Impact of Txting on (Formal) Writings of Students
Abstract
This article aims at finding out the impact of texting or
features of online language on students’ (formal) writing. It is often assumed
that because of regular use of language on social networking sites or texting, features of texting or
online register are noticed in students’ (formal) writing which in turn results
in degrading standard of writing. To draw a conclusion regarding the formed
assumption, students
of a school and a college were selected to write dialogue in English. Along
with this, answer sheets of the examination of school students were collected
as the data. Apart from these, both students of the school and the college were involved in a semi-structured
interview focusing on the purpose of this article. The result came
different from the assumption. Since writing mechanics is, all in all, it is
clear that texting and/or social networking sites have encouraged them to write
more and more which has developed the habit of writing in them.
Keywords: social networking sites, texting/textism, online register, formal writing
Background
How would you react if you see something unexpected or
shocking in the language of someone’s formal and serious writing? The same is
happening to me when I read some of my students’ writing papers either they are
their classwork, home assignments, or exam papers. Two different causes, which
are going to be illustrated in this article, might be of unexpected language, I
guessed when I was cross-checking answer-sheets of the half-yearly examination
of the secondary level students of Model Secondary school (pseudo name). They
were asked to write a dialogue of six exchanges between two friends who are
talking about the picnic. In the answer to this question in most of the
answer-sheets, I found quite strange spellings of some words such as “u”
instead of “you”, “hlo” in place of “hello”, use of “&” instead of “and”,
and so forth.
Hemant:
Hlo frnd how r u?
Hema:
I’m fine & u?
Hemant: Good. As heard
you all are making a plan for a picnic.
Hema:
Yes.
Hemant: That’s gr8!
The language used in the preceding dialogue made me think
about my other students of BBS. I doubted whether it is the case with these
university students as well. To come out of this doubtful situation I decided
to check their language as well by assigning them classwork. Accordingly, I
checked it in my next class. I assigned them a task to write a short paragraph
on “My First Day at School” and they set to write. After they got finished with
their writing, I let my eyes move along the lines and surprisingly I noticed
the same as in my school students’ writing/language. I came across, for
instance, “gr8” instead of “great”, “&” in place of “and”, “frnd” in place
of “friend”, and so on. One of the students wrote, “…no frnds as I was new to
that school…overall my first day at school was gr8”.
As I felt obscurity that this language brings to readership
may be irritating for those who want to see language in its beautiful form, and
it is certainly annoying to me as well. This is not the case with me only. As a
teacher, most of us must have encountered such kind of bizarre spellings in
students’ writing papers which is certainly not expected by anybody else in any
formal writings. This bizarre language is considered informal and non-standard
and that will certainly irritate and annoy a teacher and an examiner, or
anybody else who wants to see well-versed language.
Introduction
Of course,
language is a means to
communicate thoughts, ideas, opinions, etc. People share happy moments, their
sufferings, and inconvenience. We communicate these things in many ways, but broadly speaking,
communication is mostly done through speaking and writing. So far writing is concerned, it is a
powerful and permanent means of communication. Bronowicki (2014)
states that throughout generations,
writing has remained one of the primary modes of communication. Over the course of
history, the method through which writing is conveyed has changed;
however, the goal has remained the same: to actively and effectively
communicate information in a clear and coherent manner. The overall
purpose of writing is to convey information to others in a way that can be
fully understood. Therefore,
one should be very
conscious and careful in terms of selection of words, phrases, along with correct spelling and
other writing mechanics. Otherwise,
there is a high probability of making writing ridiculous, and finally, it results in spoiling the aesthetic value of language which is nowadays very often noticed in language
users’ writing, especially in the writings of teenagers and/or students of
different levels: college level to school level.
