Based on the reading regarding shortcuts in school by Jennifer Lee – it made me realise how our society (especially our generation) is poorly influenced by technology. Aside from all the convenient benefits that are obvious, it seems as if we are losing more human contact and becoming closer to our new best friends – technology or the internet.
Formal written letter enveloped and stamped and sent to the recepient used to be the norm. At least it was when I had been in grade school. We were all taught how to handwrite, spell certain words, capitalise letters with good punctuations. However, internet languaged developed so fast in a blink of an eye, that soon, people were getting lazier and lazier and used single letters in substitute for words.
It’s great when one is in a hurry and have to jot personal notes down in a limited amount of space or time, but when writing an essay, opinion-based writing assignment, or a letter? I think it not only seems uneducated, but also rather rude. Why is it so hard to take extra seconds to write words properly the way they were first invented? America is lazy enough with all the other new-born (or not so new) technologies and new gadgets, but does that mean we need to destroy the art of writing? The art of proper spelling?
Perhaps schools should stress the importance of Spelling bee contests… those were fun days..
I’m writing in response to the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” by Jennifer B Lee. This article discusses how students are using shorthand English to submit papers in their English classes. Teachers are astounded by the writing that their students are turning in. If I were them, I would be appalled too. I know that from personal experience, I feel that my writing has been impacted by the shorthand method I’ve been using to communicate to friends and family through the internet. The number one reason I use the shorthand method is because it is easier to type and it doesn’t take much time. In my opinion, I do not feel that it is necessary to talk to my friends formally. As long as nothing disrespectful is being said, there isn’t any harm done. Students are typing to friends through the computer and texting just as much as they write in class, so they use this lingo on a daily basis. I have to agree that my writing has changed due to this method because typing using the shorthand comes naturally after a while like the article states. It becomes something that is done unconsciously. When I’m typing papers, I have to make sure that I don’t accidentally use the shorthand because I know that if I was the reader I would find the paper to be a joke. Standard English should still be used for writing papers and the shorthand can still be used for socializing purposes. The important thing is to know when to use which; this is dependant upon the audience.
Comment by Therese Kochuparampil — July 20, 2009 @ 11:30 pm
Amal Nahhal 07/21/2009
Ms. Harding an eighth-grade English teacher. She scribbles the words that have plagued generations of schoolchildren across her whiteboard. When she asked her students how many of them used shortcuts like these in their answers no body answered. Ms Harding gave her students a warning if she sees these shortcuts in their assignments. Students should know the difference. As more a teenagers socialize online, teachers like ms Harding are seeing a breezy form of Internet. Teachers have deducted points, drawn red circles and tsk_tskedat their classes.
Almost 60 percent of the online population under age 17 uses instant messaging. It has become a popular means of flirting, setting up dates… Some teachers see the creeping abbreviations as part of a continuing assault of technology on formal written English.
Some teachers find the new writing style alarming, but some find it very rude and careless. Others say that the instant messaging style might simply be a fad.
This essay is talking about the way that some teachers use it to teach the children how to write in a good way and correctly. Ms Brecker once handed in a midterm exam riddled with instant messaging shorthand. Even terms that cannot be expressed verbally are making their way into papers.
My response is to the assigned reading in this week’s SCC three articles. The first two put several notions in context for me, and after reading I was left with the feeling that I came from one of the last generations of school children that were not wholly consumed by the cancerous influence of the internet. There have always been both spelling and grammatical errors in children’s writing across all age groups, and the notion of using information from the internet (albeit most of the time the validity of said information is questionable) is not so foreign, it was a common practice limited to those who could find access to the world wide web. Now in the age of even elementary school students in possession of cell phone (internet capable cell phones), the ridiculousness has begun to run rampant, the very idea of a teacher having to compensate for the fact a marginal percentage of the students writing is racked with internet speech, and other social colloquialism is absolutely absurd to me.
As for the piracy article, I thought it was both poignant and relatively interesting to see the prospective of those inside of the industry to see their takes on piracy in the entertainment industry. Honestly, I am a supporter of piracy, mostly because I am a consumer, on who still purchases media of artist of my preference, and I remain of the opinion that if someone is truly a fan of something, piracy will stop most people from buying media, the novelty of collects value still bears so weight in the heart of fans.
Comment by Marsailis Bryant — July 21, 2009 @ 6:52 am
“I have to work today, so I won’t be able to go to lunch with you.” “I have 2 work 2day I can’t go 2 lunch w/ u.” I don’t even have to ask. It is obvious which sentence looks grammatically correct and , therefore, more intelligent and sophisticated. It is not wrong to use shortcuts when writing to close friends, but it can easily become a habit carried into school and work. Conversational writing that transitions into a more formal environment shows signs of laziness, carelessness, and disrespect. A boss or a professor may think the person is not taking the job or course seriously. I would think the same; the individual doesn’t care enough to take the time to spell out words and go over their work. The second sentence represents stupidity and negligence. Is it worth saving a few minutes of typing in exchange of looking idiotic?
A simple reply to a professor’s e-mail message is enough for her/him to form a first impression about you just based on your writing. I can’t even imagine the embarrassment I would feel if I found out I slipped on a term paper or an important project for my job by using “u,” “r,” “2,” or “cuz.” If you don’t want to make that mistake, just be careful when writing and check your work several times.
Jennifer Lee, author of “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” mentions that the conversational writing resulted from the constant technological discoveries and Internet-based communication. I definitely agree with this statement. Back in the days, where computers were nonexistent, the style of language was totally different than what we are used to today. The computer (AIM), cell phone (text messages), and television (conversations) influence us to talk, write and communicate in certain ways. However, if we are aware of our surroundings, we should be able to judge the right way to talk and write. We cannot go blaming society all the time, because we make decisions and choose to act on them the way we want. I might have unconsciously used “2” instead of “to,” but I consciously, also, choose to revise my work or have someone else look at it before I submit it.
The scary part is that children growing up with several technological devices in a household might not even be aware of formal writing without school. Yes, almost all kids go to school, but when someone spends more time writing one way over the other, they are more inclined to use that writing style more frequently than the other in any situation.
Comment by sejla kulaglic — July 21, 2009 @ 7:11 am
In response to the article “Nu shortcuts in school r 2 much 4 teachers” I can honestly say that I DON’T get it. I too, grew up in this instant messaging culture and was completely addicted to the web all of my adolescent and teen years. I first began using AIM in 7th grade and kept an online blog for many years before social networking sites like Facebook came out. Even with all this web exposure it never affected my formal writing. Even my “IM-ing” langugage was a little more refined as I always felt that shortening “you” as “u” and are as “r” was juvenine and “immature” looking, so maybe because of this I had a slight upperhand. I still cant understand how gradeschool children are putting web lingo into their school work, anytime I am writing ANYTHING I always focus on WHO exactly I am writing to and then write appropriately. Sure, when I email or IM my friends I throw in abbrivations like lol and brb but if I’m writing a formal email to a professor or someone work related I always catch myself, I even watch myself when I email or IM my mother – as a foreigner she will not understand what “lol” stands for or means. I believe that this always-online culture is destroying our youth, there is absolutely no reason why this lifestyle should affect their writing because… regardless of typing a certain way when speaking with friends aren’t they still in school and being taught a formal form of writing?!
Response #5
“Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer 8 Lee
Oh my goodness this essay was so true! When I was younger I always had a problem with there, their and they’re. I finally learned how to use those words properly but I always laugh when I see others misuse those words because it brings back my memories. Internet chatting has caused people to use shorter words to get their point across faster such as u instead of you and ur instead of your or even b4 for before! Even I use these words but I am so careful when typing an essay to not include them because it’s not grammatical and those aren’t real words!! I agree that kids should know the difference between those words. I am older and I understand the differences but 13, 14 year old don’t and they should be taught that it is wrong. I also thought it was funny that students are adding smiley faces in their essays. That’s absurd! I never did that, yeah smiley faces are fun but don’t over due it. I feel like teenage social life has taken over and now they are more focused on the “new” internet lingo then the actual language and grammar that will take them far in life. There has to be a limit with how kids use this language and need to be taught at younger ages the right terms so they don’t make mistakes later on in life. I didn’t have a computer until I was around 15-16 and I know the difference between the grammar in school and the grammar with friends. Using wuz up in school or in an interview is going to give the wrong impression and only I will suffer.
