Language and Learning

Ever heard of Fark.com? If not, go look at it now. No, seriously... right now. I'll wait.

Back? Good. Assuming most anyone who manages to find me amidst the damp and dusky labyrinth known as the Interwebs is fairly tech and net savvy, very few are going to be unfamiliar with Fark. Personally, it's the only message board type of site that I can enjoy. You get funny news, good discussion, and a whole lot of belly laugh inducing nonsense without all the drama and needless post count pomp that comes with other boards. Because of this, I've become quite a patron of Mr. Curtis and his little corner of cyberspace, and I post my opinions quite frequently. Recently, my posting led to an unexpected result-- a sponsorship to TotalFark, Fark's pay only subscription service. A fine man or woman (I'm betting woman) going by the moniker of Kteela paid five bucks-- or roughly a gallon of gas, if you're keep score at home-- to subscribe me to TotalFark based solely on one of my posts in a thread concerning the devolution of the English language due to the internet generation beginning to use "LOL," "U," ":)" and other such grammatical atrocities in academic papers.

In short, this is my public thank you to Kteela and my invitation to any and all to give Fark a look. Also, I will be reposting the message that earned me the TotalFark subscription below this text. I figure if it was worth five dollars to one person, it may well be worth at least five MINUTES to you. Enjoy!

(Original Thread)

Person to Whom I Was Responding:
Is it really an issue of intelligence? Or more the evolution of language? As we become an increasingly written-based communication society, isn't it natural that abbreviations and other means of shortening communication will become more popular?

My Post:
You can't be serious.

As it stands, English as a language is already becoming watered down to the point that its laughable, and we are NOT becoming an increasingly written based society, as the problem stems from the Interwebs Generation (my generation) refining ALL of their communication to reflect the way they SPEAK to each other, even if more and more of that communication is being read instead of heard. While it is expedient and acceptable for our common speech patterns to use a limited vocabulary and vernacular due to the relatively small need for complex ideas to be expressed during the "small talk" that tends to constitute our common exchanges throughout our day, it as another issue entirely when we as a people start limiting our ENTIRE vocabulary to the sort of bare bones words that we use during inconsequential discussion. It is precisely that watering down of our vocabulary that is taking place and, as a corollary, our children are beginning to lack the basic knowledge of our language necessary to form or understand complex ideas.

English, reading comprehension, and writing skills are not just subjects to study in school, they're essentially the key to all learning. The only way the human brain can accurately process and assimilate information is through the elaborate symbol system we've created and dubbed language. The more thoroughly a language is understood and the easier one can wield it, the easier one's mind will be able to understand and conquer new and difficult subjects or ideas. In short, the brain cannot think with words it doesn't understand.

Example:

Hreuthasad equals Ashterda over Yrutart. Understand? Of course not. Hreuthasad, Ashterda, and Yrutart have zero meaning to anyone but me. In this case I've arbitrarily decided that Hreuthasad means Velocity, Ashterda means Speed, and Yrutart means Time. Now you certainly understand. A rather cheap and weak example, perhaps, but its gets the point across-- without being equipped with the proper vocabulary, even the most basic of ideas cannot be grasped.

Should every person strive to use perfect grammar and punctuation in their online correspondence, while simultaneously going out of their way to use more accurate and less common words in order to flex their vocabulary? In my opinion, yes... if nothing else, it's good practice. But that's me, and it's up to the individual. But once that sort of nonchalant attitude begins to creep into academic and professional writing, and worst of all, to be expected and accepted by our educators, we should all be alarmed. For better or worse, the population of sites like Fark tend to be composed of intellectuals and fairly learned individuals, at least to the point of being able to grasp complex ideas. Therefore it's easy for us to assume that even the goofiest and most "Interweb" of our culture still have the tools to wield intelligence even if they're more likely to use acronyms instead of complex sentences to communicate. But pick a high school senior in your neighborhood at random and ask them what words like "Sardonic," "Innocuous," and "Bucolic" mean. Chances are you'll get a response of "Hell, I ain't no nerd or nothing." None of those are million dollar words. The point is driven even further home if you ask them about words that are common but rarely really understood, like "Empirical," "Systemic," or "Chronic." Such words are used and appear in papers, but scratch just beneath the surface and you'll find that an alarming number of our youth only repeat or plagiarize what they hear and see without fully understanding anything at all.

The English language has grown to this point due to the fact that it was left relatively unchecked in its infancy and allowed to expand. The idea that now, when the internet allows for information to be truly universally accessible, we should begin to accept a narrowing and reconfiguration of our language is as tragically comical as a high school student believing that a sideways smiley face has its place in academia.