In today’s scenario of the profuse use of electronic devices,
people are communicating with each other using varieties of technology. They
are exploiting electronic devices such as mobile phones, mobile devices, and
computers. These all provide them with different mediums of contacting and
communicating with others. They use texting/”textism” as well as Instant
Messaging (IM). The spellings and character usage associated with texting
and other forms of computer-mediated communication (e.g. email and instant
messaging) have been referred to as ‘textisms’ (Rosen et al. 2010, and Wood et
al. 2011 cited in Grace, A., Kemp, N., Martin, F. H. and Parrila, R.,
2015). If it is reliable data, one blog, Leftronic,
cites that 2.71 billion people in the world owned a smartphone in 2019 and more
than 5 billion people in the world possess mobile devices. As per the claim of
this blog two-thirds of the world, the population is now connected via mobile
devices and kids get their first mobile device around the age of 12.
In the fast-developing world of science and technology,
people seem to keep themselves busy in their activities to follow the new pace
of lifestyle of living. They appear in haste to communicate with each other
being in a face-to-face situation. Due to their busy schedule of daily life,
they express sorry and leave their face-to-face conversation incomplete which
they later complete being online somewhere on any social networking sites. On
the basis of the time they are seen to spend online, they seem to feel much comfortable
in chatting online than being in face-to-face situations. Here on the social
networking site, they enjoy texting or instant messaging using a different form
from the normal use of it, which today appears as a new register of online
language[1], i.e. online register, which
allows them to type their thoughts, opinions, ideas, etc. in words. While typing
messages they do not feel pressure to follow standard rules of
language. Vosloo (2009) mentions that texting does not always follow the
standard rules of English grammar, nor usual word spellings. It is so pervasive
that some regard it as an emergent language register in its own right. This is
largely due to the proliferation of mobile phones as well as internet-based
instant messaging (IM). They type the way they like.
Since people have been accustomed to using online language,
this is also reflected in their (formal) writing. Online language, which is not
generally considered acceptable, emerging as a new type of register is nowadays being noticed in
students’ (exam) papers as well. Vosloo (2009) opines that this new register of
online language neither meets the standard of language nor produces correct
spellings. This is the corruption of language and the degradation in
spelling. The pervasiveness of such language provokes “a very
strong, negative response from teachers, parents, and language experts (Lee,
2002 cited in Vosloo, 2009). In “Investigating the Impact of SMS Speak on the
Written Work of English First Language and English Second Language High School
Learners” for the degree of Master of Philosophy submitted at Stellnbosch
University, Freudenberg (2009) mentions that teachers either deduct marks for
features of SMS speak in written language or refuse to mark written work that
does not conform to the formally approved standards that the school has set in
place. In other words, what is vivid is that students’ written work with
features of texting will be marked or not depends on the decision of the
teachers and school administration. Journalist John Sutherland makes a bitter
comment in the Guardian of 11 November 2002 on
those who use such language that SMS speak “masks dyslexia, poor spelling and
mental laziness. Texting is penmanship for illiterates” (cited in Freudenberg,
2009).
As texting is the written lingua franca of many youths
today, (Vosloo, 2009), and Wood, Plester and Bowyer (2008) assert that despite
the popular view that texting is responsible for linguistic deterioration, the
“impact of children’s use of textisms on their reading and writing development
is not well understood” – largely due to a lack of empirical research because
all the studies have up to now been conducted have confined themselves in
texting has either focused on the language of texts or the uses to which
texting has been put, rather than linking SMS language with other literacy
measures (Thurlow & Poff, 2009), and Aziz, Shamim, Aziz and Avais (2013)
state that with the ever-increasing use of text messaging among students,
especially, teenagers, there has been a growing concern among educators,
parents, researchers and the general public that this practice is damaging the
use of language in speaking and writing and will affect the standard forms in
the long run; therefore, this article aims at investigating the impact of
frequent use of language pervasively used while chatting online or texting on
(formal) writing. The assumption is that this kind of online register of
language could lead to writing that displays features that deviate from
standard written English. This article also attempts to answer the question:
Who is more prone to the impact of the language used on social networking
sites or in SMS – either high school students or university students? Therefore, it is centred around:
-
Almost all the students, either of high
school level or of university level, use the online register of language
on a daily basis for a significant period of time and this is why features
of this sort of language are reflected in their writing as well.
