language and technology.docx

7/25/2019 language and technology.docx

1/75

Introduction

This guide is written for students who are following GCE Advanced level (AS and A2) syllabuses inEnglish Language. This resource ay also be of general interest to language students on university

degree courses! trainee teachers and anyone with a general interest in language science.

What do the examiners say about this subject?

Language and technology is one of the sub"ects studied within the broader area of Language andSocial Conte#ts! which is set as a odule for study within the s$ecification for the A%A&s AdvancedLevel (GCE AS and A2) S$ecification ' for English Language. f you are a student taing this course!or a teacher giving su$$ort to such students! you ay find the e#ainers& guidance hel$ful. 'ut it ayalso be useful to anyone who wishes to understand how language relates to odern counicationtechnologies.

n giving guidance to $eo$le studying the sub"ect! the e#ainers advise the to study* the variety oflanguage fors insofar as they are affected by

the technological ediu used for counication (e.g. tele$hone! radio! television!

co$uter)+

the social functions that such edia $erfor in both inter$ersonal and ass counication+

historical and conte$orary changes! where a$$ro$riate.

n $articular! the guidance says! candidates should e#aine

everyday functions and activities in conte#t

discourse features.

n their su$$ort aterials the e#ainers add this*

,-or the $ur$oses of their assessent odule/ Language and Technology eans language andcounication technologyThe focus is on how inforation and counication technologyaugents! constrains and siulates huan0to0huan counication,

The e#ainers suggest that candidates should consider*

advantages! soeties called affordances or $otential ca$abilities! enabled by suchtechnology+

constraints! as in entering te#t on a $hone or eyboard+

how technologies such as te#t chat and answer $hone essages show features of interaction

ore coonly associated with s$oen conversation.

The e#ainers note that acadeic research into this area of language use is still in its early stages!and that what is $ublished ay not be reliable. 'ut at the sae tie! there is very wide use of thetechnologies of counication. -or this reason! investigations of te#t essages and instantessenger conversations! carried out by students ($erha$s for another assessent odule) are as

liely to be reliable as $ublished boos. There are ore resources available for the study of (s$oen)tele$hone conversations! radio $hone0ins and s$orts coentaries 0 transcri$ts of which have


2/75

a$$eared as data in e#aination $a$ers on the current s$ecification and the siilar syllabus that$receded it.

The e#ainers advise teachers to use varied ty$es of te#t in $resenting the sub"ect. These ight! fore#a$le! include*

transcri$ts and written records of actuality+

accounts of $o$ular attitudes in $rint edia+

e#a$les of re$resented te#t (such as invented e0ail essages in fiction and advertising)!

and

e#cer$ts fro any investigations! including those done by students.

The e#ainers $rovide soe e#a$les of 1uestions! including te#ts of these ty$es! with an e#$ertcoentary! and a $receding caution* that they are not to be taen as odel 1uestions. n the other

hand! the coentary is a good indication of what an infored res$onse would ideally include. Asecond caution stresses the need for balanced answers 0 general coent needs to be related tos$ecific details in the te#ts! while attention to these s$ecific details needs to be illuinated byreference to theory and general ideas about language that they e#e$lify or challenge.

What is technology?

,The ediu is the essage,. 3arshall 3cLuhan

t&s not necessary to start here! but in order to understand the connection of language and technologyit ay be hel$ful to arrive at a woring descri$tion of what technology is. 4ere are soe dictionary

entries fortechnology*

5. Theoretical nowledge of industry and the industrial arts.2. The a$$lication of science to the arts.-un and 6agnall&s 7ew 8ractical Standard 9ictionary! 7ew :or! 5;>2

?nowledge! e1ui$ent! and ethods that are used in science and industry.Cabridge Learner&s 9ictionary! Cabridge! 2>>2

7ew achines! e1ui$ent and ways of doing things that are based on odern nowledge of aboutscience and co$uters.Longan 9ictionary of Conte$orary English! 4arlow! 2>>@

5. The a$$lication of scientific nowledge for $ractical $ur$oses.2. The branch of nowledge concerned with a$$lied sciences.Co$act #ford 9ictionary nline! #ford! 2>>>) for ost services this is 5=> Latin or J> non0Latin characters. t is liely thatdevelo$ents in the S3S technology will allow longer essages in the future! although any usersalready wor around this by sending ulti$le essages as $art of a onologue or (ore coonly!as the reci$ient re$lies) a dialogue.

,Te#ting is free on y service! and even those who $ay will usually $ay less than for s$eaing obile

to obile. Te#ting is also useful if you are in the London nderground and can&t get any rece$tion orare in a club and can&t hear your $hone. and if you want to send the sae essage to several $eo$le!

te#ting is 1uicer than taling!, e#$lains Fachel -letcher! 25. (Source* 7ottingha Evening 8ost! citedonhtt$*IIwww.te#t.it ).

Te#t essaging has soe of the characteristics of s$oen conversation (in its $ragatics and le#icon)and soe of the characteristics of $ersonal letters (in its $ragatics! again! in its register! and in itsrelative inforality as regards graar and orthogra$hy). 'ut as a ode of counication it is notwholly lie anything else. n looing at e#a$les of te#t essaging in use! you ay wish to se$arate

your discoveries ofwhat$eo$le do when they send and res$ond to te#t essages! fro

various e#$lanations ofwhythey e#hibit this linguistic behaviour.

"hallenging notions of fixity and authority

The relative affordability of inforation and counication technology eans that it brings $ower tothe $eo$le. n earlier ties various technologies were so e#$ensive and cons$icuous that the statecould regulate their availability (whether for its own $ur$oses! or for sale to wealthy businesses andindividuals). That still ha$$ens in soe ways! as national governents sell licences to $roviders ofservices and $ortion out the available wavelengths for radio and television broadcasts.

The scenario $redicted by George rwell in his dysto$ian novel7ineteen Eighty -ourturns out to be

$rofoundly istaen. rwell iagines a world in which a handful of totalitarian states ee$ their$o$ulations in $overty! engage in constant wars with no intention of defeating the eney and! aboveall! see to control not only $eo$le&s actions! but also their very thoughts! by controlling all the $rintand broadcast edia and technologies. rwell su$$oses that the tendency of individuals to invent andada$t their uses of language can be su$$ressed! while a single state0s$onsored set of languageconventions (,7ews$ea,) establishes itself in everyone&s usage.

rwell is wrong in his attitude to this ind of linguistic dissidence. 'ecause it is not voluntary! it is notsub"ect to control. Even under soe dire threat! soe huan s$eaers will thin and say unorthodo#things! and any ore will use language in non0standard ways! because they have a differentunderstanding of graar or of the le#icon fro what is $rescribed.

4e is even ore wrong in his assu$tion that $olitical states will continue to control the technologies

of counication. 6hile governents have been able to regulate $rint edia and broadcasting to a$oint! they have not been able to $revent radio and TB signals crossing frontiers. Arguably! the 'erlin6all fell because East Gerans co$ared their own governent&s accounts of the west with theevidence of western radio and TB broadcasting! which showed a ore aterially cofortable lifestyleand the o$$ortunity for a diversity of o$inions on $olitical! oral and social 1uestions.

nternet technologies allow great sco$e to the individual to write or s$ea! $ublish or broadcast! reador listen. n any cases other $eo$le and organiations ay try to restrict that sco$e. The restrictionay coe fro

a national governent (as in China&s regulation of nternet cafMs! and blocing of soe 6eb

sites)!
http://www.text.it/http://www.text.it/http://www.text.it/


17/75

an e$loyer (as in blocing of soe technologies and 6eb sites! or enforceent of

a$$ro$riate use $olicies at wor)! or

a $arent (as in controls on children&s use of nternet technologies).

n s$ite of all of such restrictions! these technologies do generally $roote change and allowindividual e#$ression in ways! and to an e#tent! that were not $ossible $reviously.

'roadcasters and $ublishers are agents of change to an e#tent! as they allow new fors and newuses onto the airwaves and into $rint. 'ut they also are agents of stability (or conservatis!de$ending on your attitude)! in continuing to use fors that are regarded as standard in relativelyforal conte#ts. 6e can e#e$lify this by noting that $o$ular and inforal s$eech ay be heard ontal radio and $hone0ins or on soe youth $rograing on television! but that ainstrea radio andTB news bulletins or docuentary $rograes use varieties of English that change ore slowly.

-or any CT te#ts! there is no e#$licit re1uireent to use any given conventions. deas of what isa$$ro$riate ay be deterined by an eerging $o$ular consensus! but are no longer regulated at theoutset by coercial $ublishers! editors and readers! as they have been in the $ast for ost $rint

te#ts.

f wish to $ublish a boo! then ay be re1uired to acce$t the $olicy of the $ublishing house inusing! say! ? or S English. f wish to $ublish a 6eb log or 6eb site! can ae y own choice asregards the language variety. 3any new technologies allow individual and iediate $roduction ofte#ts (without the hindrance or lu#ury of a $roof0reader or editor). Since the technology is still relativelynew! it $erha$s reains to be seen whether this will lead to a general rela#ation of uses of standardfors.

