their differences in how they avow things, from rocket scientists to a sports team, yet because the young people are doing it, it’s labelled as â€Å"dumb and detrimental”. In the yellow packet we received in class, it reads â€Å"while ‘spaced out’, ‘hang’, or ‘lol’ are widespread and intimately understood…this ‘teen argot’ is viewed as slang while the arguably level(p) less-penetrable â€Å"’szujet’, ‘diegesis’, and ‘metalepsis’, are recognized as technically appropriate terms for professional literary theorists. (I think it’s ironic how when type this, the â€Å"sophisticated” words all were not recognized by the computer).\r\nLanguage is very versatile and sho uld be. At it’s core, language is nothing but a way to communicate, so why does it effect how it’s done as long as it’s done? If you’re dictum the same exact thing, why should it matter if you abbreviate a few words or add a word that’s not in the vocabulary as long as your earshot understands? I think that we have to fly our biases when it comes to something like language and allow for everybody to do what works the best for them, because they are the nevertheless one that it effects.\r\n'