- Because
of frequent or heavy use of online
register, the standard of writing is degrading day by day in their writings.
[1] Online
language: This phrase has been used throughout this article to refer to the
language, for instance, “u” for “you”, “frnd” for “friend”, “hlo” for “hello”,
“ni8” for “night”, which is enjoyed by social networking sites – Facebook,
Twitter, WhatsApp, etc. – users while chatting with each other being
online.
To meet the set
objectives for this article, the certain the methodology was followed by this article:
The population of the Study
Realizing the
significance of the study and how important the participants are for any
studies, I selected
the participants from the governmental high school, Shree Aadarsh Secondary The school (pseudonym), and the college, Model Campus (pseudonym) affiliated to
Tribhuvan University. Participants from the high school were all the students
of Grade nine and ten, and
the students of first-year graduate students from the selected college. The
number of participants from the school was 243 and 98 from the college. They
all were the users of any device facilitating them to compose
either SMSs or messages for Instant Messaging (IM) in real-time for chatting
with each other. Out of the aggregate number of participants, very few (12.32%)
were away from the access of Instant Messaging; however, they were familiar
with the language used in texting and on any social networking sites.
Tools for Data Collection
The used tools for this purpose were the questions which
participants were assigned as classwork to answer in written form and the semi-structured interview which is open in nature since it does not strictly
follow a formalized list of questions. Understanding the nature of the study,
the semi-structured interview was also conducted with the participants of the
school and the college to elicit their response on writing where features of
texting were found. Along with these two, their answer-sheets of half-yearly
examination were also employed to elicit data from the participants of the high
school, but only the classwork and the semi-structured interview were employed
with the first-year graduate students.
Procedures of Data Collection
Realizing the significance of data and as Polkinghorne
(2005) asserts that the purpose of data gathering in qualitative research is to
provide evidence for the experience, it is investigating, and he further says
that the evidence is in the form of accounts people have given of the
experience, the data were collected by being in the field with them. Since the
participants were/are familiar and close to the research and felt comfortable,
data were collected without facing any difficulties and there remained no
chance of losing any data. They felt comfortable and showed their enthusiasm to
co-operate in providing data by answering questions in both written and oral
forms, but I was conscious enough while having them involved in answering
questions thinking that data their responses may not be received in a natural
way as there would be a prospect of data being distorted by the participants.
The same procedure and strategy were exploited to elicit data from both
participants: of the school and in college.
This analysis is based on the data collected from the
participants of the government school and the private college affiliated to one
of the oldest universities of Nepal, Tribhuvan University. The collected data
are based on written as well as oral responses.
Obsession With Online Language
Because of the profuse use of technology and the considerable time
that students are spending on any social networking sites where they are
involved in sharing their matters with each other using a different style and
form of language, the effect of this is reflected in their writing, too. The
language that is used online is or seems to be different from the normal use of
it. Many words are clipped to make language short, perhaps resulting in a new
register of it in today’s context. The same thing was noticed in one of the
participants’ responses. The participant showed his/her language that s/he uses
online as s/he wrote “u” for “you” which is generally found while one chat
online. Similarly, the next feature that the data shows is the use of “ktm” for
“Kathmandu”. This thing is in their answer sheets of half-yearly examination.
Picture No. 2
The data shows that they are somehow habituated to writing
abbreviated language as they do not pay their attention to the language and its
purity/originality. They seem to be careless or seem to be not showing their
serious concern regarding the spelling of words. The above two pictures of
dialogue that they were asked to write in their examination. And Picture No. 3
is of a letter that they were to write to their class-teacher requesting for
making the missed attendance. The third picture also proves that when they are
writing, they forget whether they are chatting or producing serious writing
where they need to be focused in terms of spelling.
Picture No. 3
Here, in Picture No. 3, they came up with “plz” for “please”
and in Picture No. 4 and Picture No. 5 with “&” instead of “and” and “hlo”
instead of “hello” respectively.
Picture No. 4
Picture No. 5
These all the above data were elicited from the students of the
school. They were found with the features of texting in their formal writing as
well.