!ow technology influences new patterns of spelling and punctuation$ and use of sym%ols

Soe $eo$le (as any teacher nows) use non0standard (,incorrect, or ,bad,) s$ellings. There is

nothing new in this 0 there is $lenty of evidence to show that ever since 9r. ohnson and 7oah6ebster hel$ed us to deterine soe standards! any real writers have neither nown norconfored to the standard s$ellings.

6hat is $erha$s different today is that te#ts containing non0standard s$ellings ay be seen by farwider audiences. t ay also be true that these audiences do not notice! or do notice but are not uchbothered by! the non0standard fors 0 because they are ore interested in

theinforationorattitudese#$ressedinthe te#t.

The language student and scientist should guard against a $o$ular (but illogical) tendency to find faultwith the writing or s$eech of an individual! and then ae this the basis of a clai that ,English, is

changing for the worse.That is ob"ectively eaningless or nonsensical. t ay be that a greater or

less $ro$ortion of a given $o$ulation (all the $eo$le in 'ritain! all 5J025 year olds in soe university!all the fans of a $o$ular singer or football club) do or do not use the standard s$elling of ,adviser, ornow the conventional use of the dash. 'ut that does not $revent any other $erson fro writing withcontrol and flair.

9ifferent technologies influence s$elling in different ways. S$ell0checing tools in a$$lication softwareenable the user to eliinate non0standard fors! though they do not show where a writer uses astandard for of a le#ee other than the one he or she intends. So! for instance! one findsincreasingly coonly that ,lead, (the $resent tense and infinitive for of the verb ,to lead,) is writtenin conte#ts re1uiring the $ast $artici$le ,led, ($ossibly by confusion with its hoo$hone noun ,lead,!as in the heavy etal). t ay be that reliance on these tools! too! leads soe $eo$le to learn less fortheselves about standard fors! in the sae way that reliance on the calculator has a$$arently ledsoe $eo$le to care less about ental arithetic or learning ulti$lication tables.


18/75

3odern word0$rocessing tools allow a writer to use a s$ecific variety of a language 0 so can chooseEnglish with the standard s$elling and graar of 'elie! Canada! reland! the ? or SA! fore#a$le! or e#change y $referred 'ritish orthogra$hy for one ore suited to an internationalaudience.

3obile $hone te#ting! by contrast! $rootes new fors.

These ty$ically abbreviate the standard for of a word or $hrase 0 by such si$le substitutions asnuerals for syllables (be

They also rely on the user&s awareness of the conventions! which are often e#$lained in user guidessu$$lied with $hones 0 an range obile $hone guide gives a table of abbreviations!

including'C7(,be seeing you,)!-2T(,-ree to tal,)!8C3(,8lease call e,) andT4O(,Thans,).

These short fors ay be used$layfully0 they ay use fewer characters than the standarde1uivalent! but soeties the ,saving, is of a single letter! so that the case for using the new for

balances its $ossible unfailiarity against the sall econoy achieved! as with5daful(,wonderful,)

or6S(,6hat&s u$,) 0 this latter e#a$le reflects its association with a TB and cineacoercial (for 'udweiser beer) where characters tele$honed each other to as this 1uestion!assively elongating the s$eech sounds.

n any cases (echoing older fors) the te#t essage uses abbreviations used in sending $ersonalletters (S6AL?P,sealed with a loving iss,+ this for dates bac at least to the 5;>s) or in $rinted

$ersonal essages (,$ersonals,)! such asGS4(,good salary own hoe, or! confusingly! ,goodsense of huour,).

n studying language and technology! you should $erha$s beware of a tendency in $o$ular re$ortingand social coentary to e#aggerate the i$ortance of new technologies in influencing $atterns ofs$elling. The new fors ay be recorded in guides and glossaries! but you should loo for anyevidence that le#icogra$hers are acce$ting the as standard.

4owever! in 2>>< soe ? teachers of English language re$orted on an nternet ailing listdiscussion foru that they had observed te#t essage fors a$$earing in their students& e#a wor.This is so far anecdotal evidence! and even if accurate does not yet reflect anything lasting or$eranent.

3any CT tools ae use of sybols (eoticons or ,sileys,) to suggest feelings and attitudes1uicly. The siling face iage $re0dates the eergence of the $ersonal co$uter! having beenwidely used as a badge or transfer for clothing in the 5;=>s and later. (t was ado$ted by evangelicalChristians! with the slogan* ,Sile! esus loves you,! and ore than a decade later associated with393A! the ,recreational, drug $o$ularly nown as Ecstasy.)

The i$ortance of eoticons can be e#aggerated. 9avid Crystal clais that*

,Bery few of the are ever used. Surveys of eail and chatgrou$s suggest that only about 5> $ercent of essages actually use the! and then usually "ust the two basic ty$es 0 *) and *( . :et they still

e#ercise a fascination* as an art for! or for entertainent., Crystal! 9 (2>>


19/75

,These gra$hical accents can add e#$ressiveness! eotion and aesthetics to written discourse. 9othese siley faces at the end of essages $rovide the reader with an insight into the author or arethey "ust annoying little $unctuation ars that you have to strain your nec to see. 9o $eo$le thatuse eoticons also use eotional language in their essages And! do en and woen use

eoticons in the sae way! and with the sae fre1uency

The e$irical research in this area is inconclusive. 6iter and ?atan (5;;H) hy$othesied thatwoen use ore gra$hical accents than en in their co$uter0ediated discourse. The authorscoded over @!>>> essages and found that their hy$othesis was $artially su$$orted by the data.7either gender e#tensively used eoticons! with only 5@Q of the total sa$le doing so/. 4owever!

the co$uter users who did $riarily use eoticons were woen.,nline Eotional9iscourse!htt$*IIs"su.s"web.netI5Iinde#.htl

t ay be interesting to reflect that early fors of writing ($re0al$habetic) used $ictorial sybols 0

whether$ictogras(where a $icture of an arrow re$resents an arrow) orideogras(where a $ictureof an arrow re$resents war).

Although we now use al$habetic writing! this has often been cobined with sybolsin s$ecific $arts of a te#t! such as colo$hons on boo "acets and cover $ages or the$ortcullis sybol! to indicate the crown&s ownershi$! on docuents fro 4er3a"esty&s Stationery ffice (43S)! and iitated by the usic $ublisher 3inistry ofSound.

That ay hel$ you to reeber that! while use of novel s$ellings! acronys!abbreviations and sybols are all relevant to CT te#ts! they did not start life there!nor are they confined to new technologies. All of the have a long and co$le#history in writing generally.

At the sae tie! users of the new technologies ay be ore conservative than is coonlysu$$osed or re$orted. The following e#tract is suarised fro an article by ?risten 8hili$osi!

entitledThe 6eb 7ot the 9eath of Language. This was $ublished on -ebruary 22nd 2>>athtt$*IIwww.wired.co

Traditional linguists fear the internet daages our ability to articulate $ro$erly!infusing language with LLs! dory eoticons and the gauche sharing of$ersonal inforation on blogs. 'ut soe researchers believe we have entered anew era of e#$ression. ,

Fesources for the e#$ression of inforality in writing have hugely increased 0soething not seen in English since the 3iddle Ages!, said 9avid Crystal at theAerican Acadey for the Advanceent of Science annual eeting in6ashington! 9.C. The internet is getting ore $eo$le to write! he said! and that&s

a great thing.

,The $ro$hets of doo eerge every tie a new technology influenceslanguage! of course 0 they gathered when $rinting was introduced in the 5thcentury!, Crystal said. 'ut linguists should be ,e#ulting!,...in the ability the nternet

gives us to ,e#$lore the $ower of the written language in a creative way.,

n the s$ring of 2>>@! 7aoi 'aron collected 2@ instant essage conversations
http://sjsu.sjweb.net/1/index.htmlhttp://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66671,00.htmlhttp://sjsu.sjweb.net/1/index.htmlhttp://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66671,00.html


20/75

fro college students* nine between ales! nine between feales and fivebetween ales and feales. She studied 2!5J total transissions.

The results did not fit ty$ical stereoty$es! she found. They used few

abbreviations! acronys and eoticons! the s$elling was reasonably good andcontractions were not ubi1uitous. verall! the study suggested that conversingthrough instant essenger resebled s$eaing ore than writing.

The college students gave a staid i$ression of 3 counication. The averagelength $er transission was .< words+ 22 $ercent were a single word. 3anywere $arts of sentences 0 552 included a con"unction! lie this* ,she&s a $hdstudent (brea) and y TA!, and


21/75

-or any $ur$oses! however! clay and stone are not $ractical aterials. Su$$ose one wants to beable to write down a long story! and ee$ it in a $ortable for 0 how can one do this using stone as awriting aterial The solution to this $roble cae fro another $art of the ancient world! Egy$t. Thewriting of Egy$t! lie that of the Suerians! started as a $icture language. 4ere! too! the $icturesbecae stylied over tie! but less so! because the Egy$tians had a ore fle#ible eans of writing.

Their writing aterial was$a$yrus! a ind of reed! which grows in arsh areas. The soft $ith fro

inside the tough stes was cut into long stri$s. These were laid side by side to for a first layer! afterwhich a second layer was laid on to$! at right angles to the first. 'oth layers were $ressed together!releasing a natural gu! which bonded the stri$s together to for $a$er sheets. These were gluedtogether to for uch longer sheets! which were rolled u$ for carrying.

