I like how you took all of my good points and ignored them/changed their meaning to best fit your argument, and argued with things that weren't even points against you. Nicely done.
First off, I would like to clarify something:
I didn't mean that they don't think out their posts when I said that. What I meant was, you were saying that less characters to type out = faster message. Strictly speaking, yes, that is true. However, what I'm saying is that there are other variables involved besides the total number of characters. Overall typing experience is one of those, and, in my experience, winging a sentence word by word is also one of those variables. Do you type a full sentence (that you have completely thought out word for word, punctuation, etc.) in English slower than you type out a sentence in "chatspeak" that you're making up as you go along?
No. In my experience, it's quicker to think out a sentence before you begin typing (though I often amend my sentence a little as I go along). However, I can do this in chatspeak; I don't understand why this is a point in the favor of correct grammar. Yes, think out your sentences, but also type them in chatspeak. If you think out a grammatically correct sentence and then think out a sentence and type it in chatspeak, it doesn't somehow help the case of grammatical correctness.
It was not an insult of anyone's intelligence. Sorry for the confusion.
It's not about making mistakes and getting corrected or improving your grammar. It's about maintaining good habits so that I make less mistakes in the first place. Analogy: I play guitar. To perform my best, I need to practice everyday. If I practice enough everyday, I can play well. However, if I don't practice often, or at all except when I'm being tested (performing for an audience is a good comparison, I think) my skills will diminish quickly and I will not perform optimally when the time comes. It's not about improving my English skills, it's about maintaining them.
I understand this; however, if you continually practice doing something wrong, it is worse than no practice at all. For example, in this sentence you used 'less' to describe the word 'mistakes'. The word you're looking for is 'fewer', as 'less' does not modify countable nouns. Now, I'm sure you've unknowingly practiced it this way several times, which could only have strengthened this bad habit. Had I not corrected you, you would only have been intensifying your habit of making this grammatical mistake. If your English skills start off perfect, then this is a good way of maintaining them; if not, you might be digging a deeper hole for yourself without peers to correct you.
Perhaps it's because I spent a good part of my time online as a grammar Nazi who belittled chatspeak users, that now I notice these little nuances of grammar. However, if you don't care about good grammar, but you want to get your point across, 'less' works fine. Just like 'ppl' over 'people.'
I used to see it your way, but I don't anymore. Why? Because when you think about it, thinking less of someone based on how much dedication they put into their post is ridiculous (and usually just an excuse to look down on someone).
What does that have to do with anything I said? That paragraph was just to prove my point about the one before it: If you don't practice something regularly, you will start to lose your skills.
What I meant by that was that while you might understand English better by having studied and failed, the important thing is that you pass your test, not that you understand the subject.
I can read it well, also. While I don't deny that you will encounter it sooner than later, that has little to do with it. Reread what I said about changing paces:
And this 'change of pace' - is it my fault for typing in chatspeak, or yours for typing proper English? The transition is sort of like having people with different accents in the room - generally it doesn't cause problems. While I can't speak like an Englishman/ southerner/ Scot/ Irishman/Canadian/Jamaican/Australian/ etc, I can understand what they're saying. You shouldn't be expected to learn how to type in chatspeak, but you should be expected to understand others if they so choose.
Right, I admitted that cursive is faster, which is a point in your favor. But I asked why most people do not write in cursive regularly if they're so concerned about saving time. Saving a cumulative minute and a half on the computer when typing is important, but when writing it's not? I agree, being able to read what someone else writes is important. That's why we have standards. The standard here is the English language, which is widely accepted (proven by the number of people who speak it). "Chatspeak" is somewhat of a forced standard that I don't necessarily agree with. It has its uses in certain situations, I'll admit. In other situations, however, I believe it is out of place.
Once again, many people don't like using cursive and I'm fine with that. You shouldn't be required to write in cursive; but to understand when others do so is crucial. So I don't think why people don't use cursive is important, simply that the option is[/]i available to those who want it. Same with chatspeak - it isn't a standard at all. There is far from a standardized version of chatspeak - it comes in all sorts of varieties. The important thing is that a rational human being with at least moderate exposure to technology can understand it. Remember, the English language isn't standardized either - words are invented all the time.
Think about it like a foreign language. To communicate with someone who speaks a different language, you have to learn the language they speak. Now assume the majority of people are speaking one thing and I decide to speak in different language that most people also understand and it saves me time. The transition from one to the other slows the reader down temporarily. Since I'm in the minority speaking the other language, there will be another transition back to the language the majority is using. They may be able to understand me fine, but that doesn't mean that I saved everyone time -- just myself.
If everyone else is fluent in your language, go ahead! Chances are, you can convey your idea much more precisely in your language, and people hearing your speech can understand its meaning. When expressing a complex idea, one needs a language with which they are very familiar. When interpreting a complex idea, you don't need as much of an understanding of the language to know what they mean.
Once again, you didn't read what I said correctly.
See bottom of post.
Yeah. Responding to someone on a Pokemon forum is pretty low on my list of priorities. There are obvious exceptions when the priority of a message is higher than normal -- this wasn't one of them. Also, if you don't mind robbing me of a minute and a half of my time (see my paragraph about changing paces), I don't mind robbing it back. :biggrin:
Exactly, exactly, exactly! I was waiting for you to say that. Responding to someone on a Pokémon forum is pretty low on most people's lists of priorities. Thus, why should they put the effort into typing sound English?
But seriously, you don't spend more time reading words that are fully typed out than those that are abbreviated. You recognize both instantly. Seriously. It only saves the writer time, and if it's a severe change in pace (and it usually is) it will probably cause the reader to be temporarily slowed. The same is true for when the majority of people are using "chatspeak" and someone comes along and type out a full sentence. However, you're in the minority and you're causing the issues.
Really? I know mutliple people who type out their sentences in a chatroom setting, because they can't bring themselves to butcher the English language. Yet, I type in chatspeak, and the conversation works just fine. The only issue caused is for the person who isn't willing to make any effort to understand chatspeak. Do it once, and you're set. Now, whose effort should we spare? The guy who isn't willing to learn chatspeak once, and who thinks we should use the queen's English for his sake? Or the guy who will be saving himself trouble each and every time he uses chatspeak?
True. But I'm less likely to read your post if you don't type in a way that I want to read. I don't even get far enough to judge their content, and that's not my fault because I've made it clear that I don't like "chatspeak." If you continue to use it, I will continue to ignore you. (General sense "You" throughout this post, again)
Willful ignorance is a common theme, but really - that's like the guy who only hears one side of the argument (you're a republican/ democrat, so you can't be reasonable). Ignore their words if you want, but I don't think that they should change their ways to cater to English-language enthusiasts.
It's your time to waist when you go to read the post! Also, words like "moar," "liek," and "teh," are memes, not "chatspeak." Please learn the difference.
Sure, but there is no 'difference'. That's like saying 'that zebra is black, not white'. They find their way into chatspeak very easily. Although, I will concede posts like 'i liek teh peekachewz1111111' are usually done in jest by those who look down on chatspeak.
"People who don't use punctuation are usually using an IM service," really? I've seen plenty wall-o-texts without any punctuation or line breaks outside of IM services in my day. I have to disagree with you here. Again, I think yours is a very clean-cut example. It's not a full blown paragraph that's missing most (if not all) of its punctuation or line breaks like most longer posts type in "chatspeak" are.
There is a limit to what is practical and what isn't. As I have noted, the only requirement should be that reasonable people who have been exposed to technology can understand it. I'm not really concerned with whether or not their eyes bleed.
Two wrongs don't make a right though.