What comes to be evident from the aforementioned data is that
when they are to write any dialogues and letters (because they were found using
such language features in other types of writing), they are using the language
of texting which they use while chatting being online. This was noticed in
67.3% answer-sheets. These kinds of writing cause them to forget that they are
involved in any formal writings as they are most often involved in chatting
informally with their friends or relatives.
Apart from that when they were interviewed “What do you
think about the use of this kind of language in your formal writings?” The
majority (80%) of them responded that they did not have any idea whether such
kinds of spelling are accepted informal writings or not but one thing; they
said, is clear that this style saves time and is easy to remember. As one
student said, “This is very easy to remember and we can talk a lot
using this style within a short time.” Another student came forward
supporting this statement and defended that even it is not acceptable “What’s
wrong with this language if we understand each other?” Answer to
another question “Does this kind of language help you in any way to develop
your writing in English? If yes, how?”, a girl student said, “Although
I hesitate to write and submit an assignment in English to the teacher, I fear
nothing to type messages in English online because there’s nobody to see my
mistakes.” It seems that they feel much comfortable and confident
because of the use of online language which has created a safe zone for those
students who are scared to jot down their thoughts in English since they find
none to cross out their language in red ink saying it is wrong. Monitor
hypothesis (Krashen, 1987) posits that conscious learning is available only as
a "Monitor", which can alter the output of the acquired system before
or after the utterance is actually spoken or written. While using enjoying the
online language, they appear to be “Monitor under-users”. In the same way, the
"Affective Filter" hypothesis expresses Krashen's view that a number
of "affective variables" - motivation, self-confidence, anxiety, and
personality traits - play a facilitative, but a non-causal, role in the second
language acquisition. Krashen claims that if the language users are with high
motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, a low level of anxiety and
extroversion, they will be better equipped for success in a second language
acquisition in comparison to low motivation, low self-esteem, anxiety,
introversion and inhibition which can raise the affective filter up and form a
"mental block" that prevents comprehensible input from being used for
acquisition (ibid).
Although they seem to be unaware of the acceptability of
abbreviated form of language in their writing, it can further be understood
that children’s use of social networking sites or texting appears to
have a positive impact on their developing literacy, as they provide children
with an additional resource for learning about and experimenting with
letter-sound correspondences and language, and for reading and “decoding” text.
Crystal (2008) also believes that the brevity of the text style, and the 160
character constraint of an SMS requires them to write economically,
inventively and playfully – doing this is good practice when learning to read
and write. Wood, Plester and Bowyer (2008) concur that when texting, the
children have the freedom to ‘play’ with the construction of language that they
are learning about it at school, and are creative in their use of it. They also
have regular engagement with it.
On the other hand, in the present scenario of
fast-developing science and technology wherever we go or are, we are engulfed
by varieties of technology or at least a kind of it and social media. They are
fast means of communication and are able to make us feel that we are in a
face-to-face situation albeit we are seven hundred seas away. In this sense, we
can say physical proximity has been mitigated and because of this great
contribution of technology we are today obsessed with them. They have brought
to us three interesting comely ways of communication: text messaging, voice
call, and video call. Leaving two last ones, let us consider text messaging. It
facilitates us in sharing our happy moments, disappointment, serious and funny
thoughts and opinions, and so on by letting us type words or phrases. At the
time of typing messages, the main focus and attention are on matters to be
conveyed, rather than on language. Therefore, the intention of interlocutors is
to talk a lot within a short time. To do this they do not bother themselves to
type full words or to remember spellings, and even if they know the correct
spelling, they are reluctant to write full spellings since their priority is
communicating messages, not language.
Maharjan (2014) writes (as cited in Holmes, 2019) that to
show how cool and trendy they are, people especially “teenagers” are crazy
after this kind of online language. They heavily use abbreviations, acronyms,
slang, self-made code terms/words to communicate with others. They might have
thought this is a cool and easy way to type messages without realizing the inconvenience that it may cause the readers to decipher what one is trying to
communicate. This is happening because they have become habituated to composing
messages or texts using such language and the credit of fostering this habit
and making them obsessed with online language, I think, and no doubt goes to
the time they spend online.
