Few things have sparked as much debate in the 21st century as texting. What is now a form of communication so central to the current culture and way of life did not exist only ten years ago. Phones have been built around their texting capabilities and improvements have been made to promote the use of keypads. While most people are either indifferent users or avid supporters of texting, some are against it and the implications it has on our culture and language. David Crystal, in his essay “2B Or Not 2B?”, attacks the claims of those challengers. David Crystal’s use of the rhetorical strategies hyperbole, counterargument, and concession effectively argues that texting does not hinder the English language, but rather helps to evolve it. Crystal
…show more content…
Crystal admits that the keypads first designed for texting were not designed well for their jobs. He claims “Sending a message on a mobile phone is not the most natural of ways to communicate. The keypad isn’t linguistically sensible,” (Crystal 192). While texting itself is useful, he understands, and conveys to his readers, that it is not a perfect medium. The small keypads make it difficult to type letters in a practical way. He is clearly admitting that it is not the way humans were made to communicate. Crystal used the word “natural” to describe the way the keypad is not, meaning “existing in or caused by nature”. Had he used the term “untaught”, which means “not trained by teaching”, the sentence would would insinuate that the keypad makes texting unlearnable, which would not be useful to his argument. While it is not natural, the unhelpful keypads have not hindered people from using them, implementing them, and making them a huge part of our communication. He recognizes its shortcomings, but realizes that it only is a small hindrance. In light of this, the reader is compelled to take his words even more believably, because despite knowing the flaws, he still convincingly provides the reader with evidence and reason to follow him onto the texting bandwagon. His use of concession …show more content…
He addresses a common and widely believed rumor and uses evidence to restore texting’s validity. Crystal states, “...five years of research has at last begun to dispel the myths. The most important finding is that texting does not erode children’s ability to read and write. On the contrary, literacy improves. The latest studies (from a team at Coventry University) have found strong positive links between the use of text language and the skills underlying success in standard English . . . The more abbreviations in their messages, the higher they scored on tests of reading and vocabulary,” (Crystal 195). He uses the phrase “dispel the myth”, which means “to get rid of a widely held but false belief or idea”. The evidence he provides is sufficient enough to not only discredit the story that it is linguistically hindering, but credit the use of text messaging and acronyms with aiding children with language comprehension. Crystal’s counter argument disproves the central argument of those who wholeheartedly believe that texting cripples its users’ abilities to properly use English. Had he used the phrase “dispel the belief” instead of myth, the assertion would have a different meaning. “Belief” would insinuate that texting’s harmfulness is up for debate and something that could not be so easily dispelled, whereas, “myth”
Crystal admits that the keypads first designed for texting were not designed well for their jobs. He claims “Sending a message on a mobile phone is not the most natural of ways to communicate. The keypad isn’t linguistically sensible,” (Crystal 192). While texting itself is useful, he understands, and conveys to his readers, that it is not a perfect medium. The small keypads make it difficult to type letters in a practical way. He is clearly admitting that it is not the way humans were made to communicate. Crystal used the word “natural” to describe the way the keypad is not, meaning “existing in or caused by nature”. Had he used the term “untaught”, which means “not trained by teaching”, the sentence would would insinuate that the keypad makes texting unlearnable, which would not be useful to his argument. While it is not natural, the unhelpful keypads have not hindered people from using them, implementing them, and making them a huge part of our communication. He recognizes its shortcomings, but realizes that it only is a small hindrance. In light of this, the reader is compelled to take his words even more believably, because despite knowing the flaws, he still convincingly provides the reader with evidence and reason to follow him onto the texting bandwagon. His use of concession …show more content…
He addresses a common and widely believed rumor and uses evidence to restore texting’s validity. Crystal states, “...five years of research has at last begun to dispel the myths. The most important finding is that texting does not erode children’s ability to read and write. On the contrary, literacy improves. The latest studies (from a team at Coventry University) have found strong positive links between the use of text language and the skills underlying success in standard English . . . The more abbreviations in their messages, the higher they scored on tests of reading and vocabulary,” (Crystal 195). He uses the phrase “dispel the myth”, which means “to get rid of a widely held but false belief or idea”. The evidence he provides is sufficient enough to not only discredit the story that it is linguistically hindering, but credit the use of text messaging and acronyms with aiding children with language comprehension. Crystal’s counter argument disproves the central argument of those who wholeheartedly believe that texting cripples its users’ abilities to properly use English. Had he used the phrase “dispel the belief” instead of myth, the assertion would have a different meaning. “Belief” would insinuate that texting’s harmfulness is up for debate and something that could not be so easily dispelled, whereas, “myth”