Poll result: Is text speak endangering our literacy?

With 2082 votes cast, the results were:

• Yes: 76.5%
• No: 23.5%

A response from our experts

Tom Dickins, Course Leader for Linguistics in the School of Law, Social Sciences and Communications said:

Many people with an interest in language, including Lynne Truss, author of 'Eats, Shoots & Leaves', agree with the opinion of over three-quarters of our respondents, that text speak is endangering our literacy.

However, there is little, if any, linguistic evidence to support this widely held opinion.

Opposition to text speak appears to be based on at least three misapprehensions:

• first, text speak is a 'lazy' means of communication;
• second, the abbreviations which characterise text speak pose a threat to standard usage, and
• third, children who employ text speak do not acquire the skills necessary to develop more 'sophisticated' forms of expression.

Most linguists would argue that, far from being a reflection of laziness, text speak is a practical and efficient solution to the constraints imposed by mobile phones.

Linguists would further maintain that abbreviations are a well established feature of standard written English, as evidenced by all manner of initialisms and acronyms, such as RSPCA, BBC, NATO, RSVP and SMS itself.

Finally, they would cite a range of empirical data (including a recent study by a team from Coventry University), which have found that the use of text speak may actually enhance the literacy of pre-teenage children.

David Crystal, one of Britain's best known linguists, is unambiguously positive about the impact of texting, and has described it as “the latest manifestation of the human ability to be linguistically creative and to adapt language to suit the demands of diverse settings”.

If you would like to learn more about the study of language in general, why not consider taking a degree in Linguistics (combined with another subject of your choice)?

World and Sign Languages courses

"2b or not 2b" - article by David Crystal