Comparative Analysis on Text Messaging Essays

ComparativeAnalysis on Text Messaging Essays

Intoday’s era, text messaging is the most used form of communication.This popular means of communication is especially used by the youngergeneration. Over time, there has been a debate regarding the perks,and drawbacks of text messages. John Humphrys, a Welsh journalist hasgreatly criticized the notion of text messaging. According to him,this practice has contributed to the massive destruction of theEnglish language. As a matter of fact, he drafted an essay entitled,“I h8 txt msgs: How Texting is Wrecking our Language.”Conversely, David Crystal a British linguistics professor, arguesthat the art of texting has improved writing and spelling skills. Healso wrote an essay entitled, “2b or not 2b”. In this paper,there is a comparative analysis on the relationship between the twoessays.

Humphrybegins his essay by acknowledging his love for paperbackdictionaries. He describes the dictionary as one of the mostimportant objects one should own. The journalist further laments onthe fact that people constantly omit the hyphen. As a matter of fact,he blames the art of texting for wrecking the English language.Humphrys (1) outlines that text messages destroy punctuation,sentence structures, and vocabulary. He incorporates a lot ofsarcastic remarks in his essay to emphasize on his dire frustrationregarding text messages. For instance, he uses the word “answerphone”but, rhetorically asks whether it should have been “ansafone”instead. Nonetheless, he concurs that texting is an economical modeof communication.

Moreover,Humphrys (1) greatly laments about emoticons related to textmessages. He outlines that his computer often displays emoticonsinstead of colons, and semicolons. As aforementioned, text messagesdestroy punctuation in the English language. He proceeds by focusingon abbreviations pertaining to text messages. The journalist makes itclear that there are some accepted forms of abbreviations such as“BTW” for “By The Way” and “U” for “You”, amongothers. However, he is frustrated by the rampant abbreviationsrelated to text messages. For example, the abbreviation “LOL” mayrefer to “Lots of Love” or “Laugh out Loud.” In such aninstance, text messaging becomes an inconvenience rather than asolution. Humphrys concludes his essay by reckoning that textmessages negatively impact written language. In fact, he specificallyfocuses on the ways in which this mode of communication may affectyoung people. Moreover, Humphrys confesses to the fact that he makessome mistakes as well. Regardless of those mistakes, he is notaffiliated to the catastrophe of text messaging.

Onthe contrary, David Crystal greatly disagrees with Humphrysconcerning text messages. He begins his essay by outlining thatpeople believe that recent technology has adverse effects onlanguage. According to him, all the beliefs about text messaging arefalse due to research. He reckons that there is proof ascertainingthe necessity of text messages. Crystal (1) argues that textmessaging only breaks the rules of linguistics. He points out mostpeople uphold the notion that young people only text usingabbreviation. According to him, this is a misconception thatincreases the false beliefs about this mode of communication. Headdresses those adults who condemn youngsters for practices that theyonce upheld. Also, it is important to note those abbreviations thathave been in existence since time immemorial. For example, “IOU”for “I owe you”, “gf” for “girlfriend”, and “LOL” for“Laugh Out Loud”, among others.

Moreover,he outlines the fact that any word can be abbreviated. He goes on tosay that abbreviations in text messaging are not constant. Crystalsupports his claim by giving information about the Dictionary ofAbbreviations which was published by Eric Partridge in 1942 (Crystal1). In fact, he emphasizes that the dictionary was in existence evenbefore the realization of text messaging. Crystal argues that theEnglish language has always incorporated abbreviations. For thisreason, it would be illogical to assume that it is text messagingthat brought about the art of abbreviation.

Theprofessor argues that people who text, are aware of the art. Most ofthem use wrong and ridiculous spellings but, they know that they arewrong. He claims that these people are not the first to use theseabbreviations. As a matter of fact, he says that some of thoseabbreviations have found their way into the Oxford EnglishDictionary. Crystal infers that abbreviations were originallyinvented for instant responses to various problems. The professorconcludes his essay by upholding the art of text messaging. Heoutlines that most children have gained literacy due to textmessages. In fact, he goes on to explain the ways in whichabbreviations have improved writing, reading, and spelling skills inchildren. Crystal explains the relationship between thoseabbreviations, and the English language with regard to children.According to him, those children who use abbreviations are oftenfamiliar with the original word. He completes his essay by reckoningthat text messaging greatly contributes to growth of the Englishlanguage.

Bothessays give an overview on the benefits and drawbacks of textmessaging as a mode of communication. However, it is clear that theyeach hold different views about the art of texting. John Humphrys’essay focuses on the drawbacks, and problems of text messaging. Hisessay is full of sarcastic remarks that directly attack thoseaffiliated to text messaging. In fact, he also addresses thoseindividuals who believe that text messages improve language.According to him, texting has immensely ruined and destroyed theEnglish language. He specifically focuses on punctuation, sentences,spelling and vocabulary. Nonetheless, it is important to note that heapproves of the economical nature of text messages.

Conversely,David Crystal opposes Humphrys’ stand on text messaging. Theprofessor believes that most of the information on text messages ismere propaganda. He argues that abbreviations were present longbefore the introduction of text messaging. Also, he addresses adultswho portray double standards pertaining to text messages. He outlinesthat most of those adults used abbreviations thus they should notcondemn young people who choose to use them. Crystal’s inference isthat text messages have improved literacy among children. Accordingto him, text messages have improved their vocabulary, spellings, andwriting skills.

Inconclusion, it is clear that the two essays critically explore on theart of text messaging. Irrespective of the differences, there is aclear relationship between the two essays. They both focus on theanimosity, and beauty of text messages. The fate of texting has notbeen determined due to the existing debates. It is impossible toinfer the true contribution of text messaging to the society. Thereare people that propose Humphrys’ argument as well as those thatoppose it. In the same way, not all people endorse Crystal’sopinion.


Crystal,David. &quot2b or Not 2b?&quot 5 July 2008. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

Humphrys,John. &quotI H8 Txt Msgs: How Texting Is Wrecking Our Language.&quotMailOnline.Associated Newspapers, 24 Sept. 2007. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.&lt