My response is to the reading regarding shortcuts in school by Jennifer Lee. It just makes me realize that technology has both furthered our knowledge and hindered it. Although I don’t really fall into this category, I have definitely seen people write things such as “u” or “r” on papers in college. As funny as this sounds, it does happen. It just goes to show that people rely on technology too much. Although saying things like “lol” can be used on things such as aim or facebook, it doesn’t belong in professional papers or e-mails to teachers. I have seen many of my friends put smiley faces, lol, and very improper language such as “cuz” in emails to their teachers. It’s getting very ridiculous that people can’t separate their personal lives from their professional lives. I personally just don’t understand how it becomes such a problem to separate these two things. Short cuts were made so that it would be easier to communicate with friends online but they weren’t made to hinder the English language and create slang in the work place or in school. It isn’t hard to distinguish when you should use certain types of language or grammar. Facebook, aim, and other programs should create something that changes “u” to “you” everytime you write it so that people will get used to seeing the correct words on the screen and then when they are writing things such as college papers, when they look over it, it will pop out to them that they are using the wrong words or the wrong type of language for a college paper. That little change on those programs could definitely make a huge change in peoples’ use of language in their papers and professional settings. This should be done because technology was created to help make things easier, not make us more confused about language to use at what time and confuse people about which language is even appropriate in a professional workplace or school.
Comment by chris henien — July 21, 2009 @ 10:43 am
In response to the article “Nu shortcuts in school r 2 much 4 teachers” I believe that this is part of evolution. Society has always been focused on the American Dream. Working hard and one day you will be successful. We as a society have turned to rely heavily on communications technology such as cell phones and a computer to keep in contact. Snail mail is gone. The only thing one gets in their mailbox nowadays is bills. Sometimes even those are coming online! Working very long hours keeps us too busy to spend quality time with our friends and families. Which is where all of this technology has come in to try to fill that void. Everything nowadays is supposed to be fast and convenient, everything from drive-thru banks, drive-thru restaurants, even drive-thru pharmacies. Shortening the time it takes to do everyday things is what really has become part of our society. Which is where this new language has come into play in my opinion. How much faster is it to type ‘wat r u ^ 2 2day’ rather than, ‘what are you up to today’? Much, much faster.
There is the fine line though that should not be crossed with this informal language. Any formal paper or letter should not be written in this short form. Careful reviewing and lots of time is supposed to be spent on anything that will be looked at by someone that is supposed to be respected. When lots of time is spent on something, there should not be a need for it to be in the short-form way. If it was to be written in the short version, it just looks sloppy and thrown together. Not something that a person would like their higher authority to see.
Comment by Jill Starnes — July 21, 2009 @ 11:31 am
My response is to all three readings assigned for this week. In “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” it pretty much describes how technology has affected the language and spelling of people who have grown up with it. I can definitely see how teachers would be annoyed by students using shortcuts in their formal work. In the same sense, I am one of the people who have grown up with technology like MSN and Yahoo Messenger, or Myspace and Facebook, and I can honestly say that I haven’t had a problem with using shortcuts in my school work. I’ve always known the difference.
The second article was amusing because I did know the Internet was full of random website, I just didn’t realize what those website actually contained. I haven’t had the time to sit there and surf the web, nor do I want to after seeing what is mainly out there.
Finally, the third article talks about file-sharing and downloading music for free and the differing opinions on the subject. My opinion on the topic is that I am pro file sharing (as long as it is used to share music and not only to make a profit from it). I actually did a speech on this topic which talked about how artists really do not earn much from their record sales because most of the profits go to the record labels, and downloading music actually gives artists exposure. There was also one group that released their record online where fans could actually decide how much they wanted to pay for the record, including free.
Comment by Alyssa Lopez — July 21, 2009 @ 12:00 pm
Out of ALL the responses we were required to do, this was BY FAR the most entertaining and truly enjoyable! I especially LOVED the Dave Barry piece with regard to the (early) superfluous websites. In his typical style, Dave lucidates on the absolute novelty of what the Internet (at first) was. Soon to be a commercial beacon for almost any and all aspects of business – and government, the Internet was – at first – a repository for completely useless stuff… that MANY thoroughly enjoyed… and some still do. From a whale being blown-up to the differences in public toilets in Australia, it’s nice to know that I am among those that read Dave’s articles with enthusiasm, if not only to see what he’ll say about normally mundane things, articles, and the like. Dave has a special knack for being able to find the humor in almost every single type of situation, even if – at first – the situation isn’t comical while he’s in the moment. But life has it’s way of showing itself to Dave in a way that he – and he alone – can articulate in a regurgitated format into being more than comical. While only four of the links (per today’s class) are still viable, it shows that the Internet can have “legs” with lasting ability with which to refer in the future and for posterity.
I’m writing my response on the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” by Jennifer B Lee. This article is correspondant to the discussion lead I did on the “Black English Dilema”. So I will incorporate some of the things I said about that article.I think it is perectly o.k. to shorthand things. It is necessary to know how to write depending on the type of audience you have. For example, instead of writing “you” you might text “u” to a friend, but you might want to be more formal when texting a family member such as your mother. When you are writing a paper for class you should not be using shorthand. While in school the teachers are there to teach you to write formally so it would be irrelavant to shorthand words or writing the words based on the pronounciation. The english language has evolved over time, but when you are not able to distinguish the differences between formal and informal use of the english language then you have a serious problem.
Comment by Ashley Griffin — July 21, 2009 @ 2:58 pm
I feel rather strongly about the topic discussed in Jennifer Lee’s essay “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, which describes the trend among young students of using abbreviated “IM-speak” in an academic setting. I don’t think that using such abbreviations in any other situations than text messaging or instant messaging, should be tolerated. I feel like it is just lazy or juvenile when used in a professional or academic arena, and as school is preparing children to be functional in an adult world, text-speak should not be allowed. I myself occasionally use abbreviations while text messaging, but have no problem keeping that habit out of my academic or work environment. The fact that some children out there aren’t able to keep themselves from using text-speak in their schoolwork is troublesome. I don’t think that anyone would knowingly use such language if they knew it was improper and would get marked down on an assignment because of it, so I think these habits reflect a greater problem today’s children may have with using proper grammar and spelling, as well as having a problem with the way they spend their free time. When the bulk of your time is spent on the computer or text messaging your friends, it is more difficult to turn off your abbreviated writing style and you end up carrying it with you into your academic activities. Today’s children should be encouraged to put down the cell phone (or at least start using it with proper grammar) and perhaps face stiffer penalties at school when using text-speak as a way of combating this problem.
Comment by Laura Shishkovsky — July 21, 2009 @ 2:59 pm
In the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, the author talks about students now days running into text writing problem on papers. Being that I am going to be a teacher hopefully in the near future, I do feel that there is a place and time for everything. If the children want to write in text to each other go ahead they are not hurting anyone. Would I be all right with seeing text type in a paper I assign in class, no way! Would I go to the extremes and flunk a paper for it no. I believe in learning from mistakes and letting students correct their mistakes. No one is perfect and a teacher must understand this, if a student accidentally puts a “u” instead of using ”you” it is not the end of the world. Having the student correct and realizing they make the mistake is so much more benefited to have the students learn from their mistakes then just failing them and have them keep making the same mistakes. So in my opinion its ok for text talk in free time but not in the classroom.
Comment by dan czartoryski — July 21, 2009 @ 4:14 pm
“Piracy gets mixed reviews in industry” provides an unbiased look at the file-sharing debate that has been a major part of the music industry over the past decade. The article is presented in a way that allows for the reader to see both sides of the argument without feeling pressured to agree with the author’s views. However, since the target audience of the article is meant to be the general public, many people will likely side with the pro-sharing individuals as most people do not exactly relate to the rich record executives. This issue is hotly debated and is relative to any of us who have grown up in the age of the internet and enjoy listening to music.
Record companies are cracking down on illegal file sharing; ordinary people have been sued for large amounts of money from gathering their music collection by illegal methods. Although harsh, the consequences to these acts of piracy are meant to scare others into purchasing records as people once did. The problem is that the internet and sharing of information across the web are here to stay, and as many of the pro-sharing advocates have stated, the record companies need to find better ways to use this medium to their advantage. Services like iTunes provide people, in many countries, with the opportunity to legally download individual songs, complete albums, and movies for personal use. Since it is obvious that shopping for albums in an actual store is becoming unpopular, services like iTunes are the key to the music industry’s future.