The writing i$leent used by the Egy$tians was a reed! frayed at the end! to for a brush. Later! theGrees would re$lace this with a s$lit reed! foring a nib. The nib enables the writer to control a flowof in to a finer $oint. The in was a i#ture of gu and a colouring agent 0 soot or la$blac. Thescroll was to have a long history and s$read far beyond Egy$t. -or the $roducer! which had a virtualono$oly of the coercial su$$ly it was a valuable $roduct for foreign trade.

The Egy$tians used the well0nown hierogly$hics for writing on stone. They soon found that writing on

$a$er could be swifter if they si$lified the writing to a scri$t. Carving on stone is easier using straightlines! but with a brush and $a$er! rounded stroes are $ossible. A$art fro having to di$ the $en in inevery so often the scribe could write continuously (rather as we do with odern $ens). The writing on

$a$yrus develo$ed into a ore rounded scri$t in a style nown as cursive(which eans ,running, inLatin). This for of writing also too its nae fro thehierosor $riest and is calledhieraticscri$t. tars a ind of transition in the develo$ent of writing! between hierogly$hic and al$habetic scri$t.The 8hoenicians are the $eo$le traditionally credited with the ove to a syste of characters to

re$resent sounds! rather than whole words 0 in effect! an al$habet. This develo$ent eant that afairly sall nuber of sybols could be used! in cobinations! to re$resent all the words in a s$oenlanguage. This was a ste$ of genius! which soe languages have never taen. -ro this $oint! it is$ossible to trace the evolution of different writing systes that use al$habets (again the nae!,al$habet,! coes fro Gree).

8a$yrus was the ost coon aterial but fro the earliest ties when they wrote the boos of theLaw! the 4ebrew scribes would also use leather. -ro about 2>> '.C. onwards another ateriala$$eared 0 which was $archent. The sins of goats and calves were shaved! s$lit! bleached!haered and $olished to for a sooth writing surface. This was a ore e#$ensive writing aterialthan $a$yrus! but longer lasting.

The first boos were scrolls! u$ to thirty etres in length! fored by $asting together $a$yrus sheets.-or reading! these were unrolled fro one end! and rolled u$ fro the other! to $resent a anageable$ortion of te#t to the reader. The Foans develo$ed a different ind of boo ty$e. This was ade ofwooden tablets! coated with wa#! in which the writer cut letters with a stylus. These tablets werebound with leather thongs that $assed through holes in the wood. t is easy to see how this gave usour odern boo for. The only big difference was that for any years these boos were written

entirely by hand 0 which is why they are called anuscri$ts.

#ypesetting and printing

6hile writing has a long history! stretching over any hundreds of years! $rinting is a relatively recentinvention. 8rinting with ovable clay ty$e a$$eared in China in the ;th century A9! but the westerntradition! fro which odern ty$esetting derives! begins in 5


22/75

to leave $ages set u$. n the 5;th century! Charles 9icens and others were able to $ublish novelsserially in relatively chea$ instalents 0 $erha$s for the first tie bringing substantial $rinted te#ts to aass readershi$.

8rinting ay be seen as having two i$ortant effects on language in the west.

-irst! it is an agent of ass literacy 0 by $roviding a$$ro$riate and affordable te#ts in large

nubers it encouraged and su$$orted ordinary $eo$le in learning to read.

Second! it is an agent of standardiation. -ollowing the $ublication of 9r. ohnson&s dictionary

in 5H! and also $rescri$tive boos on graar! such as Fobert Lowth&s (5H=2)! $ublisherscae to use house styles! which ore or less established certain written fors as a standard.

There is! however! no single universal standard for s$elling! as the #ford and Cabridge niversity

$resses allowed soe sall differences (such as rules for,0ise,and,0ie,)! while 7oah 6ebster usessoe variant fors that have becoe standard in odern S English.

n contrast to odern co$uter0ediated $ublishing ethods! the technology used to $rint boos ise#$ensive! and thus restricted to a few $ublishing houses. These $ublishers tended to be very carefulin checing te#ts before they were $roduced in volue (reading what are called $roofs)! so thatEnglish $rinted boos observe 0 and indirectly reinforce 0 use of standard fors! and also s$ecialvarieties that differ fro the language of everyday s$eech. Saller and less e#$ensive $resses werein use for shorter te#ts! such as $laybills or $a$hlets! and here there ay be ore lielihood of non0standard fors.

ntil near the end of the 2>th century! English $ublishing ade a strong distinction between the$ublisher and the $rinter. The $ublisher deterines the language fors! reading the $rinter&s $roofsand showing where they are to be altered! if incorrect. The $ublisher is also res$onsible for thecontent (and liable if it is treasonable or libellous). The ty$esetter and $rinter 0 seen as silled artisans0 are res$onsible for setting u$ the ovable ty$e! $rinting the $ages! and! if need be! collating these

and binding the together. n the 25st century! the $ublisher&s role ay see little changed! butodern co$uter technologies have largely re$laced the silled wor of the artisans! as the ass$roduction of all $rinted te#ts is $erfored by achinery driven by inforation technologies.

#echnologies for communicating remotely

3odern counication technologies have their antecedents in ore liited systes that weredevelo$ed for broadly siilar ais 0 to overcoe boundaries of distance or tie. n soe conte#ts!tie is not critical 0 one can send a essage! and allow for a delay. 'ut there are soe conte#tswhere this is not $ossible.

n the case of fighting a battle on land one can counicate inforation by showing a flag orstandard! by use of devices that reflect natural light or that show artificial light (heliogra$hy). -or oreco$le# ethods one can use $airs of flags dis$layed in different $ositions (sea$hore). ntil veryrecent ties (well into the 2>th century)! for soe inds of counication the ost reliable ethodwas to send written notes carried by essengers on horsebac! otorcycle or even on foot (usuallyyoung en who were fast runners).

-or battles at sea a co$le# syste of signalling by use of flags was used until these weresu$erseded by heliogra$h and radio.

-ro the late 5;th century onwards a related set of technologies develo$ed! with the ob"ect of using$hysical devices to record or transit natural s$eech. Fecording technologies began with the$honogra$h! which evolved into the grao$hone disc or record. Later cae the use of agnetic ta$e!in the reel0to0reel and co$act cassette recorders (as well as the short0lived four trac and eight trac

cartridge forats). At the sae tie! radio found ways to convert $hysical sounds to electroagneticwaves! while tele$hony found ways to use the $hysical $ro$erties of sound to $roduce a variable


23/75

electric current+ the sae variations! arriving in the receiver! cause a corres$onding vibration whichthe user hears as an a$$ro#iation of huan s$eech.

&eginning to study language and technology

n soe areas of language study! you ay start with an o$en ind or blan sheet! because you thinyou do not now the sub"ect. This ay be the case with the early history of English or $ragatics!say. 6hen you learn a little ore! you ay find! after all! that you did have soe useful nowledge tostart with. n the case of CT te#ts! you ay face the o$$osite danger. 'ecause! in one way! you arevery failiar with such te#ts both as author and audience! then you ay e#$ect to translate thatfailiarity easily into fir nowledge about how such te#ts wor.

As you begin! you should be ready tochallenge any unsubstantiated assu$tions0 or at least loo forsu$$orting evidence and inter$retation for any general clais that others ae. Even where you seea convincing inter$retation of a given CT te#t! you ay want to as how far this te#t (and the

inter$retation of it) isty$icalof CT te#ts generally.

4owever! you should certainly begin by looing at soe evidence. f you already have soe ideasabout what the evidenceightshow you! that is all right! so long as you are ready to acce$t adifferent view! if this is what the evidencedoesshow you.

How to acquire example texts

Suitable te#tsD4ow to obtain te#ts

n aing a collection of CT te#ts! you ay wish to thin about two 1uite different $arts of youra$$roach.

The $rocess of obtaining te#ts (in a $ractical and technical sense).

Selecting suitable te#ts fro the ass of $ossible data.

Let&s tae the second of these first! as it is arguably ore i$ortant to the language student! and canbe ore briefly e#$lained.

Suita%le texts

n one sense it is not only right! but also hel$ful in soe inds of investigation! to select a narrowerrange of language data fro a wider collection. Bery crudely! if have a large collection of transcribedte#t essages! and if wish to study the $ragatics of te#t essaging in i#ed0se# e#changes! then will use only those data where a ale sends a essage to a feale reci$ient and vice versa. That isan a$$ro$riate $rinci$le of selection.

'ut if then reduce the selection further (to ae it anageable)! need soe way to ae y

selection as close as $ossible to beingre$resentative. f already have a theory about what the dataight show! then ust ae 1uite sure that do not select the data that see ost strongly tosu$$ort y theory! and leave out the inconvenient te#ts. (As you study language science! you ayfind soe e#a$les of linguists who do this.) To avoid this! could use soe other way to reduce thetotal 1uantity! using soe $rinci$le of sa$ling (say! by the nae of the collector! the nae of thesource! or the date of collecting) that is re$resentative of the whole.

t is very easy to give ore weight to the (selective) evidence that a$$ears to $rove a theory. Ascientist ay do this in good faith! honestly believing that contrary evidence is the e#ce$tion that

$roves (confirs by testing) the rule. -or e#a$le! you ight listen to a $ost0atch discussion on aTB or radio broadcast of a soccer gae! and notice the su$$ortive over0la$$ing and turn taing
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#e1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#e2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#e1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#e2


24/75

aong the (ale) s$eaers. :ou ay have observed soething lie this on any occasions! but ifyou have already decided that en (generally) don&t tal lie that! while woen do! then you ayeffectively use the available evidence to su$$ort a conclusion o$$osite to what it indicates directly.

