上传

Stylistic Features of SMS Language and Its Effects on Language Abstract As a language phenomenon caused by the development of mobile phone, SMS language has its own stylistic features as contractions and clippings, use of letter-number homophones, and dependence on the context. By analyzing its influence to English use, we can conclude some suggestions and critics in using it. Key words SMS language, stylistics, effect 1.Introduction Mobile phone has long been our prominent communication device. SMS is one of, maybe the second except calls, most popular services supplied by phones, especially in young people. SMS language is gaining influence to daily English use with its particular stylistic features. 2. Definition of SMS language. SMS language or textese is a term for the abbreviations and slang most commonly used due to the necessary brevity of mobile phone text messaging, in particular the widespread SMS (Short Message Service) communication protocol. Some similarities and overlaps in properties and style can be found within SMS language and Internet-based communication such as email and instant messaging. 3. Linguistic properties of SMS language. The primary motivation for the creation and use of SMS language was to convey a comprehensible message using the fewest number of characters possible. This was due to the way in which telecommunication companies limited the number of characters per SMS, and also charged the user per SMS sent. To keep costs down, users had to find a way of being concise while still getting their message across. Further typing on a phone is normally slower than with a keyboard, and capitalization is even slower. As a result, punctuation, grammar, and capitalization are largely ignored. In many countries, people now have access to unlimited text options in their monthly plan, although this varies widely from country to country, and operator to operator. However, screens are still small, which continues to motivate short messages and the input problem persists: SMS language is still widely used for brevity. 4. Stylistic features of SMS Language 4.1 the Language of the SMS The purists may frown at the language of SMS but it is extensively used throughout the globe. Is the variety of English used in SMS a passing phenomenon? From the point of view of stylistics this latest variety of English is a vibrant register of English having its own texture and stylistic pattern. SMS has ushered in a new stage in the evolution of the written language. The language of SMS is highly structured and theme-focused. The character limit of the message forces the addressor and the addressee to stick to the topic. The composition of the message is the end product of rigorous pruning as the SMS message is designed to save space and effort. First, contractions and clippings are the essential stylistic features of the language of SMS (chart 1). The constraint of space makes clippings essential for SMS messages. When an officer writes pl. put up on the body of an official letter received by him and passes it to his secretary for n/a (necessary action) the purists call it the ‘official language’, but when a young man sends a message saying pl 4give me the purists cry foul for violating the chastity of the language! Second, the use of Letter-number homophones is quite common in the language of SMS. (1) Single letters can replace words: be becomes b, see or sea becomes c, okay becomes k or kk, are becomes r, you becomes u, why becomes y, oh becomes o; (2) Single digits can replace words: won or one becomes 1, to or too becomes 2, for becomes 4, ate becomes 8; (3) A single letter or digit can replace a syllable or phoneme：to or too becomes 2, so: tomorrow becomes 2mro or 2moro or 2mrw, today becomes 2day, for or fore becomes 4, so: before becomes b4, forget becomes 4get, ate becomes 8, so: great becomes gr8, late becomes l8, mate becomes m8, wait becomes w8, skater becomes sk8r, and becomes &, so: banned or band becomes b&, thank you becomes 10q, thnq, ty； (4) Combinations of the above can shorten a single or multiple words: your and you're become ur, wonderful becomes 1drfl, someone becomes sum1, no one becomes no1, any one become any1 or ne1, see you becomes cu or cya, for you becomes 4u, easy becomes ez, enjoy becomes njoy, adieu becomes +u The language of SMS is nearer to the spoken rather than the written variety of English and a feeling of psychological nearness prompts the sender of SMS to use a colloquial and informal style. The behavioural dimension of SMS makes the language private rather than public. As the messages are meant for the addressee alone the nature of the SMS messages are often in the form of greetings, invitations, congratulations, jokes, love letters or emergency call for help. Third, another distinguishing feature of the language of SMS is its dependence on the context. Many SMS texts appear to be unintelligible if they are transplanted from the context in which they are created. Words in full Abbreviations or SMS language Words in full Abbreviations or SMS language As far as I remember AFAIR Keep it simple, stupid KISS Love LUV Such a laugh SAL Thanks THNX or THX At the moment ATM Today 2day Parents are watching PAW or PW Before B4 Random act of kindness RAK Have a nice day HAND Please reply RSVP See you C U Second SEC So what’s your problem? SWYP You’re on your own YOYO At @ As soon as possible ASAP Tears in my eyes TIME Oh My God OMG Sealed with a kiss SWAK Hugs and kisses HAK or XOXO Chicks CHX Laugh[ing] out loud LOL Great GR8 chart 1. a mini SMS dictionary 5. Effects and criticisms In SMS language, the original letters in words are typically replaced by phonetically similar letters or numbers. As the trend of SMS language evolves and seeps into the daily lives of individuals and some parents are even giving their babies alternative spellings for names in a bid to be unique. 