As a user of the iTunes service, I have spent a lot of money on music that is readily available elsewhere for free. The songs are guaranteed to be the best of quality and rid of any potential viruses or spyware that could come along with the shifty peer-to-peer sharing programs and files, however, in order to accommodate to new users, prices need to be lowered; iTunes now charges $1.29 (per song) for the most popular downloads. This is a solution that Noboyuki Idei of the electronic giant Sony agrees with. If they can get more people to pay for music, the increase in sales can compensate for the lower prices; the artists will get their exposure and fair compensation (or unfair if you ask Kid Rock).
Comment by Stanley Wandeloski — July 21, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
My discussion is in response to Jennifer Lee’s essay “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” it focused on the way the younger generation has adapted to the language of IM (instant messaging) in their academic environments. In my opinion I feel that there’s an appropriate time and place to speak or talk formally. Abbreviated words such as “u” or “cuz” or even the popular phrase “lol” should only be used when texting or chatting with whomever over instant message. In my experience, when texting first became the thing to do, I developed a really bad habit of using those abbreviated words in school. I quickly fixed that issue by texting out the full word. I feel that this fad or whatever it may be, is affecting the grammar of young students today. As stated in the essay, students are unable to peer edit due to this “IM speak.”
In conclusion, I think that English teachers should continue to enforce the rules of grammar, in order to maintain structural writing, or let’s be honest, English as a subject in school wouldn no longer be needed.
Comment by Joumana Amine — July 21, 2009 @ 4:37 pm
Piracy is obviously illegal. The skepticism about it raises an eyebrow or two. I remember when music artists pushed to make entertainment piracy illegal. They of course have that right, but I don’t think it’s justified. They are artists. They perform to entertain. They serve little good to the better of society. What they do for a living does not make a difference in tomorrow. So what if we share their music or movies? No one is getting hurt in the process. Besides, what is the difference compared to copying songs off the radio? That part of the economy reminds me of medicine. Medicine is normally marked up between 400 and 600 percent over the cost of the pill. The same goes for entertainment. If anything, programs like Limewire are just giving the rest some competition. How about mail? It costs money to send a letter, but email is free. I don’t hear the post office raising a stink. I think in the end, producers just “mis-named” piracy for entertainment just to win a cause. I believe consumers should be protected rather than “sued” for ridiculous amounts of money. Like they say, “it’s not over till it’s over”. So maybe things will change in the future.
It was interesting to read Jennifer Lee’s “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, n nt realiz wat da essay was abt til i was few lines in2 it…. LOL :p Alright, I was joking there, but obviously this has become more of a language that we are getting accustomed to.
I don’t mind it. Personally, the only time I use it is when I am taking notes down from a fast-dictating professor in a class room. When I text-message somebody or email a friend, I prefer to use full sentences and punctuations sometimes.
On one hand, shortcuts make it more convenient to communicate when typing or writing; especially in a time when society has become obsessed with the fast-lane. However, I do not believe it is proper when communicating on a professional level such as at schools and the working place. On the other hand, too much “texting” has become more and more common while people are driving. This needs to be controlled.
Comment by Ala Jammalieh — July 21, 2009 @ 7:45 pm
In the Jennifer 8 Lee essay on language choice I felt some what connected at many points I had to catch myself from making these grammatical errors. text messaging in my life happens more than formal writing and its easy to get carried away when your ideas start flowing. Although I don’t think I’ve ever let text messaging language carry over into a final draft, I have slipped up and let it be spoken. I can remember using a phrase OMG out loud when I seen a man run into a door on campus LOL. I feel that because text messaging language is so prevalent and so common in today’s society that easy slip up’s of phrases should be given some sort of leeway, youth today practice informal writing on a daily basis and sometimes the lines between formal and informal writing might get crossed.
In the Dave Barry essay I found it quite humourous. Although the internet has come a long was since 1996 this article still seems relevant because at any point while surfing the web it can be bombarded with ignorant and random website, like pornography site adds, those annoying screen saver adds and the ever so popular yahoo “mind maze”. Today I feel that if this same article was written in 2009 that its primary target would be Youtube or Facebook, both sites are very popular and draws the consumer in and gives them 100 different other random applications and videos. BOTH SITES ARE A MAZE.
Comment by Dorian Barbee — July 21, 2009 @ 8:36 pm
This response is in respect to “Nu Shortcut in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer 8 Lee. Although I believe in the evolution of language, I think that there is a time and place for everything. In academic writing, unless used for brainstorming and outlining, there should be no exception in allowing 1337 text language to pass. There are even guidelines when it comes to citing and giving credit to sources, such as MLA and APA. This is done so that everybody is on the same page – nobody has to guess at what is happening or is intended. This even exists in scientific abbreviations and languages, such as IUPAC nomenclature, which determines how molecules are named and abbreviated. With 1337 text language, the shortcuts are just that – shortcuts. They are used in texting and IMing for convenience, but in most cases the words are staying the same. A problem with it is that anybody could make it up, and unless it is well diffused and known, you don’t know what is intended. The variety can just make someone BHOK (Bang Head On Keyboard). I don’t mind it being used in texting and IMing. I think that as humans we always strive for convenience and efficiency, and as long as the other person acknowledges what is intended or meant, then it is causing no harm – it’s communication. Certainly, it’s rare that we all speak as we write and I believe 1337 is just an extension of that.
I read the article by Jennifer Lee titled Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers. The article starts by talking about how a teacher has, each September, made a list of common writing mistakes. The article I think brings up a great point about how the way children and people in general communicate to each other. I think that it is very important to explain to children today that there is a way you can speak to your friends and a way that you need to speak when in public settings.
The article hints at how the way children write and talk when it shows some of the lists that have been shown in the past going from “There, Their, They’re, your, and you’re” to “ U, R, ur, b4, and wuz”. I think that this shows a general degradation of social acceptance in youth today, that is, they see something on tv and think its cool and next week they are all talking or acting like they saw others on tv. I think that it is very important to continuously remind children of the proper way to talk, like saying the whole word and showing respect where it is necessary.
I think that this article is very relevant to children and parents today because I think the quality of social interaction will constantly degrade if children are not taught the correct way to talk and present themselves. Children today need better role models than are shown on stations like MTV. I think that the article accurately addresses the problem and I wish more teachers were making a move to prevent this dreadful change in the English language.
In today’s class, we talked about the short hand English writing used in the text messages and chatting on MSN. As long as this technique save time and energy to write the whole long words, but it is actually spoil the correct form of English or we can say literature language. Almost everyone take advantage of this short hand writing during chatting and text messaging. It wouldn’t be that bad if limited only for those purposes but when students of any level use short hand words in their academic papers because they have habit to see and read these kinds of words. In addition, if some body peer read their paper for them and if he also belongs to the group of short hand user group, and then he can not observe those mistakes for corrections. Besides this, I would like to talk about growing use of slang language or words in daily conversation. This is sort of same thing as short hand writing, it used to explain the whole story or sentence in few or one word. This slang words flood is sinking the proper English language down. Every day a new word add to the slang words dictionary, as this make one step forward to destructs the English language also resist and make trouble to learn the English. There are approximately more than half of the people in United States speak at least two different languages, or English is not their first language. For those people, it is really a big challenge to learn how to speak slang language because no institute, no instructor and even no book has written yet which teach the slang words or language. They have to learn English with proper sentences and grammar but when they see people talk in abbreviated or stereotype forms, they feel that they do not speak English or try to speak some slang words without knowing the meaning, which is considered more awkward and inappropriate way to communicate.
Comment by summera kanwal — July 21, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
Nathan Missler
Response 5
For this response I will be discussing about the article in the seeking common cause book, “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer Lee. The article talks about how new words are coming into the English dictionary that children are putting into their papers as if they are making a big text message. In my opinion I feel that writing a paper and submitting it like that is unacceptable. Every student must have been taught how to properly talk and write, so why would you want to make any shortcuts? It is a very informal way to write and you would not want to write a paper or a letter to your grandmother or grandfather and send them a message with that junk written on it. It is hard enough for them already, but it is worse when they have to deifier the hieroglyphics in your letter. It’s ridiculous! High school students work hard to prepare for college. College is one of the most important decisions that a student will make in their lifetime. If they are submitting papers with this on it into a college writing class, the professor would laugh and rip them apart into shreads. Writing papers is not an easy process. Writing papers is even essential into the work world. What if you were in a big journalism company and you were typing a hot topic on the president, would you want your article filled with instant-message slogan? I know that it would be your last day in that office, that’s for sure, n00b.