!ow to o%tain texts

-or any inds of CT te#t! obtaining the is as si$le as co$ying data in a range of forats (eitheras co$lete data files! or as data ob"ects! lie te#t and iages) and storing the on a co$uter ornetwor.

There are reasons why you ay wish to have the sae data saved in different ways 0 for e#a$le asunforatted $lain te#t or as te#t and iages foratted to $reserve its a$$earance e#actly as in itsoriginal conte#t. 9e$ending on the ind of investigation you intended to ae one or other of thesewould be far ore suitable than the other. -or e#a$le! if & studying the writer&s le#icon or synta# insoe 1uantitative way! then want $lain te#t that can analyse with various tools. f & studying theauthor&s awareness of the audience in soe 1ualitative way! then will want to see how the te#t was$resented to that audience originally.

Te#ts fro TB can be saved to various edia! fro B4S or 9B9 forats! to hard dis storage. Fadio$rograes can be saved in the sae way! fro satellite broadcasts! or converted to co$uter datafiles in forats lie $@ and Feal Audio! using a$$ro$riate software. Alternatively! you can usebroadcasts that are already saved and ade available for use in this for. The ''C has begun to dothis e#$erientally with soe radio $rograes available in $@ forat! while Teachers& TB has arange of short $rograes for users to download. n each case! you will find the files on the 6eb

sites athtt$*IIwww.bbc.co.u andhtt$*IIwww.teachers.tv . f you search the 6orld 6ide 6eb! you willfind ore such recorded $rograes that you can download.

t is $ossible to obtain te#t essages in a siilar way! if you use nternet technologies to send or readthe 0 a service that soe networs or third $arties $rovide. 'ut if you send and read the using aobile $hone only! then you ay need to transcribe the as a te#t or word0$rocessor docuent. :oushould

3ae an e#act co$y of all of the characters! including s$aces! in each essage.

Fecord inforation about

o when it was sent!

o fro who to who!

o where each was! and

o the age and se# of the sender and reci$ient.

nclude where $ossible the $revious (initiating) and subse1uent (res$onding) essages! if

there are either of these.

8lease note that while you would hold this inforation in a database or te#t docuent! you shouldhave obtained the $erission of the $eo$le concerned to do this! and would not $ass on thisinforation in unethical ways. (n an investigation you ight refer to the se# or age of the sender orreci$ient! if this is relevant to your research+ you would never identify either by nae! but ight useconvenient initials.) There is ore guidance on ethics below.

haring the texts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/http://www.teachers.tv/http://www.bbc.co.uk/http://www.teachers.tv/


25/75

nce you have a collection of docuents as co$uter data files! then it is easy to share the withother $eo$le! and ae larger collections. Co$yright laws ay liit the e#tent to which you can dothis! and will norally $revent you fro $ublishing your collection on a 6eb site. f course! where thete#ts coe fro you and your friends (e0ail essages and te#ts! say)! then you can share the aswidely as you have all agreed to do.

There ay be soe situations where you are unable to use co$uter technologies to study the te#ts!and where you resort to $rinting the onto $a$er. Soe teachers ay still rely on doing this and$hotoco$ying the $rintouts! but it is better (for interacting with the te#ts and for the environent) to doas uch as $ossible in digital for 0 such as adding annotations! coents or highlighting.

!sing the texts

6hile it is $ossible to obtain (for free) soe si$le tools for analysing electronic te#ts! you can aea start by using soe of the features of a word $rocessor.

Tae the e#a$le of a collection of transcribed te#t essages! using 3icrosoft 6ord. (ther word$rocessors ay have siilar tools.)

f these are already saved in a single docuent! that is fine. :ou need to delete any of the conte#tualinforation (and initiating and res$onding essages! if you do not need these). deally! so as not tolose the inforation you have deleted! save the resulting docuent with a new nae.

f they are not saved as a single docuent! co$y the individual essages (without any of the otherinforation) so that each is in a se$arate $aragra$h.

7ow you can use either the 6ord Count o$tion on the Tools enu or the 8ro$erties o$tion on the -ileenu. Either will show you the total nubers of $ages! $aragra$hs! lines! words and characters (withand without s$aces) in your docuent.

sing a calculator or s$readsheet! you can now ee$ statistical records and $erfor calculations!such as the ean nuber of characters $er $aragra$h.

:ou can also use the Fe$lace tool (on the Edit enu in 3S 6ord) to re$lace a given character or te#tstring! note the nuber of re$laceents shown! then undo the action. n this way you can calculatethe fre1uency with which the various essage writers use any le#ee.

6ith s$ell checing and graar checing you can identify and co$ute the fre1uency of use of non0standard fors.

n 3S 6ord! you can also set the s$elling and graar checer to show readability statistics. (To dothis! go to the Tools enu! select $tions! then choose the S$elling and Graar tab! and ae surethe bo# ared ,Show readability statistics, is checed.) The software uses the -lesch Feading Easeand -lesch0?incaid Grade Level scores! as e#$lained here.

'lesch (eading Ease score

This rates te#t on a 5>>0$oint scale+ the higher the score! the easier it is for the reader tounderstand the docuent. The forula for the -lesch Feading Ease score is*

2>=.J@ 0 (5.>5 # ASL) 0 (J


26/75

ASL P average sentence length (the nuber of words divided by the nuber of sentences)

AS6 P average nuber of syllables $er word (the nuber of syllables divided by the nuberof words)

'lesch)*incaid +rade Leel score

This rates te#t on a .S. grade0school level. -or e#a$le! a score of J.> eans that an eighthgrader can understand the docuent. The forula for the -lesch0?incaid Grade Level score is*

(.@; # ASL) R (55.J # AS6) 0 5.;

where*

ASL P average sentence length (the nuber of words divided by the nuber of sentences)

AS6 P average nuber of syllables $er word (the nuber of syllables divided by the nuberof words)

"uidance on ethics

8erission to use language data 0 e#a$le letter of re1uest

n studying language and technology! you will norally wish to investigate CT te#ts fro a range ofsources! including $rivate individuals! such as your faily! friends and students or teachers fro yourschool or college. Soeties this ay see intrusive! and it is i$ortant to res$ect other $eo$le!

rather than see the as only a source of data. n general! you should obtain $erission in advance touse these te#ts. And let $eo$le now what use you will! and will not! ae of any data.

4aving said that! any $eo$le (your friends and ac1uaintances) ay readily give s$ecific or general$erission for you to use te#ts that they have written 0 such as e0ail essages! obile $hone te#ts!te#t chat fro instant essenger conversations! $ostings on essage boards! and 6eb logs.

f you are a student! you ay wish to use these in relatively closed conte#t 0 for your individual studyof the te#ts! or a shared activity in a classroo. A teacher ay wish to share the ore widely! fore#a$le with other teachers! to build u$ a ore e#tensive collection. t ay be sensible! therefore! toget the e#$licit $erission of the ,owners,! for any uses you ay wish later to ae. (Conversely! it isvery frustrating to find yourself later unable to use data that you have $ainstaingly collected! becauseyou oitted to get this $erission.)

6here you use such te#ts in any $ublic conte#t! then in ost cases you should reove anything inthe data that ight identify any individual e#actly. t&s not acce$table to assue that you can taeliberties because you now the $erson fro who you have ac1uired language data. :ou ay wish touse the s$ecien $erission for below. (Ada$t it as necessary.)

,ermission to use language data ) example letter of re-uest

To 6ho t 3ay Concern*

As $art of y Advanced Level wor in English Language! a re1uired to find real language
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#f1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#f1


27/75

data! and inter$ret the according to theoretical odels of language.

As you have indly su$$lied! or agreed to su$$ly! such data! need your consent for the use

will ae of the. This letter e#$lains what will ha$$en to the data you have $rovided! and hasa s$ace for you to show your agreeent to this. f you have any further 1uestions about theLanguage nvestigation! $lease contact the su$ervising teacher or head of de$artent at yschool.

ay use co$uter a$$lication software to transcribe! save or ada$t the data that you have$rovided. The data you have su$$lied will norally be seen by the teachers su$ervising ywor! and ay be seen by other teachers running the Advanced Level course! as well as byoderators (e#ainers) of coursewor who assess the wor of candidates at y school.

f y teachers or wish to $lace the investigation in the $ublic doain (by $rint! broadcast or6eb $ublishing) they or will see your $erission. f you give $erission! the $ublication ofyour data will confor to noral ethical $rocedures for scientific research 0 your naes will be

shown only as initials! and other identifying inforation will not a$$ear. 8lease show yourconsent to y use of the data you have su$$lied by signing the for below.

Than you for your hel$!

Student nvestigator(8rint nae and sign)

Su$ervising Teacher(8rint nae and sign)

have read the inforation about the use that will be ade of language data that havesu$$lied. a the $erson legally entitled to give $erission to use these data! whichwere originally written or s$oen by e or by a child of who a the $arent or legalguardian! and on whose behalf can give such $erission. agree to allow you to usethe data have $rovided. :ou ay use these data only in the way you have described. fyou wish to $ublish the data! you will see y further $erission for this.