Interest Growing Towards Using Online Language in
Graduates
Proving the concept of general people that graduates are far
better than school children, they showed that in their practice, too. They were
involved in the study assuming that their condition of writings would be the
same as of school children. Out of 98 participants, only a handful (12.24%
participants only) of them reflected the features of texting in their formal
writings and they were the use of ampersand as shown in Picture No. 6 and “hlo”
for “hello” when they were assigned to write a paragraph on “My First Day at
School/College” albeit the majority of them were users of any sort of social
networking sites for chatting with others.
Picture No. 6
Although all graduates are active users of social networking
sites and they often enjoy instant messaging, they are careful regarding language.
They do not let features of texting come in their formal writings.
However, their oral response to an interview question – What
do you think about the use of this kind of language in your formal writings? –
clears that they also do not think that it is/will be acceptable as far as they
know because this is of course against the norms of any language as one of them
spoke, “This kind of language is a bit strange from the point view of
writing that we are involved in outside of that world (IM or texting) since
this doesn’t or may not follow rules of language.” Conforming that but
expressing doubt, the next participant said, “It is perhaps not good
because the clipped or short words used in texting are not found in our books
or anywhere else except on social networking sites.” When they were
asked another question “Does this kind of language help you in any way to
develop your writing in English? If yes, how?”, five of them agreeing with each
other replied, “Social networking sites are the safest zone for writing
anything in English since there is nothing to worry about – I mean neither
spelling, nor grammar, nor anything else. We just enjoy it.” Similar
to the interpretation of the view of the school’s children, it can be deduced
from their responses that using social networking sites are their safer zone to
play with writing in English. It reflects that they seem to be conscious while
using language because clipped forms similar to online language are not
encountered anywhere in formal writing either in their course books or
elsewhere.
Impact of Online Language on Writing
The impact of online language is very evident in the writings of
students since people’s inclination is to follow short-cut in everything, they
reflect it in their writing while using language. What is more interesting is
the fact that no matter how far you keep yourself away from the trend of using
online language, sooner or later you tend to follow that yourself (Holmes,
2019) but anything excess is bad. Because of the pervasiveness of social media
people have become so economical in terms of using language and they go
unnecessarily making language short by dropping some letters from words. In
doing this, they somehow forget that they are not doing well in language, but
making it “totally lame” (ibid). This not only causes difficulty on the part of
readership to comprehend the text, but it also spoils writing and/or language.
At the same time, it has motivated and facilitated them in practising language
to a great extent keeping their affective filter variable “down”. Now, it leads
the language users to think that language used in social media introduces a new
issue regarding its acceptability in the future as language itself is a
living phenomenon.
On the one hand, it is speculated and advocated that the use of
abbreviated forms and shorthand in online language causes students’ inability
to spell and ultimately write well and is developing a bad habit of being short
in language unnecessarily, and on the other hand, because of this they fell encouraged
and motivated to express what they wish without experiencing any difficulties
and this is to some or large extent proved beneficial on the part of students
of any level to write as much as they like. Believing Cullington (2011),
degradation of writing quality in students’ paper is not something caused by
texting or online language because they are also seen alert that such language
that is used online is not appropriate in the formal writing assignments. They
know the difference between texting friends and writing formally and they are
known to what is appropriate and what is not in each situation. This can be
noticed in data collected from the graduates where they (12.24%) showed the
features of online language. However, this is a bit different in the samples of
school children. Many an expert would agree that there is no harm in textspeak,
as long as students continue to be taught and reminded that a formal language
occasion is not the place for it (ibid). Regarding maintaining accuracy in
language, Krashen (1987) posits that the study of the structure of the
language can have general educational advantages and values that high schools
and colleges may want to include in their language programs. Any benefit,
however, will greatly depend on the learner being already familiar with the
language. It should also be clear that analyzing the language, formulating
rules, setting irregularities apart, and teaching complex facts about the
target language is not language teaching, but rather is "language appreciation"
or linguistics, which may not lead to communicative proficiency. Here
comes the role of a teacher as well. My study also suggests that the
teacher should play an active role to make students, especially school
children, familiar with acceptable patterns of language which will have
educational advantages to them.