5.1 Positive 5.1.1 Effect on verbal language use and literacy According to research done by Dr. Nenagh Kemp of University of Tasmania, the evolution of‘textese’is inherently coupled to a strong grasp of grammar and phonetics. David Crystal has countered the claims that SMS has a deleterious effect on language with numerous scholarly studies. In his book, Crystal argues that: In a typical text message, words are not abbreviated as frequently as widely thought Abbreviating has been in use for a long time, and thus is not a novel phenomenon only found in SMS language. Furthermore, some words such as 'sonar' and 'laser' that are accepted as standard words in the dictionary are actually acronyms. Both children and adults use SMS language, so if adults do not display the errors seen in children's written work, they cannot be attributed to SMS language alone. Use of abbreviations in written work and examinations is not that prevalent among students. A prerequisite to using SMS language is the knowledge of spelling, so use of SMS language does not necessarily imply low literacy. He further observes that this is by no means a cause for bad spelling, where in fact, texting may lead to an improvement in the literacy of the user. There are others who feel that the claims of SMS language being detrimental to English language proficiency are overrated. A study of the written work of 100 students by Freudenberg found that the actual amount of use of SMS language found in the written work was not very significant. Some features of SMS language such as the use of emoticons was not observed in any of the written work by the students. Of all the errors found, quite a substantial amount cannot be attributed to use of SMS language. These included errors that have already appeared even before the advent of SMS language. There are also views that SMS language has little or no effect on grammar.Proponents of this view feel that that SMS language is merely another language, and since learning a new language does not affect students' proficiency in English grammar, it cannot be said that SMS language can affect their grammar. With proper instruction, students should be able to distinguish between slang, SMS language and correct English and use them in their appropriate contexts. 5.1.2 Efficiency and economy According to a study, though SMS language is faster to write, more time is needed to read it compared to conventional English. Many people are apprehensive of the SMS register, they think that technology is corrupting the language and the SMS culture is promoting rampant illiteracy across the globe. But dispassionate linguists believe that technology has fostered creativity among the young people using SMS for transmitting messages. 5.2 Negative 5.2.1 Effect on verbal language use and communication Although various other research supports the use of SMS language, the popular notion that text messaging is damaging to the linguistic development of young people persists and many view it as a corruption of the standard form of language. Welsh journalist and television reporter John Humphrys has criticized SMS language as "wrecking our language". The author cites ambiguity as one problem posed, illustrating with examples such as "lol", which may either be interpreted to mean "laughing out loud", "lots of love", and "little old lady" depending on the context in which it is being used. However, it should be noted that ambiguous words and statements have always been present within languages. In English for example, the word "duck" can have more than one meaning. It could be referring to either the bird or the action, and such words are usually disambiguated by looking at the context in which it was written. The proliferation of SMS language has been criticized for causing the deterioration of English language proficiency and its rich heritage. Opponents of SMS language feel that it undermines the properties of the English language that have lasted throughout its long history. Furthermore, words within the SMS language that are very similar to their English-language counterparts can be confused by young users as the actual English spelling and can therefore increase the prevalence of spelling mistakes. 5.2.2 Indolence vs. efficiency Humphrys describes emoticons and textese as "irritating" and essentially lazy behavior, and surmises that "sloppy" habits gained while using textese will result in students' growing ignorance of proper grammar and punctuation. Conclusion With special features in stylistics, SMS language has witnessed an increasing popularity among mobile phone users. Of course, it is a convenient way a fast communication. However, we should also pay due attention on its negative influence especially on kids in stage of language learning. references [1] http://www.shvoong.com/books/1733008-language-sms/#ixzz2Hvfvd6Xp [2]https://www.vodacommessaging.co.za/dictionary.asp [3] IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning 2005.p. 168."The Impact of Short Message Service (SMS) Language on Language Proficiency of Learners and the SMS Dictionaries". [4] Thaindian News."SMS language sparks off unusually spelt baby names trend!". [5] Crystal, David (November 2008). "The joy of txt". Spotlight: 16–21. [6] Solomon Ali Dansieh (2011). "SMS Texting and Its Potential Impacts on Students’ Written". International Journal of English Linguistics 1 (2). [7] Geoffrey K. Pullum (2012-01-15). "Waterstones". Language Log. [8 Berman, Isabel (2006). "Email-"Inspired" Changes in Non-Native Legal Discourse". Language@Internet . [9] John Humphrys (2007-09-24). "I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language". Associated Newspapers. [10] "Messaging 2.0". Mobilemessaging2.com. [11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_language