Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Response to Thompson and Trubek

I found both of these articles incredibly interesting in the way they called for new and innovative things. I was mostly intrigued by the article on spelling. Although Trubek made some valid and interesting points, I overall disagreed with her. Yes, the English language does have some funky rules and a lot of exceptions, but most people should know these. I think it would be disastrous to change English to be written however people feel is best or easiest. It is lazy for one thing, and would cause a chaotic lack of clarity. Clarity is the main reason for all of English's bizarre rules, to be able to differentiate the meaning of words that sound similar, but mean totally different things and imply, or use different contexts. I would actually argue that auto-correct and spell check have improved my spelling. When I see a word is wrong I look up the proper spelling if I don't already know it and correct it. I do this with the same word whenever it comes up until it is committed to memory and I know longer make the mistake. I also hate it when people send me messages that are densely text speak. The occasional brb or lol is fine but when people start using u for you, r for are or our, and c for see and or sea. In spoken language it is easier to determine which word is being used based off of context. It is not always as easy, and can sometimes be confusing in communicating messages, which can lead to some awkward moments. If English is evolving then let it evolve, but don't make a sudden and drastic change. I don't think that has ever been successfully done in any language at anytime. English will be nothing like it is today a few hundred years from now, just like it isn't the same as a few hundred years ago.
I was for the changes proposed by Thompson however. I don't understand why we do keep old processes for new technologies. I can understand that it is comfortable, makes the transition to the technology smoother, and even adds a bit of retro style, but in the long run I feel it takes away from the technology and its full capabilities. I like new technology, and I get excited when I get to try something new and learn how to use it. This makes the process of switching to a new technology easier and fun. Integrating old processes with new technology is like a weird inefficient oxymoron. It just doesn't make much sense. If you create a new technology, make it new. Make it different, original, and exciting. I love Flipboard by the way!

1 comment:

  1. Agreed, text talk is overwhelming and confusing at times. I often find myself asking my younger brother what that abbreviation means or Googling it, when he is not around. However, I wound't want to see my text (as in essays or whatnot) in abbreviation form. I already have a hard time analyzing and understanding, I don't need to be spending my time researching acronyms.

    I do find it fascinating how we are resistant towards words changing up but mostly favorable towards changing up technology. Just a thought.