From the aforementioned analysis, it can be understood that
as everything has two facets – positive and negative, so does an abbreviated
language. It seems that it has created a better option to raise their level of
confidence to learn writing in the English language with fluency. However, one
should not ignore the thing that it might degrade the quality of their writings
because it has not got a green signal in any formal writings up to now. Thus,
it appears that using this sort of language, though not approved till now, is
not about good or bad writing; rather it is a matter of choice or an option for
language learners and teachers whether they focus on accuracy or fluency in
writing.
On the basis of data analysis and interpretation, the result
and discussion section discussed in the subsequent heading will indicate what
kind of impact is of texting on students’ writing whether a positive, negative,
or no significant relationship was found between the texting and their
writings.
Result and Discussion
The study was conducted on the ground of two assumptions
which were made observing writings of some students: almost all the
students, no matter which level they are, reflect their habit of using an
online register, i.e. texting or Instant Messaging, in their writing;
and because of frequent use of online register, the standard of writing
is continuously degrading.
In the present context, texting is ubiquitous even among
general people regardless of university students or school students and has
become the most popular form of technology-based communication for young
adults. Data also show that texting is very common among students of school
and university. They feel comfortable with it and it saves their time as well;
this is why they have an inclination for this type of language. Although they
use this language, especially spellings, in their writing, they are unknown to
the acceptability of it in formal writing. This brings their thoughts out onto
the paper and this is very necessary to produce writings because writing is a
process first, then writing as a product comes out. Although their habit of
using online register is reflected in their writing, it is not evident enough
to declare that whatever and how they use language in texting or online
directly intrude into their formal language and degrades their language where
they are to be conscious regarding the use of formal language because only a
very few examples were found in their exam paper or assignments in the
classroom. These are mostly “hlo” for “hello”, “u” for “you”, “&” instead
of “and”, and “plz” replacing “please”. Even out of these, the most frequent is
“hlo”, “&” and “plz”.
Writing is not simply concerned with spellings, selections
of words, or writing mechanisms. Writing is a form of communication through
which thoughts, ideas, and feelings are inscribed on paper. It allows the
language users to organize their knowledge and beliefs into convincing
arguments, and to convey meaning through well-constructed text. Some teachers
are using the quick, free-flowing writing style of texting to spark their
learners' thinking processes. Trisha Fogarty, a sixth-grade teacher in the USA
says: “When my children are writing first drafts, I don't care how they spell
anything, as long as they are writing. If this lingo gets their thoughts and
ideas onto paper quicker, the more power to them” (Lee, 2002). She does,
however, expect her learners to switch to Standard English during editing and revising.
What is clear from the analysis of the elicited data is that it is not a
matter to worry if (any) features of texting are noticed in their writing. As
it is a solitary and demanding job, the writer can rework with it later to make
the writing flawless. Leki (2010) suggests that one should not worry about
details in the first draft. S/he should just try to get ideas down on paper
that can be shaped later. She further suggests that once ideas are on paper,
grammar, vocabulary, spelling, and punctuation are to be checked to make the
writing as correct as one can. Therefore,
one does not need to be over conscious to produce the final copy of his/her
writing at the very first attempt.
It is true that students are frequently enjoying texting
with their friends and relatives, and somehow they reflect this type of
language even in their writing and assignments. However, it cannot be claimed
that their writing is degrading all because of the frequent use of texting. However, the
survey conducted by Geertsema, Hyman and Deventer (2011) as cited in Verheijen
(2013) claims that a majority of the educators perceived that textese had a
negative effect on their students’ writing skills. From their survey, they came
to know that their students were not conscious enough to the use of Standard
English with respect to spelling, punctuation, and sentence length. They were
noticed to adhere to sporadic use of abbreviated forms of language based on the
habit of texting. The use of textese was perceived to have a negative impact on
students’ academic achievement and on their knowledge of Standard English.
