A New Dialect?

Being the one who brought up the online dialect thing, guess the main reason why I mentioned it was because I was thinking of the non-standard spoken dialects of English (ex: African American Vernacular English and Chicano English) and how they used to be seen as substandard. We can't.. really rank language. If we did, what would be higher or lower than say, Standard American English? British English? English spoke in Australia? All languages are systematic. It's all just a different way of speaking (or typing in this case), one that takes a bit of time to adjust to and understand, just like any other dialect of English. Some dialects have different pronunciations, such as the r-less ("cah" instead of "car"), or have different words ("gumband" for "rubberband" in Pittsburgh). However, because of the way some people speak, they are judged as uneducated, which really doesn't say much about their overall mental intelligence (stereotype of the Southern accent, anyone?). Those of us who have immigrant families? How many of our families may speak in broken English, but speak quite fluently in the native language? Would we call them stupid or unintelligent? Probably not. The reason why there are so many dialects in America is because it's impossible to squash down those individuals. Language itself is very expressive, fluctuates depending on the time and people, and can be a huge marker of how a person defines himself.

Um.. also, language was never really officially formal. All the rules that make language "formal" were decided by dictionary writers and educators, who barely make up the population. Writing itself actually didn't exist until a few thousand years ago. People were using spoken language a lot sooner (which is also why I don't think people will ever just stop talking and resort to only one or two forms of communication). I also rarely see people talk the way they write (or have to write in formal papers, at least, which would be the actual, "formal" form of English), so I don't think we need to worry too much about people saying "lol" or "ttyl." Most likely they will say the entire phrase out, and those who speak abbreviated will only be a small number. Standard American English (which is what is deemed as "formal English in America) anyway would be not using contractions; using "If I/he/she/it/you were,"; not ending sentences or phrases with prepositions; no splitting infinitives; and all those other rules we learned in English, but may or may not remember anymore. Really? The spoken, vernacular language is quite casual, so why can't the written be, too? Even spelling itself wasn't quite formalized until dictionaries came out. One man, Noah Webster, really influenced how American spelling would differ from British simply by publishing a dictionary and finding different ways to spell. His reasoning (backed by other prominent revolutionists of the time) was that there needed to be an American way of doing things versus a British way. "Color," "theater," "wagon," and "defense" are just some examples of words that have been changed because of him. People saw it as a way of distinguishing their new government and political system from the old monarchy. They could have easily ignored his dictionary and just went with the old spellings, but they decided not to, so who's to say we may not have eventually ended up at those abbreviations anyway? New words are also always coming into the language, but whether or not they stay depends on the time and people (ex: "belittle" from Thomas Jefferson).

It is also possible that spontaneity does still exist, if not in thought (as mentioned in the presentation), at least in language, because people are always coming up with new ways to communicate (or abbreviate). They do realize that tone can be very difficult to detect online, so they come up with ways to convey it the best way they can. Emoticons were mentioned. It's very easy to come up with an emoticon, such as oAo, e-e, r-r, n.n, ^^, owo, -_-. Each carries its own separate meaning. Understanding them however would.. again, take some practice, along with seeing it in different contexts, but the skill needed to understand could also be similar understanding idioms in other languages. "The cat is out of the bag." How.. would this make sense to someone who was not familiar with American English? Heck, this happens with new words, too. "D'oh," "spiffy," "that is sick" (with a good connoation), "quiz," are just a few examples of words that people may not understand at first, but once explained, will. Why not also the abbreviations and emoticons used on the Internet and texting?

There is a system to the Internet language, just like all other languages. There are certain words that get abbreviated, certain letters that get cut (usually vowels), numbers that replace sounds (rebus writing, which also existed in the ancient Sumerian culture, so it's not just from chatspeak). It's not all random, so.. I'd say there's still hope. Once chatspeak and Internet language start getting unsystematic though, then yeah, I'd start getting a bit more worried myself, too. As long as people can understand each other, it's still communication. It may not be phone call or letters, but hey, before phones were invented or faster postal service, people were still able to communicate and talk to each other. Be it done vocally or texted/written, they both work. Language and writing don't necessarily need to be understood by everyone, because not everyone thinks the same way, just like not all spoken dialects of English are totally mutually intelligible.