Comment by nathan missler — July 21, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
I agree with Staples that it is “the least privileged parts of society that are often the most sexist, reactionary, and even materialistic.” I believe this is because being under-privileged goes along with being relatively uneducated; so many of them are ignorant to what is going on or what they are implying or doing for our culture. It could also be a defense mechanism. They don’t have a lot of opportunity so they have to make up for it through a fake façade that they soon begin to believe. They must lash out or be bitter toward someone, and women seem like a perfect weaker candidate. They buy expensive or fake expensive things so that they appear to be doing well or look good when they really can’t afford to. All of this makes them especially reactionary because when they are called out on their fraud or embarrassed, they must save face and keep up with their false image.
I think Jackson very much resembles a Barbie Doll, in the photo of her in the text. Jackson’s ideal female beauty is basically, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” She is aware of what most beholders like to see and what a girl can get away with when they look like that. To her, beauty is being socially aware of what people want. I think my image of female beauty is very similar to hers. I know what people regard as beauty. It is something nice to look at. I do not think this image has affected my life very much. To be honest, I have never had a real problem with my image.
I do agree that physically attractive people are more likely than less attractive ones to get what they want. For example, I consider myself a very weird person. I just have an odd, strange personality. I know many people feel this way about me. But because of the way that I look, people put up with it or think it’s funny. My weirdness is viewed as adorable quirks. I even shaved off all of my hair and the people who knew me before still see me the same way; but the people that met me after I shaved my head, I can tell, a lot of them think I am a weirdo.
Jackson speaks so violently of her pre-cosmetic surgery self because she is bitter that such a simple thing as the way one looks can keep a person from so much.
Comment by Rebecca Whisenhunt — July 21, 2009 @ 10:48 pm
Today in class we heard two discussion leads on two popular culture hot topics. The first I am going to discuss is the essay reading on text/aim style writing. Many people in the class gave their thoughts on how we should be able to use it, and that it’s just the natural evolution of speech. I on the other hand am very conflicted about the uses for the text writing. I believe that with friends or for a quick message the use of short forms is not only ok, but a necessity. But when it comes to more academic type writing I think that it is very wrong to use the text style writing. Not only does the writing sound poorly written, as discussed in class many people still do not understand all the different short form terms, as they can very from person to person. So my person thoughts on the text speech are that there is a time and place for it, but not every time is the proper place.
The next essay looked on the issue of music piracy. What I took from the discussion is that the only person losing out when a song is pirated is the already wealthy music company. What I really found interesting is that the artist themselves are barely even financially scratched, or even personally affected. As discussed Kid Rock was happy to see his music pirated, he even encouraged it! Now I do not feel so bad about downloading all those song (joking of course). The final interesting point I got from this discussion is that most artist actually encouraged the illegal downloads because what they care about more is getting out their music rather then making millions off it.
Comment by Anthony Injic — July 22, 2009 @ 1:10 am
Diana Daghlas
Kimberly Lacey
ENG 3010
21 June 2009
Response #5
One of the articles covered in Seeking Common Cause was “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers.” This article basically explained how students are using text or AIM language in their academic papers. However, one teacher questions whether or not students should be taught in this new language. I do not believe that students should be taught in this new language because text language is very undefined. Many people come up with new abbreviations for themselves that they may think other people will understand, however, sometimes I find it very hard to decipher. I think that abbreviations such as “u” or “r” are very handy because in a text you are limited to a small amount of space, 160 characters. On the other hand, abbreviations such as “lsimh (laughing silently in my head)” are very difficult to understand when someone is not familiar with these types of abbreviations. Also, in academic writing, a person wants to sound like they know what they are talking about, basically professional; but with the texting language you sound and look as though you are not taking your professional career seriously.
The second article that we looked at was “Piracy Gets Mixed Reviews in Industry.” Basically this article covers the pros and cons of downloading music and what the music industry has to say about that. The pros are that unknown bands and singers get noticed by fans and make most of their money off of concerts and tours. The cons are that the music industry is not doing as well as they have done in the past. I personally believe that downloading music from the internet is not bad so long as a person does not abuse. The discussion we had in class earlier about not selling mix tape CD’s that have been downloaded off of the internet is a great example of how some people can abuse the ability to download music. In addition, record companies and singers make a lot of money as it is, however, I feel like their outcry about downloading music on the internet free is based on greed, not at looking at the whole picture.
Comment by Diana Daghlas ENG 3010 — July 22, 2009 @ 1:20 am
For this response I chose to discuss my personal views on the reading from “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer Lee. This article discusses how school aged children are now incorporating newly added words from the dictionary into their papers. The problem with this is that such words that have recently been added to the dictionary are controversial to teachers in terms of whether or not they are appropriate for academic writing. The type of words that the students are using in their writing are words that are typically used over text messages or chats online. Thus, not the most academic terminology to be using in assignments for school.
Although, I can completely relate to mistakenly typing a word in abbreviated form that would typically be used over texts or chats, I have always corrected this error upon proofreading. Therefore, my final submitted paper would not include text/chat lingo. I whole heartedly agree that teachers should not conform to this new wave of technology terminology in their classrooms. There is nothing wrong with text messaging or chatting but it is particularly important to be able to transcend out of that element when in an academic setting. Different forms of writing should be embraced and taught when such language is most appropriate. For example, students should be strictly taught the difference between the type of language you would use in various formal, informal, and social settings. It is imperative that people in general know how to communicate but it is even more important to understand how to leave one behind momentarily when needed.
I am currently a volunteer at a local elementary school in the city of Detroit in which I facilitate a reading program for struggling students in 4-6th grade. I have witnessed how these students struggle with forming grammatically correct sentences and to think that in a year or two most of them will have cell phones and be exposed to the texting world, I find it highly imperative that they be taught immediately how to write in an academic setting. Perhaps then, we won’t have as many students using cyber lingo in papers.
Comment by Shaquitta Stanley — July 22, 2009 @ 3:46 am
Rich Gorski
The reading, by Dave Barry, At Last: Proof That Civilization is Doomed criticizes the internet in a comical way. Barry compares the content and the internet as a whole to why our civilization is doomed. He points out that the content that the internet provides is dominated by the crude, the uninformed, the deluded, the self-righteous, and the shrill. He talks about his research and how he spent his time surfing the internet. I think it was funny that he spent 93% of his time waiting for what seemed like at least two academic semesters per Web page while the computer appeared to do absolutely nothing. I can remember when I was younger and the internet did the same thing to me. His research allowed him to spend 1% of his time looking at Web pages. He does not want the reader to think that all Web pages are a total waste of time based on his research. I found myself wasting my time checking the validity of the Web pages that he browsed and found that out of the twenty Web pages he wrote about, I was only able to access four of them. The four Web pages that he searched and I was allowed to access were:
- Giant Collection of Viola Jokes
- Trojan Room Coffee Machine
- Federal Corpse Slice Photos
- World Record Barbecue Ignition
The World Record Barbecue Ignition Web page took me to the Purdue Engineering Web Page, so unfortunately I was unable to read up further on this. The other sixteen Web pages I was unable to access can make a person question whether his research was really valid or was some of it made up even though he stated that all the Web pages in his research were real. I tested one in specific that caught my attention and I could only wonder the disaster that it created. I used YouTube to observe the exploding whale and it proved to be a real website. This article was written in 1996. Since then, the internet has become much faster, but the content has become that much more ridiculous.
Based on the reading regarding shortcuts in school by Jennifer Lee – it made me realise how our society (especially our generation) is poorly influenced by technology. Aside from all the convenient benefits that are obvious, it seems as if we are losing more human contact and becoming closer to our new best friends – technology or the internet.