While analyzing the data, it was not found that their
writing is degrading because of it. Instead of it, the cause of their poor
writing is the lack of knowledge of writing skill, grammar, and vocabulary.
Data clear that textism is not the sole or main reason behind their degrading
or poor writing. It has rather played a pivotal role in assisting them to
develop writing habits which they were afraid of before. Textism has brought
them closer to writing by mitigating a wider distance between them and writing.
Similarly, Wood, Plester and Bowyer (2008) also posit that “children’s use of
this technology appears to have a positive impact on their developing literacy,
as it provides children with an additional resource or learning about and
experimenting with letter-sound correspondences and language, and for reading
and ‘decoding’ text.” They conclude that “If our children are showing
difficulties with reading and spelling attainment, it would seem that this is
in spite of the contribution of textism use, not because of it.” Social
networking sites where they enjoy texting, Instant Messaging have provided them
with a common electronic platform to practice and foster writing skills with
full freedom since they fear nothing regarding any sorts of mistakes and they
build up their level of confidence as well. As they come up with numerous ideas
shared by social networking site users, they feel provoked to throw their
comments on them and share their thoughts, opinions, or feelings there. This
activity encourages them to play with and arrange their ideas properly
overcoming anxiety while writing anything in English so that they could at
least get as many likes and/or comments as possible. Manifold likes and/or
comments play the role of feedback to raise their level of confidence to write
more.
Conclusion
Obviously, suffocation is experienced if communication does
not take place and it is mainly done through either speaking or writing. As a matter
of fact, writing, in terms of accuracy and appropriacy, is a far more serious
job than any other means of communication. It needs constant practice to be
competent to produce acceptable academic writing. In the present scenario
that almost everybody, even a layman, enjoys texting and social networking
sites in their daily lives. Therefore, it is normal to see features of texting
or online register in the writings of students as well. Although they reflect their
habit of using online language features in writings, it cannot be claimed that
Social networking sites, Instant Messaging, and texting are spoiling their
writings; instead, they are providing them with common platforms to practice written
communication. Technology has appeared as a useful tool to create communities,
where learning is infused with social interactions among students, with
teachers, and with others who have traditionally been considered outside the
traditional structure of the school. It means there is no great harm noticed in
writing because of social networking sites or texting. Instead, they are tools
that help to motivate and encourage students to do more writing and to express
themselves through their writing. Here, students need to be encouraged
positively and made conscious that they must have their writings flawless
later.
However, a language with features of texting and language
used in social networking sites to save time and energy are not acceptable and
cannot be approved in formal writing; they may have a green signal in the long
run as language is a dynamic phenomenon.
THIS COMPLETE ARTICLE.Aziz,
Sh., Shamim, M., Aziz, M. F., and Avais, P. (2013). The impact of texting/sms
language
On
academic writing of students - what do we need to panic about? Elixir
International
Journal.
Elixir Ling. & Trans. 55 (2013) 12884-12890. Retrieved from https://www.elixirpublishers.com/articles/1360068938_55%20(2013)%2012884-12890.pdf
Bronowicki, K. A. (2014). Technology's
adverse effects on students' writing: An emphasis on
Formal
writing is needed in an academic curriculum. Education and Human Development
Master's Theses. 392. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1399&context=ehd_theses
Crystal, D. (2008). Txting: The gr8 db8.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cullington, M. (2011). Texting and
writing. Young Scholars in Writing, 8, 90-95. Retrieved
from
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Texting+and+Writing&btnG=#
Geertsema, S., Hyman, C. and Deventer, C.
(2011). Short message service (SMS) language
And
written language skills: Educators’ perspectives. South African Journal of
Education 31 (2011): 475–87.
Grace, A.,
Kemp, N., Martin, F. H. and Parrila, R. (2015). Undergraduates’ attitudes to
text
messaging language use and
intrusions of textisms into formal writing. New Media & Society.