Signed*

8rint nae*

9ate*

#onsidering the authors and the audiences

n this guide! CT te#ts are categoried by the technologies that are used to $roduce and e#$eriencethe 0 tele$hony! radio and TB! and nternet technologies. 6e can! however! also usefully consider

the in ters of nuber 0 is there oneauthoror ore! and is theaudiencean individual or a largergrou$ A second diension would be the degree to which the conte#ts of utterance and rece$tion are$rivate or $ublic.

Let&s e#$lain each of these ideas further.


28/75

A well0nown 5;;>s coercial for a ? obile $hone co$any ased the 1uestion ,6ho would youlie to have a one0to0one with, Soe inds of CT te#t are very clearly counications between two

individuals (dyadiccounications). 6hen the $artici$ants are aware of each other as individuals!then this influences the way they s$ea! te#t or write. E#a$les would be

tele$hone or instant essenger conversations!

a series of te#t essages! or

an e0ail corres$ondence.

CT te#ts ay also coe froone0to0anyinteractions! as ha$$ens when

send an e0ail to a grou$ of $eo$le!

$ost on a essage board!

$ublish a docuent on the 6orld06ide 6eb! or

send a te#t essage to a service that dis$lays y essage on a TB channel.

6here there are ulti$le authors! we can also see the interactions as beingany to any! asha$$ens when a nuber of $eo$le

$ost on a essage board! to "oin in a discussion!

call a radio or TB $hone0in $rograe! or

tae $art in a tele$hone or instant essenger conference.

n a way one0to0any and any0to0any interactions ay overla$. The difference ay lie with theauthor in the degree to which he or she feels a sense of being one aong any s$eaers oressage0$osters! or is unaware of the others who contribute. 6e can thin! too! of situations wheretwo $eo$le s$ea to each other! but in the conte#t of a radio or TB broadcast with a huge unseene#ternal audience.

The degree to which an CT te#t is $rivate or $ublic is related to these 1uestions! but has soe furtherdiensions. A one0to0one conversation ay be ty$ically $rivate! but this can change when! fore#a$le*

one of the $artici$ants re$orts it to other $eo$le+

recording technology leads to the $roduction of a transcri$t+

one s$eaer is (or both are) in a $lace where others can hear hi or her (on a train! say)+

a su$ervisor reads an e0ail e#change! looing for ina$$ro$riate use.

:ou can also see that in any of these cases! the degree to which any one $erson isawareof the$rivacy or o$enness of the counication varies. There are $eo$le who will s$ea on a train withoutaing any concession to the $resence of other $eo$le! while others will oderate their s$eech in all

sorts of ways because the situation constrains or inhibits the in soe way.


29/75

n studying CT te#ts! you should certainly consider these distinctions 0 which belong in the broaderarea of $ragatics. :ou should focus! es$ecially! on the ways in which the technology has aninfluence on how they wor. Soeties this leads to 1uite novel inds of interaction! as whensoeone sends a te#t essage! nowing it will be dis$layed on a TB broadcast! where a wideaudience sees it! soe of who ay in turn res$ond! so that their re$lies are also dis$layed on theTB broadcast.

$nvestigations

n any area of language study! it is often hel$ful to su$$leent what you read about other $eo$le&s

research byaing your own investigations. This is a good idea because language in use changesover tie and is influenced by any social and cultural factors! so that the findings of a $articular$iece of research ay be valid for the $lace and tie where it ha$$ened! but ay not be as widely (oruniversally true) as is claied. To give a si$le e#a$le! anyone who watches and listens to the

''C&s football $rograes3atch of the 9ayand3atch of the 9ay Livewill hear en s$eaing inways that are su$$osedly ore characteristic of woen (turn0taing! su$$ortive overla$$ing! $ositivefeedbac).

n the case of CT te#ts it is es$ecially i$ortant for obvious reasons. The novelty of these fors oflanguage $roduction eans that any research into it is necessarily liited 0 it will be recent! $erha$snot widely $ublished! and will not have had uch tie to be tested by other views! so that aconsensus can eerge.

Even where the research is good! it ay need to be re$eated fre1uently! because the uses of newtechnologies are theselves changing ra$idly 0 so that! for e#a$le! the conventions that ightcharacterie! say! the use of electronic ail for business counications have changed e1uallyra$idly. ('ecause of s$a! it is less efficient+ the users are now ore aware that it can be read byothers for who it was not intended 0 which ay be anything fro alicious forwarding to industriales$ionage+ a technologically so$histicated user ay send only as $lain te#t! because he or she nowsthat any ail browsers will not dis$lay rich te#t or 4T3L correctly! and so on).

This eans that your own research ay be the best that is available 0 $erha$s because it is done

well! or $erha$s because it is theonlyresearch that is available or that is relevant to the area oftheory about which you wish to have ob"ective inforation.

$nteractive texts

Soe inds of digital te#t are described asinteractive. This is! strictly! incorrect. 7o te#t! in isolation!can be interactive 0 interactions occur in the relationshi$ of a te#t to its author and audienceK. Andwhen $eo$le are involved! any te#t can be used interactively 0 we can tae a handwritten or $rint te#t(whether it&s a $oe or a $iece of "un ail) and read it aloud! write a review! $lagiarie it for soeother te#t and so on.

Kne ight 1uibble with this and say that there is one way in which a digital docuent can beinteractive without huan agency! since a search engine robot (also nown as a s$ider or crawler)can $erfor an autoatic cataloguing of the content of docuents on a 6eb site! and send theresults to the search engine database. 4owever! this tas has no value until a huan being $erforsa search that uses the inforation that the robot has sent bac to the database.

3any of the interactions that ay ha$$en between a te#t and its audience will not be affected by thetechnology used to $roduce it. f we want to $erfor a scene fro a $lay! we can use a $rinted co$yof the scri$t! or find a digital version! and use this to learn our lines. (n the case of a $lay! one ightbegin to $erfor with a $rinted version of one&s lines and cues! but would be less liely to use aco$uter for this 0 though $erha$s a handheld device or $ersonal digital assistant would serve this$ur$ose.) 'ut there are soe inds of interaction that are s$ecific to digital te#ts. These ay be

things that we cannot do with $rint or written te#ts! or


30/75

things that we can do ore $owerfully! swiftly and accurately by using technology.

As an e#a$le of the first! we can$ublish the te#t to an unliited nuber of readers at no e#tra cost !whereas $rinted or written docuents re1uire ore aterial and labour to $roduce ulti$le co$ies.

n the second case! there are any things that we can do with conventional $rint te#ts! but which areso tie0consuing and sub"ect to the $ossibility of error! that we would not do the at all! or would dothe! if we really needed to! very slowly. 'ut we can do the easily and conveniently with suitableco$uter a$$lications. E#a$les would be

counting all the occurrences of a given le#ical ite in a te#t+

using analytical tools to calculate the readability score or fog inde# of a large te#t+

changing the forat of $resentation of a long literary wor+

co$ying long $assages of a te#t for $ur$oses of scholarshi$ or $lagiaris+

collaborating in a distributed grou$ to $roduce a docuent with ulti$le authors.

There are soe inds of interaction that are ore convenient using $rint te#ts. ne can obtain thete#t of a novel as a digital docuent! and read it on a $ersonal co$uter&s dis$lay device. 'ut ostreaders will find it easier to use a $rinted version in boo forat.

The author of a digital docuent can also use soe inds of software to $reventinteraction. f you$re$are docuents in soe word0$rocessor or $ortable docuent forat writer software! you can fi#

the te#t so that the end usercannotco$y it! re$lace it or save the docuent under a different nae!for the $ur$oses of editing it.

4owever! readers with sensory i$airent or soe inds of learning difficulty ay be able to read thenovel ore easily in the digital forat! since this allows the use of te#t0to0s$eech software and otherreader devices. 6e can also use co$uter software to increase the sie of the te#t as it is dis$layed(as the writer of this guide did in writing it! to overcoe the effects of a te$orary visual i$airent).

ocial functions of technological media

se of co$uters for social interactionDCybers$ace as a social conte#t

.se of computers for social interaction

Soe $eo$le ay regard interactions conducted in cybers$ace as not social by definition. Theychallenge our understanding of the 1ualifier ,social,! because traditional social activities re1uire$eo$le to be $hysically together. 'ut $ersonal relationshi$s in an abstract sense! and intellectuale#changes can and do $roliferate. This is found chiefly in the use of distributed networs (internal

networsntranets/ or the e#ternal nternet*nter0here is short for ,international, not ,internal,). Bisitsto 6eb sites allow for liited interaction! but ostly this is a new for of reading! with little sco$e forres$onse. 3ore significant is chat. This is a eta$hor fro s$eech! but the interaction is conducted inwriting (ty$ing). As in s$oen conversation! there is turn taing and contributions ay be short. As insocial conversation! standard fors are not essential 0 $hrases re$lace sentences! there is no s$ellchecing! $unctuation ay be ,creative, and eoticons ay a$$ear. Soe software allows the,chatters, to insert iages! nown as avatars! to re$resent theselves in the ,conversation,. Thesecharacters are conventional re$resentations by se#! dress and age. 3illions of such interactions tae$lace daily! often bringing strangers together.