Formal written letter enveloped and stamped and sent to the recepient used to be the norm. At least it was when I had been in grade school. We were all taught how to handwrite, spell certain words, capitalise letters with good punctuations. However, internet languaged developed so fast in a blink of an eye, that soon, people were getting lazier and lazier and used single letters in substitute for words.
It’s great when one is in a hurry and have to jot personal notes down in a limited amount of space or time, but when writing an essay, opinion-based writing assignment, or a letter? I think it not only seems uneducated, but also rather rude. Why is it so hard to take extra seconds to write words properly the way they were first invented? America is lazy enough with all the other new-born (or not so new) technologies and new gadgets, but does that mean we need to destroy the art of writing? The art of proper spelling?
Perhaps schools should stress the importance of Spelling bee contests… those were fun days..
Comment by Julie Lee — July 20, 2009 @ 10:47 pm
I’m writing in response to the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” by Jennifer B Lee. This article discusses how students are using shorthand English to submit papers in their English classes. Teachers are astounded by the writing that their students are turning in. If I were them, I would be appalled too. I know that from personal experience, I feel that my writing has been impacted by the shorthand method I’ve been using to communicate to friends and family through the internet. The number one reason I use the shorthand method is because it is easier to type and it doesn’t take much time. In my opinion, I do not feel that it is necessary to talk to my friends formally. As long as nothing disrespectful is being said, there isn’t any harm done. Students are typing to friends through the computer and texting just as much as they write in class, so they use this lingo on a daily basis. I have to agree that my writing has changed due to this method because typing using the shorthand comes naturally after a while like the article states. It becomes something that is done unconsciously. When I’m typing papers, I have to make sure that I don’t accidentally use the shorthand because I know that if I was the reader I would find the paper to be a joke. Standard English should still be used for writing papers and the shorthand can still be used for socializing purposes. The important thing is to know when to use which; this is dependant upon the audience.
Comment by Therese Kochuparampil — July 20, 2009 @ 11:30 pm
Amal Nahhal 07/21/2009
Ms. Harding an eighth-grade English teacher. She scribbles the words that have plagued generations of schoolchildren across her whiteboard. When she asked her students how many of them used shortcuts like these in their answers no body answered. Ms Harding gave her students a warning if she sees these shortcuts in their assignments. Students should know the difference. As more a teenagers socialize online, teachers like ms Harding are seeing a breezy form of Internet. Teachers have deducted points, drawn red circles and tsk_tskedat their classes.
Almost 60 percent of the online population under age 17 uses instant messaging. It has become a popular means of flirting, setting up dates… Some teachers see the creeping abbreviations as part of a continuing assault of technology on formal written English.
Some teachers find the new writing style alarming, but some find it very rude and careless. Others say that the instant messaging style might simply be a fad.
This essay is talking about the way that some teachers use it to teach the children how to write in a good way and correctly. Ms Brecker once handed in a midterm exam riddled with instant messaging shorthand. Even terms that cannot be expressed verbally are making their way into papers.
Comment by Amal Nahhal — July 21, 2009 @ 12:37 am
My response is to the assigned reading in this week’s SCC three articles. The first two put several notions in context for me, and after reading I was left with the feeling that I came from one of the last generations of school children that were not wholly consumed by the cancerous influence of the internet. There have always been both spelling and grammatical errors in children’s writing across all age groups, and the notion of using information from the internet (albeit most of the time the validity of said information is questionable) is not so foreign, it was a common practice limited to those who could find access to the world wide web. Now in the age of even elementary school students in possession of cell phone (internet capable cell phones), the ridiculousness has begun to run rampant, the very idea of a teacher having to compensate for the fact a marginal percentage of the students writing is racked with internet speech, and other social colloquialism is absolutely absurd to me.
As for the piracy article, I thought it was both poignant and relatively interesting to see the prospective of those inside of the industry to see their takes on piracy in the entertainment industry. Honestly, I am a supporter of piracy, mostly because I am a consumer, on who still purchases media of artist of my preference, and I remain of the opinion that if someone is truly a fan of something, piracy will stop most people from buying media, the novelty of collects value still bears so weight in the heart of fans.
Comment by Marsailis Bryant — July 21, 2009 @ 6:52 am
“I have to work today, so I won’t be able to go to lunch with you.” “I have 2 work 2day I can’t go 2 lunch w/ u.” I don’t even have to ask. It is obvious which sentence looks grammatically correct and , therefore, more intelligent and sophisticated. It is not wrong to use shortcuts when writing to close friends, but it can easily become a habit carried into school and work. Conversational writing that transitions into a more formal environment shows signs of laziness, carelessness, and disrespect. A boss or a professor may think the person is not taking the job or course seriously. I would think the same; the individual doesn’t care enough to take the time to spell out words and go over their work. The second sentence represents stupidity and negligence. Is it worth saving a few minutes of typing in exchange of looking idiotic?
A simple reply to a professor’s e-mail message is enough for her/him to form a first impression about you just based on your writing. I can’t even imagine the embarrassment I would feel if I found out I slipped on a term paper or an important project for my job by using “u,” “r,” “2,” or “cuz.” If you don’t want to make that mistake, just be careful when writing and check your work several times.
Jennifer Lee, author of “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” mentions that the conversational writing resulted from the constant technological discoveries and Internet-based communication. I definitely agree with this statement. Back in the days, where computers were nonexistent, the style of language was totally different than what we are used to today. The computer (AIM), cell phone (text messages), and television (conversations) influence us to talk, write and communicate in certain ways. However, if we are aware of our surroundings, we should be able to judge the right way to talk and write. We cannot go blaming society all the time, because we make decisions and choose to act on them the way we want. I might have unconsciously used “2” instead of “to,” but I consciously, also, choose to revise my work or have someone else look at it before I submit it.
The scary part is that children growing up with several technological devices in a household might not even be aware of formal writing without school. Yes, almost all kids go to school, but when someone spends more time writing one way over the other, they are more inclined to use that writing style more frequently than the other in any situation.
Comment by sejla kulaglic — July 21, 2009 @ 7:11 am
In response to the article “Nu shortcuts in school r 2 much 4 teachers” I can honestly say that I DON’T get it. I too, grew up in this instant messaging culture and was completely addicted to the web all of my adolescent and teen years. I first began using AIM in 7th grade and kept an online blog for many years before social networking sites like Facebook came out. Even with all this web exposure it never affected my formal writing. Even my “IM-ing” langugage was a little more refined as I always felt that shortening “you” as “u” and are as “r” was juvenine and “immature” looking, so maybe because of this I had a slight upperhand. I still cant understand how gradeschool children are putting web lingo into their school work, anytime I am writing ANYTHING I always focus on WHO exactly I am writing to and then write appropriately. Sure, when I email or IM my friends I throw in abbrivations like lol and brb but if I’m writing a formal email to a professor or someone work related I always catch myself, I even watch myself when I email or IM my mother – as a foreigner she will not understand what “lol” stands for or means. I believe that this always-online culture is destroying our youth, there is absolutely no reason why this lifestyle should affect their writing because… regardless of typing a certain way when speaking with friends aren’t they still in school and being taught a formal form of writing?!
Comment by Irene Mahmud — July 21, 2009 @ 8:14 am
Response #5
“Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer 8 Lee
Oh my goodness this essay was so true! When I was younger I always had a problem with there, their and they’re. I finally learned how to use those words properly but I always laugh when I see others misuse those words because it brings back my memories. Internet chatting has caused people to use shorter words to get their point across faster such as u instead of you and ur instead of your or even b4 for before! Even I use these words but I am so careful when typing an essay to not include them because it’s not grammatical and those aren’t real words!! I agree that kids should know the difference between those words. I am older and I understand the differences but 13, 14 year old don’t and they should be taught that it is wrong. I also thought it was funny that students are adding smiley faces in their essays. That’s absurd! I never did that, yeah smiley faces are fun but don’t over due it. I feel like teenage social life has taken over and now they are more focused on the “new” internet lingo then the actual language and grammar that will take them far in life. There has to be a limit with how kids use this language and need to be taught at younger ages the right terms so they don’t make mistakes later on in life. I didn’t have a computer until I was around 15-16 and I know the difference between the grammar in school and the grammar with friends. Using wuz up in school or in an interview is going to give the wrong impression and only I will suffer.