2015, Vol. 17(5) pp. 792-809. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/bb48/30f0f72e7e3dd4408596757cde368b4b6adc.pdf
Holmes, H. I. (2019). English for business
studies-I. Kathmandu. Buddha Publication Pvt. Ltd.
Krashen, S.
D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Prentice-Hall
International.
Retrieved from
http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf
Lee, J. (2002). I Think, Therefore IM. New
York Times, September 19, G.1. Retrieved from
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06E5D71230F93AA2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all.
Leki, I. (2010). Academic writing:
Exploring process and strategies (2nd ed.). New Delhi:
Cambridge University
Press.
Milijic, M.
(2019, Oct 7). 29+ smartphone usage statistics: around
the world in 2020.
Retrieved
from https://leftronic.com/smartphone-usage-statistics/
Polkinghorne, D.E. (2005). Language and
meaning: Data collection in qualitative research.
Journal
of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 52, No.2, 137-145.
Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2fe8/4d15e6306b02da390a0f714b7575f5043a86.pdf
Thurlow, C. & Poff, M. (2009). The
Language of text messaging. In S.C. Herring, D. Stein and
T.
Virtanen (eds), Handbook of the Pragmatics of CMC. Berlin and New York: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Verheijen, Lieke (2013). The effect of
text messaging and instant messaging on literacy.
English
Studies. 95. 582-602. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256507070_The_Effects_of_Text_Messaging_and_Instant_Messaging_on_Literacy/link/5ccc03a392851c3c2f81b2a2/download
Vosloo, S.
(2009). The effects of texting on literacy: Modern scourge or opportunity?.
Shuttleworth
Foundation. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.175.2588&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Wood, C., Plester, B., & Bowyer, S.
(2008). A cross-lagged longitudinal study of text
Messaging
and its impact on literacy skills: Preliminary results.
Poster Presented at the British Psychological Society Development Section
Conference, Oxford Brookes University.
QUESTIONNAIRE
Thank you for agreeing to participate in supplying
information to me. This questionnaire has been designed to have the authentic
data/information to meet the purpose of this paper entitled “Impact of
Txting on (Formal) Writing”. I am interested to better understand the
writing habit of students. Through this study, I want to figure out whether
there is any kind of impact – positive or negative – of online language or
shorthand messages (texting) on students’ (formal) writing. You are to supply
written answers to a couple of questions, and are also being interviewed to
know whether you use any social networking websites. So, there are no right or
wrong answers to any of our questions, I am interested in your own experiences.
Participation in this study is voluntary and your decision to participate, or
not participate, will affect the findings. The interview should take
approximately 45 minutes depending on how much information you would like to
share. With your permission, I would like to audio record the interview because
I do not want to miss any of your comments. All responses will be kept
confidential. This means that your de-identified interview responses will only
be shared with research team members and we will ensure that any information we
include in our report does not identify you as the respondent. You may decline
to answer any question or stop the interview at any time and for any reason.
Thanking you with an expectation of your kind co-operation.
Amit Kumar Karn
Name :
………………………………………………………….
Age :
…………………………
Sex : Male ( ), Female ( )
School/College: ……………………………………………………………. Level: …………
GUIDELINE FOR THE INTERVIEW
Establishing Rapport
Before we begin, it would be nice if you could tell
me a little bit about yourself.
1. Hope you may have many
friends. How do you feel when you are with them?
2. How do you feel if you
have no friends?
To be sure about users of any social networking sites
3. Do you use/enjoy any
social networking sites to have a conversation with people?
4. When you are away from
your friends, which means do you use to talk to your friends I mean a phone call,
SMS, or any social networking sites like Messenger, WhatsApp, Viber, etc.?
Challenges and Benefits of using social networking
sites
5. When chatting with
people in English, how do feel, I mean, do you feel the same level of
hesitation/difficulty that you (may) have while writing any assignments of your
class at the time of using any social networking sites?
6. What do you think
about the use of texting or abbreviated forms if the language in your formal
writings?
7. Does this kind of
language help you in any way to develop your writing in English? If yes, how?
Thank you!
 Writings of Students){kind=link}
0 Comments