"y%erspace as a social context
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#g1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#g2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#g1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#g2


31/75

Lie other social conte#ts! cybers$ace has $rotocols and eti1uette. -or nternet technologies! this is

usually called7eti1uette. t is easy for a novice to send a ail essage to illions of other users! orto as a 1uestion to which the re$ly is already well nown aong other users of a service. So thereare rules! and naes for disa$$roved $ractices. 3ail sent out en asse (electronic ,"un ail,) is

calleds$a(the word is also used as a verb). Sending re$eated severe verbal rebues to those whobreach 7eti1uette isflaing. 8ostal addresses are rarely e#changed (no need) and any users donot reveal their se#! or even! soeties! their $ersonal naes 0 the e0ail address is an alias. Sinceeach user ay be at hoe! each ay feel soe intiacy in the interaction. Cost is inial(co$ared to tele$hone calls) and while the e#change ay be swifter than ,snail ail, (conventional

$ostal letters) there is enough tie delay for res$onses to be co$osed. n4oe Truths(''CFadio

:ounger users of nternet counications are serious ultitasers.7aoi 'aron&s 2>>@ study1uoted abovefound that*

...H> $ercent of college students who answered a 1uestionnaire as $art of thestudy said they were siultaneously $ursuing other activities while they 3&dused nstant 3essaging/! such as listening to a edia $layer! word $rocessing!taling to soeone in $erson! eating or drining! watching television or taling onthe tele$hone. The average nuber of 3 conversations $er student at one tiewas about three! the highest nuber being 52. They had ulti$le conversations!they said! because of tie constraints! and also because focusing on "ust one 3conversation would be ,too weird.,

Social attitudes to computer users

6here $e"orative language use is disa$$roved in res$ect to gender or race! it $ersists in relation to

co$uter users 0 as in ters such asnerdorgee. The forer originally denoted soeone lacingsocial $oise! but has develo$ed so that it now i$lies industry and intelligence! while the originaldenotation reains but in a weaer for. 8e"orative language about race once reflected the s$eaer&sor writer&s fear of the unnown or e#otic. 8e"orative language use about co$uter users ay welle#$ress a siilar fear (and so tell us ore about the s$eaers or writers than the $erson to who

these refer). A ore abiguous attitude a$$ears in the noun hacer(which has connotations ofdaring! stealth and cunning). 3ore a$$roving is the eta$horguru(as in ,6eb guru aob 7ielsen,)!which liens technical understanding to religious enlightenent and wisdo.

&echnology and the lexicon
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#h1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#h2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#baronhttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#baronhttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#h1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#h2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#baronhttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#baron


32/75


33/75

#racking new lexemes

There are different ways in which we can do this. ne is by observation in use! while another is byuse ofreference wors(such as dictionaries! glossaries and encyclo$aedias! which are usuallyco$iled fro other $eo$le&s observations of le#ees in use).

The second ethod allows systeatic tracing of le#ees! to see whether they have $assed fros$ecialist to ore general use. :ou could! for e#a$le! find a technical glossary fro an earlier$eriod! and co$are it with what is recorded in conte$orary glossaries and dictionaries. Thefollowing le#ees a$$ear in a glossary fro 5;;5 (,A straightforward $ath through the "argon

"ungle,!8C Answers! Bolue 5! uly 5;;5! -uture 8ublishing! 'ath! ?)*

ASC! 'ASC! binary! bit! bus! byte! cos! CA9! C90F3! character! daisywheel! data! dis!drive! file! font! hard dis! he#adecial! ail erge! 39! ode! ouse! ultitasing!$arallel $ort! $eri$heral (noun)! $rinter! FA3! F3! serial $ort! s$readsheet! word $rocessor

4ere is a selection fro 9avid Crystal&sAn A0 of 7ets$ea(fro his 2>>>< Longan 2>>< Co$act #ford 2>>

ASC 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0

bit! byte 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0

bus 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 07o0

character 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0 07o0

cos 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 07o0

drive 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 07o0
http://www.askoxford.com/dictionarieshttp://www.askoxford.com/dictionaries


34/75

ail erge 0:es0 07o0 07o0 07o0

39 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0

ouse 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 0:es0

ultitasing 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0 0:es0

$eri$heral 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 0:es0

s$readsheet 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 0:es0

word $rocessor 0:es0 07o0 0:es0 0:es0

6hile this shows that the s$ecial le#is is being recorded ore widely! ost of these le#ees are listedby the dictionary as having a technical sense! or one related to co$uting 0 they are $assing intowider use only because ore $eo$le are using co$uter technologies at wor and at hoe.

An e#ce$tion to this would beultitasing! which has e#tended its eaning fro the conte#t ofco$uting to general huan activities. 6hen $eo$le suggest that woen are better than en at

ultitasing! they very rarely ean that they are better at running any co$uter a$$licationssiultaneously. n relation to teenagers! ultitasing does often refer to the siultaneous use oftechnologies! but not s$ecifically co$uter a$$lications. Thus! y daughter ultitass by chatting withthe 3S7 instant essenger (in several sessions at once)! browsing soe digital $hotogra$hs!watching TB and sending and receiving te#t essages by obile $hone.

6e can see how established or coon le#is is ada$ted to a new! ore restricted! eaning with bus.This derives! eta$horically! fro the vehicle that taes $eo$le to and fro various $laces. t denotes!in co$uting! an electronic circuit that trans$orts data between different $arts of a syste! and

connected devices. The le#ee has now been e#tended into the acrony S'(,universal serialbus,) 0 a standard connection technology for $ersonal co$uters and $eri$heral devices.

6e can also see change occurring with$ort. This was originally used to denote a $hysical connection(as in the serial and $arallel or Centronics $orts on early 8Cs). 7ow it usually denotes a digital orlogical connection 0 so the nternet 8rotocol uses a very large nuber of $orts for different tass (thisaes it $ossible for syste designers to regulate use). t is derived! of course! fro the old eaningof $ort as a $lace to and fro which shi$s sail.

1here do new words come from0

Ti Shortis! suariing a cha$ter of his boo!The Language of CT! writes that*

,-ro the social $ers$ective! vocabulary will eerge out of $articular conte#ts of relationshi$s!intentions! counities and $ower. Considering word origins and how words coe into the language

can be a $roductive way of seeing this social diension and the ways in which new words reflect anddefine how $eo$le are thining and relating to each other! as well as to the technology being

used.,htt$*IIwww.netting0it.co

n one sense! this has always been true. 'ut new technologies can $rovide a eans for new inds

ofdistributedcounity to eerge and a eans for e#isting or eerging counities to becoeore confident. -or e#a$le! $eo$le who love $oodles ay not live close enough together to foranything lie an interest grou$ with face0to0face eetings. 'ut there are enough $oodle lovers in the

world for the to for a digital grou$. (Search onhtt$*IIwww.google.co for ,$oodle lovers grou$sessage boards, and you will find several.) :ou will also find any grou$s with ore seriousagendas both benevolent and anti0social.

'ecause these counities are distributed! across continents or the whole world! their usages cans$read into ainstrea language varieties ore swiftly.
http://www.netting-it.com/http://www.google.com/http://www.google.com/http://www.netting-it.com/http://www.google.com/


35/75

!ow are new words formed0

Le#ical growth 0 neologissDLe#ical growth 0 new eanings for established tersD3or$hology

7ew technologies connect so thoroughly with the wider society that uses the! that language growthin relation to the does not differ aredly fro what ha$$ens in the language generally* there aresoe wholly new words! there are any ore borrowings and ada$tations of older words! and thereare $atterns of or$hology whereby roots and affi#es are used to build new fors fro old eleents!or where longer fors are abbreviated or reduced to acronys. Ti Shortis states that*

,Linguists have develo$ed a ta#onoy or syste for classifying ty$es of word foration and thevolue of new technical words coing into the language is an o$$ortunity to see these classificationsin action+ it is also $ossible that there are soe interesting differences in $atterns of soe of these

new words.,htt$*IIwww.netting0it.co

4ere are "ust a few e#a$les.

Lexical growth ) neologisms

This is fairly easy to study. These are words or $hrases coined to denote new $rocesses andactivities! $roducts or technologies. These are often acronys (fored by initials) lie*

'S(basic in$ut out$ut syste)!

C8(central $rocessing unit)!

9SL(digital subscriber line)!

FA3(rando access eory) or

FL(unifor or uni1ue/ resource locator).

Soe others are $ortanteau words! such as

bit

eoticon

ode

'ac to to$

Lexical growth ) new meanings for esta%lished terms

This is a far ore $rolific area of le#ical growth. Soe e#a$les are now alost universally nown in

develo$ed societies! such asiconor ouse (soeties "oingly calledarodent).6indowsanddesto$are eta$horical naes for $arts of the interface. Acacheis ate$orary store (ineory! which also has a new eta$horical eaning). 3any of these eta$horsare derived fro reseblance to

huan activities (eory! client0server! file! folder! utility)+

traditional counications ($acet! ail! router! bus)! and even!
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j5http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j7http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j7http://www.netting-it.com/http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j5http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#j7http://www.netting-it.com/http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


36/75

food and drin! inava(a $rograing language+ the nae is S slang forcoffee)!cooies(files which e#change inforation about the user with 6eb sites)ands$a(unsolicited e0ail).

