Ever since its creation,texting is a very controversial topic. One of the main claims people have against texting is that “it ruins not only the brains of children using it but it ruins are language”. In “I h8 txt msgs” John Humphry uses his experience with texting to utter the claim that texting is ruining the english language.
He states on line 53-57 that the “march of texters” are “doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbors 800 years ago. They are destroying it: pillaging our punctuation; savaging our sentences; [ravaging] our vocabulary. And they must be stopped”. But that is about as factual as the article gets. All his writing on this topic is completely opinionated and severely close minded (or, shall I say, close-minded). The way he writes seems like he has more of a problem with change than with texting. The way he writes seem as though he is
…show more content…
The evidence he states throughout the writing shows he actually knows about the topic. Most even taking very obvious jabs at Humphry, like how in lines 161-163 he says that the Oxford Dictionary (which Humphry displays as some heavenly body almost) even added words like “cos” and “wot” in the late 1820s. The media portrays childrens texting habits as with “lols” or “wat evrs”, that would dumb down the language to an illiterate level. But according to lines 141-148, text messaging didn't put that into our minds, for these things have been around longer than texting. It says “Eric Partridge published his Dictionary of abbreviations in 1942. It contained dozens of SMS-looking examples, such as agn “again”, mth “month” and gd “good”-- 50 years before texting was born. English has had abbreviated words ever since it began to be written down. Words such as exam, vet, fridge, cox and bus are so familiar that they have effectively become new