AS Language and Technology

I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language by John Humphrys

I agree with the majority of this article on the fact that it is changing the way we speak, especially younger people who may not know better, or how the original language was. I think the abbreviations such as 'tks' for thanks and 'u' for 'you' is extremely derogatory and degrading for our generation, and creates this judgement of people that they are actually that dumb, when in reality, they are just too sluggish to write out the entire word.
Personally, I use proper English when typing because it's hard to understand what half of these abbreviations mean, and it takes more time to actually work it out rather than type words. Also, I find that using these contracted forms make you look common and quite stupid, which is why the majority of people that I know don't actually do it. So I think it's a bit unfair to say that the changes in the dictionary are solely to be blamed on texting, as it's just adapting; but texting and technology is guilty.

Cn u txt? by John Sunderland

This article is too shallow minded to agree with, it's feeble-minded and it has a very closed view on the way we type, and generalises the whole of our generation to talk like that. Personally, I have never actually seen a conversation like that being applied in real life, only the fickle mind of the writer here. The whole point here is to discuss how often these dumbed down alternate forms are actually being used, and therefore be realistic here, but this article exaggerates it alot, stereotyping us alot.

2b or not 2b by David Crystal

I agree with this article more because it contradicts the last two articles that are too exaggerated on the stereotypes that the young are the people who mostly use texting, that it is infact not just for the younger generation, and the fact that calling people is a rare event these days. I agree with the fact that people may text too much, I think calling should be used more often, but the problem is that the population of these rich countries, such as the UK, simply do not have the time to call anymore, being a very business associated country. Texting only takes a matter of seconds, and you can do it anywhere without hassling other people, which calling may do, and can be extremely disruptive. Calling is also limiting, you cannot curse or use any even slightly offensive language on the phone because of course, it may offend someone. The appeal of texting is how private and free it can be, which is good in the way that allows people to express themselves more, but may encourage youngsters to become profane.
I also agree with the article when it states that people are taking this way too seriously, and texting/new technology cannot solely be blamed for the modernisation of the language. Why are people only becoming agitated now? As the article also states, these abbreviations have been used for a long time, even the well known IOU which has been dated back to 1618 and the Dictionary of Abbreviations 1942 which had modern abbreviations in it before texting was even invented, which means it is clearly evident that texting is not the only excuse, the main factor probably just being the ever-changing society, which we may be adding to, but are not the only cause.