Thursday, July 7, 2011

The evolution of language in the digital age of 140 characters

The Internet has revolutionized customs and behavior in many ways. One is dealing with our language. The new generations have some freedom with the words, giving rise to exotic abbreviations and neologisms.


Contrary to what many might imagine, I am not against digital language.

Spoken language, for example, is quite different from writing. Better tolerate an "I'll take it" has spoken, but not would accept in place of "I'll get it" in writing, following the rules of the language learned. The same is true for the web. Contexts are different because of different needs. Abbreviate the words to have agility on keyboards, especially for mobile devices, which require more manual dexterity.

The same goes for emoticions. In this era of 140 characters, we have to be more objective. Thus, we leave aside the subtleties that a good prose, traditional patterns, provides: convey emotions, sensations and feelings. The chances of a misunderstanding in a virtual environment, you see, are very high. Often healthy discussions on forums, blogs and social networks turn into bloodbaths by the issuer's total inability to transform their characters in a text message expressive. Hence arose the emoticons. They help us a lot, and the best - it costs only 2 or 3 characters.

Note that if you tell me, for example, a sexist joke, an emoticon in my reply can completely change my intention. If I say "asshole !!!", I'm angry. If I answer "You bastard !!!", I'm angry and yelling. If I say "you jerk! "I can attest that my wink did not like, but I took in stride. I confess that I am halfway addicted to emoticons at the end of sentences. At one time I tried to cut them a little, but gave up. I find them to important social networks, after all, the amount of characters available is as short as our time in virtual chats.

Sometimes some misrepresentation of syntax occur in favor of the much needed communication speed. I confess that I do not have the courage to reach someone saying "I axo" instead of "I think", but do not bother when they address me in this way on social networks.

The neologisms also gained ground in the digital age. Perhaps Machado de Assis will pull your feet at night whenever you use the verb "troll". However, as to be bizarre at first, are the neologisms that keeps the language alive. The problem is when you start using virtual language out of context. For example, a school exam, or in corporate communications. You can find it natural to exchange the "ch" with "x" in corporate email, but certainly his "xefe" will not see too much informality welcome.

But there are cases that can not tolerate in any situation. It is the contempt of the English language. Enter in the comments section of the major news portals becomes shocking, because it seems no one pays attention to what he writes. In fact, many seem to be using a keyboard for the first time. Put me to thinking: is the Internet dumbing down the people en masse, or all of these people has always been the web only 3 brought them greater visibility?

Some "mistakes" even became hashtags on Twitter! That's another thing I did not resign. Some nitwit wrote one day "Corrao" instead of "run", and who knows that the error goes forward, and apologizes saying that has become a standard expression in microblogging, or that part of the new digital culture. Humph! It's the same stupidity, or what would be the excuse to enter a shift, a tilde and an "a" and an "o" instead of simply an "a" and an "m"? Brainless parrots.

I know that many may be to not give a damn what others think of their writing. Well, remember that also means it's message. Whether or not judge people by how they talk more rather than talk. And on the web, who mistreats the Portuguese language is discredited. And ends up being judged, often for what is not! Our web presence has now become important in all aspects of our lives: personal, professional, school ...

Therefore, before sending a message, keep in mind that your format also impact positively or negatively on the people, interfering with the desired result.