Comment by Cristina Bekris — July 21, 2009 @ 9:46 am
My response is to the reading regarding shortcuts in school by Jennifer Lee. It just makes me realize that technology has both furthered our knowledge and hindered it. Although I don’t really fall into this category, I have definitely seen people write things such as “u” or “r” on papers in college. As funny as this sounds, it does happen. It just goes to show that people rely on technology too much. Although saying things like “lol” can be used on things such as aim or facebook, it doesn’t belong in professional papers or e-mails to teachers. I have seen many of my friends put smiley faces, lol, and very improper language such as “cuz” in emails to their teachers. It’s getting very ridiculous that people can’t separate their personal lives from their professional lives. I personally just don’t understand how it becomes such a problem to separate these two things. Short cuts were made so that it would be easier to communicate with friends online but they weren’t made to hinder the English language and create slang in the work place or in school. It isn’t hard to distinguish when you should use certain types of language or grammar. Facebook, aim, and other programs should create something that changes “u” to “you” everytime you write it so that people will get used to seeing the correct words on the screen and then when they are writing things such as college papers, when they look over it, it will pop out to them that they are using the wrong words or the wrong type of language for a college paper. That little change on those programs could definitely make a huge change in peoples’ use of language in their papers and professional settings. This should be done because technology was created to help make things easier, not make us more confused about language to use at what time and confuse people about which language is even appropriate in a professional workplace or school.
Comment by chris henien — July 21, 2009 @ 10:43 am
In response to the article “Nu shortcuts in school r 2 much 4 teachers” I believe that this is part of evolution. Society has always been focused on the American Dream. Working hard and one day you will be successful. We as a society have turned to rely heavily on communications technology such as cell phones and a computer to keep in contact. Snail mail is gone. The only thing one gets in their mailbox nowadays is bills. Sometimes even those are coming online! Working very long hours keeps us too busy to spend quality time with our friends and families. Which is where all of this technology has come in to try to fill that void. Everything nowadays is supposed to be fast and convenient, everything from drive-thru banks, drive-thru restaurants, even drive-thru pharmacies. Shortening the time it takes to do everyday things is what really has become part of our society. Which is where this new language has come into play in my opinion. How much faster is it to type ‘wat r u ^ 2 2day’ rather than, ‘what are you up to today’? Much, much faster.
There is the fine line though that should not be crossed with this informal language. Any formal paper or letter should not be written in this short form. Careful reviewing and lots of time is supposed to be spent on anything that will be looked at by someone that is supposed to be respected. When lots of time is spent on something, there should not be a need for it to be in the short-form way. If it was to be written in the short version, it just looks sloppy and thrown together. Not something that a person would like their higher authority to see.
Comment by Jill Starnes — July 21, 2009 @ 11:31 am
My response is to all three readings assigned for this week. In “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” it pretty much describes how technology has affected the language and spelling of people who have grown up with it. I can definitely see how teachers would be annoyed by students using shortcuts in their formal work. In the same sense, I am one of the people who have grown up with technology like MSN and Yahoo Messenger, or Myspace and Facebook, and I can honestly say that I haven’t had a problem with using shortcuts in my school work. I’ve always known the difference.
The second article was amusing because I did know the Internet was full of random website, I just didn’t realize what those website actually contained. I haven’t had the time to sit there and surf the web, nor do I want to after seeing what is mainly out there.
Finally, the third article talks about file-sharing and downloading music for free and the differing opinions on the subject. My opinion on the topic is that I am pro file sharing (as long as it is used to share music and not only to make a profit from it). I actually did a speech on this topic which talked about how artists really do not earn much from their record sales because most of the profits go to the record labels, and downloading music actually gives artists exposure. There was also one group that released their record online where fans could actually decide how much they wanted to pay for the record, including free.
Comment by Alyssa Lopez — July 21, 2009 @ 12:00 pm
Out of ALL the responses we were required to do, this was BY FAR the most entertaining and truly enjoyable! I especially LOVED the Dave Barry piece with regard to the (early) superfluous websites. In his typical style, Dave lucidates on the absolute novelty of what the Internet (at first) was. Soon to be a commercial beacon for almost any and all aspects of business – and government, the Internet was – at first – a repository for completely useless stuff… that MANY thoroughly enjoyed… and some still do. From a whale being blown-up to the differences in public toilets in Australia, it’s nice to know that I am among those that read Dave’s articles with enthusiasm, if not only to see what he’ll say about normally mundane things, articles, and the like. Dave has a special knack for being able to find the humor in almost every single type of situation, even if – at first – the situation isn’t comical while he’s in the moment. But life has it’s way of showing itself to Dave in a way that he – and he alone – can articulate in a regurgitated format into being more than comical. While only four of the links (per today’s class) are still viable, it shows that the Internet can have “legs” with lasting ability with which to refer in the future and for posterity.
Truly loved it!!!
Comment by David Riley — July 21, 2009 @ 12:26 pm
I’m writing my response on the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” by Jennifer B Lee. This article is correspondant to the discussion lead I did on the “Black English Dilema”. So I will incorporate some of the things I said about that article.I think it is perectly o.k. to shorthand things. It is necessary to know how to write depending on the type of audience you have. For example, instead of writing “you” you might text “u” to a friend, but you might want to be more formal when texting a family member such as your mother. When you are writing a paper for class you should not be using shorthand. While in school the teachers are there to teach you to write formally so it would be irrelavant to shorthand words or writing the words based on the pronounciation. The english language has evolved over time, but when you are not able to distinguish the differences between formal and informal use of the english language then you have a serious problem.
Comment by Ashley Griffin — July 21, 2009 @ 2:58 pm
I feel rather strongly about the topic discussed in Jennifer Lee’s essay “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, which describes the trend among young students of using abbreviated “IM-speak” in an academic setting. I don’t think that using such abbreviations in any other situations than text messaging or instant messaging, should be tolerated. I feel like it is just lazy or juvenile when used in a professional or academic arena, and as school is preparing children to be functional in an adult world, text-speak should not be allowed. I myself occasionally use abbreviations while text messaging, but have no problem keeping that habit out of my academic or work environment. The fact that some children out there aren’t able to keep themselves from using text-speak in their schoolwork is troublesome. I don’t think that anyone would knowingly use such language if they knew it was improper and would get marked down on an assignment because of it, so I think these habits reflect a greater problem today’s children may have with using proper grammar and spelling, as well as having a problem with the way they spend their free time. When the bulk of your time is spent on the computer or text messaging your friends, it is more difficult to turn off your abbreviated writing style and you end up carrying it with you into your academic activities. Today’s children should be encouraged to put down the cell phone (or at least start using it with proper grammar) and perhaps face stiffer penalties at school when using text-speak as a way of combating this problem.
Comment by Laura Shishkovsky — July 21, 2009 @ 2:59 pm
In the article “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, the author talks about students now days running into text writing problem on papers. Being that I am going to be a teacher hopefully in the near future, I do feel that there is a place and time for everything. If the children want to write in text to each other go ahead they are not hurting anyone. Would I be all right with seeing text type in a paper I assign in class, no way! Would I go to the extremes and flunk a paper for it no. I believe in learning from mistakes and letting students correct their mistakes. No one is perfect and a teacher must understand this, if a student accidentally puts a “u” instead of using ”you” it is not the end of the world. Having the student correct and realizing they make the mistake is so much more benefited to have the students learn from their mistakes then just failing them and have them keep making the same mistakes. So in my opinion its ok for text talk in free time but not in the classroom.
Comment by dan czartoryski — July 21, 2009 @ 4:14 pm
“Piracy gets mixed reviews in industry” provides an unbiased look at the file-sharing debate that has been a major part of the music industry over the past decade. The article is presented in a way that allows for the reader to see both sides of the argument without feeling pressured to agree with the author’s views. However, since the target audience of the article is meant to be the general public, many people will likely side with the pro-sharing individuals as most people do not exactly relate to the rich record executives. This issue is hotly debated and is relative to any of us who have grown up in the age of the internet and enjoy listening to music.
Record companies are cracking down on illegal file sharing; ordinary people have been sued for large amounts of money from gathering their music collection by illegal methods. Although harsh, the consequences to these acts of piracy are meant to scare others into purchasing records as people once did. The problem is that the internet and sharing of information across the web are here to stay, and as many of the pro-sharing advocates have stated, the record companies need to find better ways to use this medium to their advantage. Services like iTunes provide people, in many countries, with the opportunity to legally download individual songs, complete albums, and movies for personal use. Since it is obvious that shopping for albums in an actual store is becoming unpopular, services like iTunes are the key to the music industry’s future.