Arguably the ost a$t eta$hor is in the nae of the6orld 6ide 6eb. Search engines gather

inforation about resources by sending out $rogras that record docuent inforation and return itto the search site&s database* these $rogras are calledrobots! crawlersors$iders. The last of theseis a $unning reference to the nae of the 6eb.

'ac to to$

Morphology

Co$ounding abounds. The affi#0ware(as insoftware) has s$awned any new ters in co$uting!such asauthorware! firware! freeware! grou$ware! alwareandshareware* the basic or$hology isverb or noun R suffi#. The $ortanteau words are fored by co$ounding! with abbreviation of oneor ore eleents as in

bit (binary R digit)

ode (odulator Rdeodulator) and

eoticon (eotion Ricon).

'ac to to$

&echnology and grammar ' the grammar of computer languages

8rograing or $erating Syste (S) languages are artificial (invented) languages. They ay usecharacters other than those on conventional eyboards. They will have rules or conventions forwriting! and none is a s$oen language. 4owever! any reseble natural fors of English (for

e#a$le 3icrosoft&s 9S! which has coands liety$e! abortorco$y). 4T3L (4y$erTe#t 3ar0u$Language) wors lie ordinary ty$ed English with two fundaental differences. The software that usesit ignores any s$aces in a file. And any instructions! such as aing te#t bold or drawing a table! are

shown by tags. These are $airs of angle bracets! giving an instruction (e.g.UbVP ae te#t bold) orreversing it (e.g.UIbVP turn off bold te#t). The only difference in the for of these two instructions isthe slash character. 4T3L has its own synta# and (fle#ible) seantics.

'ac to to$

#omputer software as a language authority

This is already a reality. 8ro$rietary software has s$elling and graar tools that are hard to ignore. tuses established le#icogra$hy in electronic for. The graar checing is not yet able to recognieco$le# standard synta#! but s$ell checing is ore secure. 6here earlier software a$$lications used$riarily S English s$elling! soe now allow great variety 0 which $erha$s reduces its tendency tosu$$ort the eergence of a global or international standard s$elling syste for English. This seesnot to be an altruistic or $rinci$led develo$ent! so uch as a res$onse to the consuer&s deand tohave regional s$elling 0 as with ? users of word0$rocessors disa$$roving of the s$ell0checers& useof S fors. (n s$ite of which any 'ritish users do not now that they can set the ? s$elling as thedefault! and co$lain that their software is ,Aerican,! whereas they have not discovered how toae it ,'ritish,)

'ac to to$
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


37/75

#elephony

How we use telephones

9o you find yourself! or have you observed other $eo$le! doing any of these things while s$eaing on

the tele$hone

3aing gestures! even though the other $artici$ant in a conversation cannot see these+

changing one&s accent! as co$ared with face0to0face conversation (for e#a$le

accoodating the other $erson&s accent ore aredly)+

e#$eriencing greater (or reduced) self0consciousness or ebarrassent! co$ared to face0

to0face counication.

The tele$hone e#cludes the use of visual cues and gestures. t also gives an acoustic re$resentationof s$eech that is less rich than the original s$oen sounds. And until recent ties the cost of calls

encouraged any users of tele$hones to atte$t to counicate ore swiftly than in everydays$eech. (This ay e#$lain why $arents or grand$arents feel unease at! and soeties e#$resscriticis of! younger $eo$le&s tendency to use tele$hones without uch regard for the tie.)

Tele$hone counication using landlines has also! until recently! been inhibited by the restrictedavailability of the syste. Ty$ically! a doestic user would have one line (or two! at ost) so thatanyone&s using it for long $eriods would $revent any other calls fro arriving. 7ow there are systesto alert users to incoing calls (,call waiting,) while use of obile $hones eans that the technologyis not restricted in this way. (Though ature users ay retain the attitudes that were a$$ro$riate tothe older! restricted! systes.)

'ac to to$

( dyadic medium

4ow far is it trueD6hat is the reason for this

-or soe tie now! it has been technically $ossible to use a tele$hone for a conference call! wherethree or ore $eo$le tae $art in a conversation siultaneously. t is ore difficult to initiate than asi$le one0to0one call! but less co$le# than any other $rocedures that $eo$le routinely undertaewith tele$hones.

6e can tae! as a woring hy$othesis! the idea that there is soething about voice tele$hony that

encourages one0to0one ordyadicinteractions rather than grou$ counications 0 ,two&s co$any

and three&s a crowd,. The reason for doing this would be an i$ression! based on observation! butnot in any systeatic way! that! as a $ro$ortion of tele$hone calls for various inds of user! one0to0oneconversations are vastly ore coon than grou$ interactions. Starting fro this $oint! we can dovarious things to find out if it is true! and then to e#$lain what we find.

!ow far is it true0

6e can find this out by a nuber of ethods. -or e#a$le*

asing $eo$le to estiate what $ro$ortion of calls are one0to0one or grou$ conversations+

ee$ing a log of our own calls 0 and $ooling the results for a grou$ survey+

asing tele$hone co$anies for inforation about call ty$es.
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#l1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#l2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#l1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#l2


38/75

'ac to to$

1hat is the reason for this0

This is harder to answer. Any reasons that you suggest will only be tentative and $rovisional! thoughyou ay be able to devise research tass to investigate further. t ay be that the action of initiating a

call is soething we identify with s$eaing to an individual! but not in a grou$ discussion. 8ossibly! itreflects a general $reference for s$eaing one0to0one that we are not able to sustain in othersituations (at wor! at hoe! at leisure) because other $eo$le are visibly $resent 0 whereas the $honeallows us to indulge the $reference without causing others to feel e#cluded (since they do not nowwe are s$eaing to soeone else). f that sees i$lausible! consider this* if all your other contactscould now! every tie you ade a call! to who it was ade and how long it lasted 0 ight thatcause you to change soe of your $ractices in using the tele$hone

'ac to to$

( democratic medium

The tele$hone began life as a technology that was to be used s$aringly and for relatively i$ortantcounications 0 so that in the SA and 'ritain $ublic tele$hone ioss allowed $eo$le to ae freecalls to the eergency services! while the first $eo$le to have tele$hones in their hoes includeddoctors! senior $olice officers and sheriffs or agistrates.

As the technology has becoe less e#$ensive and ore convenient over tie! it has also becoe$ossible to see what ight be the liits of its use. (6hen cost and convenience cease to affectdecisions as to use! then $eo$le will decide for other reasons.) 4ere! too! you can see for yourself.3ost odern systes (landline and obile) $rovide the user (when they send the bill) with e#tensiveinforation about the nuber and duration of calls! where the other $erson was and so on. t is easy!fro such records! to show which were social calls! which related to wor! to consuer affairs!$ersonal finance and so on.

t is less easy with landlines to ee$ a record ofincoingcalls 0 so here one ight wish to ee$ a logto get an ob"ective $icture of what is ha$$ening.

6e ight assue that $eo$le use tele$hony e#tensively erely because it is so ine#$ensive 0because it is there! so to s$ea. The vast $o$ularity and use of the technology are self0evident! but dowe really have uch idea of what it is doing 4ow any of those calls are giving i$ortantinforation and how any are young en sending "oes or insults to friends 4ow any are bondingsessions and how any are children asing a $arent for a lift after usic $ractice

'ac to to$

Alost certainly there are aret research co$anies that have ade surveys of this. 'ut you aynot be able to share their findings! without difficulty! or very good contacts. :ou can! however! carryout your own surveys or ee$ your own logs! for $ooling with ebers of a grou$.

:ou could do this using s$readsheet or si$le database software 0 recording inforation in a nuberof fields! such as

the category of call and reci$ient

the tie of day when it was ade

the duration of the call

the cost (if nown)! and so on.
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


39/75

t is better to have any fields of inforation (and disregard the for $articular inter$retations)! solong as there are not so any as to ae it onerous to ee$ the records or logs.

'ac to to$

&elephone conversations by landline and mobile

4ow the ediu affects the essageD8ragaticsDGraarD9iscourse features D8honologyDslanguage use with this technology changing over tie

!ow the medium affects the message

,ragmatics

8eo$le who use voice tele$hony norally cannot see each other. (There are increasingly e#ce$tionsto this where $eo$le use tele$hones to s$ea! say! in an o$en0$lan office or obile $hones in arestaurant or bar! where they can see each other.) This eans that uch of the non0verbalcounication is lost. (The s$eaers ay well continue to use gestures 0 as the writer of this guidedoes 0 but the other $erson cannot see these! in either case.)

n studying tele$hone conversations! you ight consider whether a $ragatic analysis suggests thats$eaers do things differently fro their $ractice in face to face conversations 0 do they observe theconversational a#is listed by 8aul Grice! or do they e$loy face and $oliteness strategies to agreater degree than when the $arties can see each other

9o s$eaers have shared nowledge! and does one assue the other shares his or her nowledge!

so that they refer to thingselli$tically 9o s$ecific conversations allude to other conversations orevents or the coon culture of the s$eaers

n e#$loring how the technology ay influence language as it ediates conversation! then $ragatic

analysis is liely to be a fruitful area of study. n coenting on te#ts you are seeing for the first tie!you will need to ae use of soe $ragatic conce$ts! as in this e#a$le! fro Adrian Attwood*

,6e now fro the 1uestion that Te#t - is a sales scri$t. The $ragatic consideration of this te#taes us loo for features! which are designed to reassure the $otential custoer rather than toinfor the. 8articularly! in this case! where the scri$t is for a tele$hone conversation and one of theob"ects fro the sales0$erson&s view$oint is to ee$ the other $erson taling. This eans that the te#twill try to close off as any $otential e#its as $ossible and therefore be siilar to soe of the noralco0o$erative $rinci$les of s$oen language.,

'ac to to$

+rammar

9o $eo$le generally vary their graatical usage in s$oen English! when they s$ea on thetele$hone! as co$ared to face0to0face s$eaing t is $ossible that use of the technology ight alterone&s sense of forality! and attentiveness to su$$osed ,correct, fors.

