Letter to the Editor

RESPONSE 1: 

To: Mrs. Laura Clark                                                                                      October, 15th 2016

The Daily Mail Magazine

California, U.S.

Dear Mrs. Laura,

I write to you to express my stance on the last article published in your latest issue which tackles the appearance of the all-pervasive materialization of text speak or “txt spk”. 

As I am ever mindful of how text speaks and colloquialisms are increasingly coming to the view of the surface as aforementioned in the article, I believe it’s more likely, only a glimpse of the impacts of “text speak” are being caught and portrayed; which leads me to the following. I am afraid to say that it’s not entirely fair for “text speak” to be pertained to as an eroding force; for me, as a student who is almost interminably susceptible to such platforms is cognizant of the innumerable dimensions to this nuance of English.

An element present in your article which easily stood out to me and needless to say, was overly exaggerated, is the outright claim that the continuance of us teenagers being exposed to the countless social media platforms and all else has afflicted in “protecting standards of English”. According to the linguist, John McWhorter over 50 slang phrases were used in the 1920s which further explains the countless grammatical constructions being disputed. Therefore, I still give credence to the reality of the English language unceasingly changing and evolving over the past 50 years for reasons “Text speak” isn’t associated with. Therefore, in my opinion, digital fluency is not the primary reason behind the streamlining of the English language and hasn’t made it any difficult to protect that specific nuance of the English language for it has expanded my linguistic capabilities as not only does it introduce me to unfamiliar words and phrases but also newly coined words found on platforms like “Twitter” and “Facebook” that have emerged and are currently legitimized to begin cramming into the Oxford English Dictionary.

Yet, such platforms are perpetually held responsible for being the ramification of our English standards as students and said to be being the beacon of such ineptitude in the usage of complex vocabulary and dialect by youngsters. Lastly, with all respect due I suggest Mrs. Jordan looks deeper into this issue and perhaps set out to be met with some more practical solutions.

Yours Sincerely,

Barbara Williams

67839, Khalifa A

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

RESPONSE 2: 

To: Mrs. Laura Clark                                                                                       October, 15th 2016

The Daily Mail Magazine

California, U.S.

Dear Mrs. Laura,

I would like to start my response with saluting you for such an impressive article, I have enjoyed reading it and would like to share my gratitude regarding the topic you brilliantly examined and conferred to. I believe your claims were fully justified and very reasonable. Unequivocally, this notorious phenomenon is progressively seeping through our children’s lives to become more and more prevalent over time. This idea isn't the only element that makes me of the same mind as yours.

I’m a teacher at an elementary school, I love my job but something I’m not very fond of is having words such as “kinda” and “wanna” increasingly appearing in exam papers I have previously corrected. I believe it’s because such words have been hackneyed to the extent where our children are starting to use them at school and thus they aren’t able to respond and converse in an adequate and expressive manner perhaps because they face difficulties when trying to find the most appropriate register to use at certain times.

Let’s take my daughter who wasn’t very articulate when expressing herself in an interview as another example, a distorted impression from her potential employer was definitely what she left the interview with; she never got a call back… It’s as clear as the sun that our children are amid this outpouring phenomenon. This colloquialism-filled “language” is offensively intrusive and definitely contradicts our English standards but has unfortunately reached epidemic proportions. Consequently, I support the endorsement of a more practical syllabus that adheres to that standard or nuance of the English language aforementioned in your article by limiting the academic syllabus in a way that only reinforces the application of a specific type of English which may decrease the chance of examiners like myself unceasingly stumbling upon more English tasks being botched by youngsters!

I was very happy to come across your article and felt great satisfaction to know individuals out there who concur with my opinion have the notion to put an effort into stipulating systems to proceed with protecting our English standards. Despite the fact that individuals like ourselves, who acknowledge the importance of preserving our language are sadly considered to be a minority.

Looking forward to read more of your articles!

Yours Sincerely,

Anne J. Williams

67839, Khalifa A

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E