As a user of the iTunes service, I have spent a lot of money on music that is readily available elsewhere for free. The songs are guaranteed to be the best of quality and rid of any potential viruses or spyware that could come along with the shifty peer-to-peer sharing programs and files, however, in order to accommodate to new users, prices need to be lowered; iTunes now charges $1.29 (per song) for the most popular downloads. This is a solution that Noboyuki Idei of the electronic giant Sony agrees with. If they can get more people to pay for music, the increase in sales can compensate for the lower prices; the artists will get their exposure and fair compensation (or unfair if you ask Kid Rock).
Comment by Stanley Wandeloski — July 21, 2009 @ 4:33 pm
My discussion is in response to Jennifer Lee’s essay “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers,” it focused on the way the younger generation has adapted to the language of IM (instant messaging) in their academic environments. In my opinion I feel that there’s an appropriate time and place to speak or talk formally. Abbreviated words such as “u” or “cuz” or even the popular phrase “lol” should only be used when texting or chatting with whomever over instant message. In my experience, when texting first became the thing to do, I developed a really bad habit of using those abbreviated words in school. I quickly fixed that issue by texting out the full word. I feel that this fad or whatever it may be, is affecting the grammar of young students today. As stated in the essay, students are unable to peer edit due to this “IM speak.”
In conclusion, I think that English teachers should continue to enforce the rules of grammar, in order to maintain structural writing, or let’s be honest, English as a subject in school wouldn no longer be needed.
Comment by Joumana Amine — July 21, 2009 @ 4:37 pm
Piracy is obviously illegal. The skepticism about it raises an eyebrow or two. I remember when music artists pushed to make entertainment piracy illegal. They of course have that right, but I don’t think it’s justified. They are artists. They perform to entertain. They serve little good to the better of society. What they do for a living does not make a difference in tomorrow. So what if we share their music or movies? No one is getting hurt in the process. Besides, what is the difference compared to copying songs off the radio? That part of the economy reminds me of medicine. Medicine is normally marked up between 400 and 600 percent over the cost of the pill. The same goes for entertainment. If anything, programs like Limewire are just giving the rest some competition. How about mail? It costs money to send a letter, but email is free. I don’t hear the post office raising a stink. I think in the end, producers just “mis-named” piracy for entertainment just to win a cause. I believe consumers should be protected rather than “sued” for ridiculous amounts of money. Like they say, “it’s not over till it’s over”. So maybe things will change in the future.
Comment by Jason Trefil — July 21, 2009 @ 7:28 pm
It was interesting to read Jennifer Lee’s “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers”, n nt realiz wat da essay was abt til i was few lines in2 it…. LOL :p Alright, I was joking there, but obviously this has become more of a language that we are getting accustomed to.
I don’t mind it. Personally, the only time I use it is when I am taking notes down from a fast-dictating professor in a class room. When I text-message somebody or email a friend, I prefer to use full sentences and punctuations sometimes.
On one hand, shortcuts make it more convenient to communicate when typing or writing; especially in a time when society has become obsessed with the fast-lane. However, I do not believe it is proper when communicating on a professional level such as at schools and the working place. On the other hand, too much “texting” has become more and more common while people are driving. This needs to be controlled.
Comment by Ala Jammalieh — July 21, 2009 @ 7:45 pm
In the Jennifer 8 Lee essay on language choice I felt some what connected at many points I had to catch myself from making these grammatical errors. text messaging in my life happens more than formal writing and its easy to get carried away when your ideas start flowing. Although I don’t think I’ve ever let text messaging language carry over into a final draft, I have slipped up and let it be spoken. I can remember using a phrase OMG out loud when I seen a man run into a door on campus LOL. I feel that because text messaging language is so prevalent and so common in today’s society that easy slip up’s of phrases should be given some sort of leeway, youth today practice informal writing on a daily basis and sometimes the lines between formal and informal writing might get crossed.
In the Dave Barry essay I found it quite humourous. Although the internet has come a long was since 1996 this article still seems relevant because at any point while surfing the web it can be bombarded with ignorant and random website, like pornography site adds, those annoying screen saver adds and the ever so popular yahoo “mind maze”. Today I feel that if this same article was written in 2009 that its primary target would be Youtube or Facebook, both sites are very popular and draws the consumer in and gives them 100 different other random applications and videos. BOTH SITES ARE A MAZE.
Comment by Dorian Barbee — July 21, 2009 @ 8:36 pm
This response is in respect to “Nu Shortcut in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer 8 Lee. Although I believe in the evolution of language, I think that there is a time and place for everything. In academic writing, unless used for brainstorming and outlining, there should be no exception in allowing 1337 text language to pass. There are even guidelines when it comes to citing and giving credit to sources, such as MLA and APA. This is done so that everybody is on the same page – nobody has to guess at what is happening or is intended. This even exists in scientific abbreviations and languages, such as IUPAC nomenclature, which determines how molecules are named and abbreviated. With 1337 text language, the shortcuts are just that – shortcuts. They are used in texting and IMing for convenience, but in most cases the words are staying the same. A problem with it is that anybody could make it up, and unless it is well diffused and known, you don’t know what is intended. The variety can just make someone BHOK (Bang Head On Keyboard). I don’t mind it being used in texting and IMing. I think that as humans we always strive for convenience and efficiency, and as long as the other person acknowledges what is intended or meant, then it is causing no harm – it’s communication. Certainly, it’s rare that we all speak as we write and I believe 1337 is just an extension of that.
Sarah Gorgis
Comment by sarahgorgis — July 21, 2009 @ 8:48 pm
I read the article by Jennifer Lee titled Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers. The article starts by talking about how a teacher has, each September, made a list of common writing mistakes. The article I think brings up a great point about how the way children and people in general communicate to each other. I think that it is very important to explain to children today that there is a way you can speak to your friends and a way that you need to speak when in public settings.
The article hints at how the way children write and talk when it shows some of the lists that have been shown in the past going from “There, Their, They’re, your, and you’re” to “ U, R, ur, b4, and wuz”. I think that this shows a general degradation of social acceptance in youth today, that is, they see something on tv and think its cool and next week they are all talking or acting like they saw others on tv. I think that it is very important to continuously remind children of the proper way to talk, like saying the whole word and showing respect where it is necessary.
I think that this article is very relevant to children and parents today because I think the quality of social interaction will constantly degrade if children are not taught the correct way to talk and present themselves. Children today need better role models than are shown on stations like MTV. I think that the article accurately addresses the problem and I wish more teachers were making a move to prevent this dreadful change in the English language.
Comment by Kyle Mueller — July 21, 2009 @ 9:13 pm
In today’s class, we talked about the short hand English writing used in the text messages and chatting on MSN. As long as this technique save time and energy to write the whole long words, but it is actually spoil the correct form of English or we can say literature language. Almost everyone take advantage of this short hand writing during chatting and text messaging. It wouldn’t be that bad if limited only for those purposes but when students of any level use short hand words in their academic papers because they have habit to see and read these kinds of words. In addition, if some body peer read their paper for them and if he also belongs to the group of short hand user group, and then he can not observe those mistakes for corrections. Besides this, I would like to talk about growing use of slang language or words in daily conversation. This is sort of same thing as short hand writing, it used to explain the whole story or sentence in few or one word. This slang words flood is sinking the proper English language down. Every day a new word add to the slang words dictionary, as this make one step forward to destructs the English language also resist and make trouble to learn the English. There are approximately more than half of the people in United States speak at least two different languages, or English is not their first language. For those people, it is really a big challenge to learn how to speak slang language because no institute, no instructor and even no book has written yet which teach the slang words or language. They have to learn English with proper sentences and grammar but when they see people talk in abbreviated or stereotype forms, they feel that they do not speak English or try to speak some slang words without knowing the meaning, which is considered more awkward and inappropriate way to communicate.
