SMS lingo: convenience vs. formality

LAWRENCE OOKEDITSE
Correspondent | Friday January 15, 2010 00:00

'Iv bi stupd iVe bin cln u on ur old numb sory bout dat' for 'I have been stupid I have been calling you on your old number and sory about that. As for this one, you will figure it out yourself , 'hi ts Karly de O.G Negar, ths z ma no. If T's no aint workin halla @ dis no.peace!'

That is SMS text messaging language for you. It is here and it is here with a bang. Its cool, its streetwise, to some extent its smart.  'At times I hook up with a guy right, then he texts just as am about to go to bed to say night. The way he texts makes all the difference. I can easily tell I cannot relate with this one from the way they text', 24 year old Karabo, a University student says.

I prod here to explain further, 'come 'on Lawrence, you know what am talking about', she says, with her tongue rolled up, or should I say the sort of English accent that is said to scare many a low esteemed guy. 'I mean, some guys are out right boring and you can tell from the way they text. I do not like a guy who texts me like he is writing some letter at work or some note for the president. Make it simple, shorten the words and let there be that mystery from the way you text', she further says and adds, 'We like it when we cannot completely figure everything out right away. And it's cool to be in touch with the times!'

One of the major international critics of textese as some term the language, Welsh journalist and television reporter John Humphrys, has criticized textese as 'wrecking our language'. He cites ambiguous examples such as 'lol' which may mean 'laughing out loud' or 'lots of love', depending on the context in which it is used. Humphrys describes emoticons and textese as 'irritating' and essentially lazy behaviours, and surmises that 'sloppy' habits gained while using textese will result in students' growing ignorance of proper grammar and punctuation. And he is not without a point.

Well, there we go. There is even an attraction touch to it. Still, I wish to figure out what others think of it. I chat to my neighbor, Lebogang Mbise, a working mother to get her views. 'I do not have a problem with people texting as they wish. After all, it saves money to cut the words in a message. Some of us are now old but if we texted as much and were still as young we would do it', she says. And I do not quite think I had expected anything different from my 'liberal' neighbor.

She however disproves of the use of abbreviations used for text messaging formal correspondence. 'If you put it that way then I get it. It happens yes, people could easily get used to abbreviating such that they even use it for official purposes, which is not proper. It is like some of us who are used to using Microsoft word, at times I struggle to write down on paper certain words that I know because since I started using word, I do not care much about improving my spelling', she insightful says. I suspect I am not getting any better at spelling with prolonged use of this computer thing but who am I to complain, after all, I have to confess it saves us lots of embarrassment doesn't it? Though it could also be embarrassing such as when you intend to write 'public' and you misspell it to 'pubic' without noticing.

Still, there is an interpretation dilemma connected to some of the texting. Let me take you through a few items to help and at the same time show you the misinterpretations that could occur.

For words that have no common abbreviation, users most commonly remove the vowels from a word, and the reader is forced to interpret a string of consonants by re-adding the vowels (e.g., 'dictionary' becomes 'dctnry', or 'keyboard' becomes 'kybrd').

The reader must interpret the abbreviated words depending on the context in which it is used, as there are many examples of words or phrases which use the same abbreviations (e.g., 'lol' could mean 'laugh out loud' or 'lots of love', and 'cryn' could mean 'crayon' or 'crying'). So if someone says 'ttyl, lol' they probably mean 'talk to you later, lots of love' not 'talk to you later, laugh out loud'; and if someone says 'omg, lol' they probably mean 'oh my god, laugh out loud' not 'oh my god, lots of love'. Context is key when interpreting txtese, and it is precisely this shortfall which critics cite as a reason not to use it.

Technology and cellphones are not only fast becoming notorious for helping us lie about our whereabouts; as in saying 'I am at UB honey', while one is actually at Game City but are now leading us towards a more informal society-even in official correspondence.

Psychologists point out that repetition of a task instills it in the sub conscious part of our minds which is why repetitive training helps perfect up ones act.

As such, repeated slang and abbreviation associated with SMS texting is actually practice with writing. This leads to people at times sub consciously writing in short hand and slang when doing official correspondence.

 I ask a Social Sciences lecturer at the University of Botswana if they encounter such headaches with their essay and exams scripts. 'To tell you the truth, I am also a victim of this technology. Even when sending out e-mails I at times overtly abbreviate. It is convenient and to some extent quite utile. I encourage my students to take notes in shorthand as I lecture and this to some extent also contributes to their addiction to this shorthand writing', he says.

But is it a problem? 'Wena o batla go nkubisa mo tirong jaanong' (you want to get me fired), he says in response as if thinking I am prodding him to say something he should not be saying.  'Honestly, on many occasions we simply interpret and make them get away with it.

In the English Department where they mark grammar and spelling there is a good chance any such unofficial abbreviation would get you penalized. The thing is, you are a human being and you know the person wrote under pressure. I would only penalize a student if they are overdoing it but if they throw in a word or two I do not think it's such a crime. Students should know though that exams are formal things which have to be approached with the necessary seriousness', he advices, beginning to sound like a typical conservative University professor.

Knowing how conservative they are I rather feel that, many would just circle with their red pen and hit you with two question marks. Thus, official correspondence needs to remain formal, and so do exam scripts and essays. It's here with us though and a little understanding of what the characters actually are could be helpful.

I texted some of my friends and asked some to contribute their abbreviations. The following is what I dug up. M8-mate, L8R-later, L2G-Like to go?, LD-Later dude, LEMENO-let me know, XLNT-excellent, LOL-Laughing out Loud or Lots of Love, LTD-living the dream, Bout-About, ABT2-about to, d00d-dude, AWOL-Absent without leave, PLS/PLz-please, fb-Face Book, SC-stay cool, SDMB-Sweet dreams my baby, Ey-they, Ayt-alright, Gr8-great, Lwrnc- Lawrence(my name continuously mutilated but hey, it's convenient, perhaps sexy too!) and there are many more.

 Is language evolving with technology being the catalyst of such evolution? Time will tell. In one American study, researchers found that less than 20% of messages used SMS language (textese, or the abreviations used in text messaging).

Looking at his own texting history, the study's author, linguist David Crystal, noted just 10% of his messages used SMS language. Evolution has never been a quick process though.