-or ost $eo$le there is considerable difference between the graar of their writing and theirs$eaing. Co$ared to this the difference between the graar used in s$eaing in differentsituations! with or without the use of any counication technology ay be less evident.

'ac to to$

Discourse features
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m4http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m4http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m5http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m5http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m4http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m5http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#m6http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


40/75

Boice tele$hony has $roduced soe conventions that hel$ us construct a discourse! in ters ofbeginning! iddle and end. These often give inforation that is redundant for users of newer fors oftele$hony (such as answering a call by stating one&s $hone nuber). 'ut they ay survive as a indof traditional courtesy.

t is fairly easy to gather evidence about this! either by asing $eo$le to say what they ty$ically do! or

by ee$ing a log of what they do! when you call the. :ou ight consider 1uestions such as thefollowing! to organie what you find.

9oes the $erson who receives the call always s$ea first

4ow does the $erson who receives a call re$ly 9oes he or she give a nuber! utter a

greeting! or do soething else

9oes the $erson aing the call e#$lain in suary for the reason for calling

6hile one $erson is s$eaing! does the other listen silently or give $ositive feedbac and

su$$ortive overla$$ing (things lie ,, and ,yes,)

9oes the $erson who ade the call or the one who receives it usually bring the conversation

to an end

6hat conventional e#$ressions do we use to close the conversation

4ow long is the series of interactions that ars the ending of the tal! before one or other

$uts down the tele$hone

'y studying lots of real conversations! you will 1uicly add to this list. 'y $ooling your findings withothers! you ay develo$ a very useful survey of conventions of tele$hone conversations. f you also

log the age and se# of the s$eaer! and whether the conversation used landlines only! obiles only orlandline to obile 0 these details! too! ay hel$ you see soe $atterns eerging.

'ac to to$

,honology

9o we use different s$eech sounds when we use certain technologies Can we account for what wefind in answering this 1uestion (-or e#a$le! does the general tendency towards accoodationbecoe stronger when we use a tele$hone)

9oes technology influence such things as su$rasegental features of s$eech

Are we ore or less cofortable with $auses and silence than in face0to0face conversation

9o we try to fill silences or even as the other $erson 1uestions about the (,Are you still

thereIall right,)

'ac to to$

Is language use with this technology changing oer time0

f $eo$le use tele$hones increasingly! and if the technology becoes ever less cons$icuous!

then our ca$acity to use the $hone un0self0consciously for social intercourse could also bee#$ected to grow.
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


41/75

'ut a contrary influence coes fro the uses of tele$hony in business where any

organiations teach both general $oints of eti1uette and even very s$ecific routines (or

scri$ts) for their e$loyees to use when aing calls.

rganiations such as call centres will enforce these conventions by onitoring the calls (anddisci$lining those who deviate fro the scri$t). They are usually re1uired to notify the $erson

receiving the call that this is ha$$ening 0 coonly the caller will say that the call is beingonitored ,for training $ur$oses,.

'ac to to$

$nteraction by text messaging

6hat is te#t essagingD8o$ular ideas about te#t essagingD4ow the ediu affects theessage

1hat is text messaging0

Te#t essaging ost coonly refers to the $ractice of co$osing and sending essages withobile $hones. These are usually liited (though this ay not reain the case) to 5=> characters inlength (including s$aces! or J> if non0Latin characters are used). The essage writer uses a salley$ad! in which each ey has ulti$le values which the writer selects by re$eated $ressing of therelevant ey until the character re1uired a$$ears. The characters include Arabic nuerals! accented

characters (such asM) or letters fro other al$habets (such as W! used in 7orwegian) and various$unctuation ars and other sybols.

t is $ossible to use the sae underlying technology to co$ose and send and ($erha$s lesscoonly and usefully) to receive such essages using a $ersonal co$uter. 6hile few $eo$lewould use this to send fro one co$uter to another (since e0ail is easier and less constrained) thisis a very $ractical technology to use when one $erson is using a $ersonal co$uter with an nternet

connection! and the other $erson is using a obile $hone. This resebles loosely the situation whereA (in an office or at hoe) uses a landline to ae a tele$hone call to the obile $hone of ' (who istravelling soewhere).

The outline history below ay be useful in deonstrating the e#tent of the use of this counicationtechnology. There are now ore obile tele$hones registered in the ? than there are $eo$le.Although young $eo$le have been 1uicer to tae u$ the technology! it has gradually been ado$ted by$eo$le of all ages! in a way that resebles the growth of hoe $ersonal co$uting.

'ac to to$

A &rief !istory of .* #ext

5;;2* The first ? te#t essage was sent in 9eceber.

5;;* S3S was launched coercially in the ?.

5;;J* ? $erators 2! range! Bodafone and T03obile established an interconnection.

5;;J* The first recorded onthly te#t essage total was .< illion! in A$ril.

2>>>* The first TB $rograe to use te#t essaging in a storyline was Eastenders.
http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n1http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n2http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#n3http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


42/75

2>>5* August was the first onth in which over one billion essages were sent in the ?.

2>>2* The first localIayoral electoral vote by te#t essage too $lace on 2@rd 3ay.

2>>2* n 9eceber 5 billion S3S essages $er day were e#changed globally

2>>@* HJ illion te#t essages were sent by 'ritons on Balentine&s 9ay! = ties ore thantraditional cards and a @HQ increase on te#t figures for 2>>2.

2>>@* A0Level results 0 =H illion te#t essages were sent throughout the ? on August 5> 9owning Street.

2>>* n 7ew :ear&s 9ay! the total nuber of te#t essages sent reached 5@@ illion! the highestrecorded daily total.

2>>* ;Q of 5=02< year olds used te#t essaging regularly! each sending an average of 5>> te#ts$er onth. The $ea hours for te#ting were between 5>.@> $.. and 55.>> $..

Ada$ted fro a guide athtt$*IIwww.te#t.it

'ac to to$

,opular ideas a%out text messaging

8o$ular ideas about te#t essaging often derive fro a confusion of the technology and its users.The obile $hone does not re1uire the user to write in non0standard fors! but the 5=>0character liitay encourage the develo$ent of an alternative standard short for.

Thus! if a te#t essage contains a non0standard for there are any $ossible e#$lanations*

The writer nows the standard for in ordinary written English but has shortened it to allow

for ore words in the whole essage.

The writer nows the standard for in ordinary written English but has shortened it to save

tie in sending the essage.

The writer nows the standard for in ordinary written English but has changed it for

idiosyncratic reasons (lie thining a different for to be elegant or ausing).

The writer nows the standard for but has not entered it correctly nor noticed the istae.
http://www.text.it/http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#tophttp://www.text.it/http://www.universalteacher.org.uk/lang/languageandtechnology.htm#top


43/75

The writer does not now the standard for.

9o not assue that the last e#$lanation is always true! and be ready to challenge coentators whoae the sae assu$tion.

'ac to to$

Ti Shortis notes that news$a$er articles and even boos by linguists ae istaen suggestions

about the fre1uency of initialiss such asbrb(,&ll/ be right bac,) and eoticons or sileys (suchas*)for ha$$iness). (Eoticons are iages co$osed of $unctuation ars! so0called because theye#$ress eotions. The nae is a $ortanteau word fored fro eotion/Ricon.)

8ositively! he clais that the language conventions are accessible 0 this is self0evident fro thera$idity with which they have becoe established and understood by a wide $o$ulation of users (bothauthors and audience). 6e can contrast this with the resistance of largely the sae user grou$ to thelearning of a second language. A $lausible e#$lanation is that! whereas the te#t essager recognies-rench as a 1uite different language 0 foreign in every sense 0 he or she sees that te#ting is only an

e#tension or ada$tation of his or her e#isting language co$etence.

This technology has been areted at younger $eo$le for who the relative chea$ness of the te#tessage is attractive. ver tie! by a natural $rocess! users of the technology becoe older. Andone can $redict 0 by analogy with $ersonal co$uters 0 that as the ethods of entering te#t becoeore straightforward (re1uiring less $hysical de#terity) then the technology will be used by olderwriters ($erha$s with ore regard for the orthogra$hy of written Standard English! $erha$s not. 6ould

the silver senior/ te#ter writebefore0 as do 0 orb

language and technology.docx

Documents

Transcript of language and technology.docx