Comment by summera kanwal — July 21, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
Nathan Missler
Response 5
For this response I will be discussing about the article in the seeking common cause book, “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer Lee. The article talks about how new words are coming into the English dictionary that children are putting into their papers as if they are making a big text message. In my opinion I feel that writing a paper and submitting it like that is unacceptable. Every student must have been taught how to properly talk and write, so why would you want to make any shortcuts? It is a very informal way to write and you would not want to write a paper or a letter to your grandmother or grandfather and send them a message with that junk written on it. It is hard enough for them already, but it is worse when they have to deifier the hieroglyphics in your letter. It’s ridiculous! High school students work hard to prepare for college. College is one of the most important decisions that a student will make in their lifetime. If they are submitting papers with this on it into a college writing class, the professor would laugh and rip them apart into shreads. Writing papers is not an easy process. Writing papers is even essential into the work world. What if you were in a big journalism company and you were typing a hot topic on the president, would you want your article filled with instant-message slogan? I know that it would be your last day in that office, that’s for sure, n00b.
Comment by nathan missler — July 21, 2009 @ 10:20 pm
I agree with Staples that it is “the least privileged parts of society that are often the most sexist, reactionary, and even materialistic.” I believe this is because being under-privileged goes along with being relatively uneducated; so many of them are ignorant to what is going on or what they are implying or doing for our culture. It could also be a defense mechanism. They don’t have a lot of opportunity so they have to make up for it through a fake façade that they soon begin to believe. They must lash out or be bitter toward someone, and women seem like a perfect weaker candidate. They buy expensive or fake expensive things so that they appear to be doing well or look good when they really can’t afford to. All of this makes them especially reactionary because when they are called out on their fraud or embarrassed, they must save face and keep up with their false image.
I think Jackson very much resembles a Barbie Doll, in the photo of her in the text. Jackson’s ideal female beauty is basically, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” She is aware of what most beholders like to see and what a girl can get away with when they look like that. To her, beauty is being socially aware of what people want. I think my image of female beauty is very similar to hers. I know what people regard as beauty. It is something nice to look at. I do not think this image has affected my life very much. To be honest, I have never had a real problem with my image.
I do agree that physically attractive people are more likely than less attractive ones to get what they want. For example, I consider myself a very weird person. I just have an odd, strange personality. I know many people feel this way about me. But because of the way that I look, people put up with it or think it’s funny. My weirdness is viewed as adorable quirks. I even shaved off all of my hair and the people who knew me before still see me the same way; but the people that met me after I shaved my head, I can tell, a lot of them think I am a weirdo.
Jackson speaks so violently of her pre-cosmetic surgery self because she is bitter that such a simple thing as the way one looks can keep a person from so much.
Comment by Rebecca Whisenhunt — July 21, 2009 @ 10:48 pm
Today in class we heard two discussion leads on two popular culture hot topics. The first I am going to discuss is the essay reading on text/aim style writing. Many people in the class gave their thoughts on how we should be able to use it, and that it’s just the natural evolution of speech. I on the other hand am very conflicted about the uses for the text writing. I believe that with friends or for a quick message the use of short forms is not only ok, but a necessity. But when it comes to more academic type writing I think that it is very wrong to use the text style writing. Not only does the writing sound poorly written, as discussed in class many people still do not understand all the different short form terms, as they can very from person to person. So my person thoughts on the text speech are that there is a time and place for it, but not every time is the proper place.
The next essay looked on the issue of music piracy. What I took from the discussion is that the only person losing out when a song is pirated is the already wealthy music company. What I really found interesting is that the artist themselves are barely even financially scratched, or even personally affected. As discussed Kid Rock was happy to see his music pirated, he even encouraged it! Now I do not feel so bad about downloading all those song (joking of course). The final interesting point I got from this discussion is that most artist actually encouraged the illegal downloads because what they care about more is getting out their music rather then making millions off it.
Comment by Anthony Injic — July 22, 2009 @ 1:10 am
Diana Daghlas
Kimberly Lacey
ENG 3010
21 June 2009
Response #5
One of the articles covered in Seeking Common Cause was “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers.” This article basically explained how students are using text or AIM language in their academic papers. However, one teacher questions whether or not students should be taught in this new language. I do not believe that students should be taught in this new language because text language is very undefined. Many people come up with new abbreviations for themselves that they may think other people will understand, however, sometimes I find it very hard to decipher. I think that abbreviations such as “u” or “r” are very handy because in a text you are limited to a small amount of space, 160 characters. On the other hand, abbreviations such as “lsimh (laughing silently in my head)” are very difficult to understand when someone is not familiar with these types of abbreviations. Also, in academic writing, a person wants to sound like they know what they are talking about, basically professional; but with the texting language you sound and look as though you are not taking your professional career seriously.
The second article that we looked at was “Piracy Gets Mixed Reviews in Industry.” Basically this article covers the pros and cons of downloading music and what the music industry has to say about that. The pros are that unknown bands and singers get noticed by fans and make most of their money off of concerts and tours. The cons are that the music industry is not doing as well as they have done in the past. I personally believe that downloading music from the internet is not bad so long as a person does not abuse. The discussion we had in class earlier about not selling mix tape CD’s that have been downloaded off of the internet is a great example of how some people can abuse the ability to download music. In addition, record companies and singers make a lot of money as it is, however, I feel like their outcry about downloading music on the internet free is based on greed, not at looking at the whole picture.
Comment by Diana Daghlas ENG 3010 — July 22, 2009 @ 1:20 am
For this response I chose to discuss my personal views on the reading from “Nu Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers” by Jennifer Lee. This article discusses how school aged children are now incorporating newly added words from the dictionary into their papers. The problem with this is that such words that have recently been added to the dictionary are controversial to teachers in terms of whether or not they are appropriate for academic writing. The type of words that the students are using in their writing are words that are typically used over text messages or chats online. Thus, not the most academic terminology to be using in assignments for school.
Although, I can completely relate to mistakenly typing a word in abbreviated form that would typically be used over texts or chats, I have always corrected this error upon proofreading. Therefore, my final submitted paper would not include text/chat lingo. I whole heartedly agree that teachers should not conform to this new wave of technology terminology in their classrooms. There is nothing wrong with text messaging or chatting but it is particularly important to be able to transcend out of that element when in an academic setting. Different forms of writing should be embraced and taught when such language is most appropriate. For example, students should be strictly taught the difference between the type of language you would use in various formal, informal, and social settings. It is imperative that people in general know how to communicate but it is even more important to understand how to leave one behind momentarily when needed.
I am currently a volunteer at a local elementary school in the city of Detroit in which I facilitate a reading program for struggling students in 4-6th grade. I have witnessed how these students struggle with forming grammatically correct sentences and to think that in a year or two most of them will have cell phones and be exposed to the texting world, I find it highly imperative that they be taught immediately how to write in an academic setting. Perhaps then, we won’t have as many students using cyber lingo in papers.
Comment by Shaquitta Stanley — July 22, 2009 @ 3:46 am
Rich Gorski
The reading, by Dave Barry, At Last: Proof That Civilization is Doomed criticizes the internet in a comical way. Barry compares the content and the internet as a whole to why our civilization is doomed. He points out that the content that the internet provides is dominated by the crude, the uninformed, the deluded, the self-righteous, and the shrill. He talks about his research and how he spent his time surfing the internet. I think it was funny that he spent 93% of his time waiting for what seemed like at least two academic semesters per Web page while the computer appeared to do absolutely nothing. I can remember when I was younger and the internet did the same thing to me. His research allowed him to spend 1% of his time looking at Web pages. He does not want the reader to think that all Web pages are a total waste of time based on his research. I found myself wasting my time checking the validity of the Web pages that he browsed and found that out of the twenty Web pages he wrote about, I was only able to access four of them. The four Web pages that he searched and I was allowed to access were:
- Giant Collection of Viola Jokes
- Trojan Room Coffee Machine
- Federal Corpse Slice Photos
- World Record Barbecue Ignition
The World Record Barbecue Ignition Web page took me to the Purdue Engineering Web Page, so unfortunately I was unable to read up further on this. The other sixteen Web pages I was unable to access can make a person question whether his research was really valid or was some of it made up even though he stated that all the Web pages in his research were real. I tested one in specific that caught my attention and I could only wonder the disaster that it created. I used YouTube to observe the exploding whale and it proved to be a real website. This article was written in 1996. Since then, the internet has become much faster, but the content has become that much more ridiculous.
Comment by Rich Gorski — July 22, 2009 @ 10:53 pm