SMS language
2G technology made text entry difficult, requiring multiple key presses on a small keypad to generate each letter, and messages were generally limited to 160 characters (or 1280 bits).
It seeks to use the fewest letters to produce ultra-concise words and sentiments[2] in dealing with the space, time, and cost constraints of text messaging.
It follows from how early SMS permitted only 160 characters and that carriers began charging a small fee for each message sent (and sometimes received).
[4] Faramerz Dabhoiwala wrote in The Guardian in 2016: "modern usages that horrify linguistic purists in fact have deep historical roots.
Such generalization may have risen from the fact that mobile phones had only been able to support a limited number of default languages in the early stages of its conception and distribution.
This motivates the anglicization of such languages, especially those using non-Latin orthographies (i.e. not using Latin alphabets) following for instance, the even more limited message lengths involved when using for example, Cyrillic or Greek letters.
[9] On the other side, researcher Gillian Perrett observes the de-anglicization[10] of the English language following its use and incorporation into non-English linguistic contexts.
The advent of touchscreen phones with large screens, swipe-based input methods and increasingly advanced autocomplete and spelling suggestion functionality, as well as the increasing popularity of free-to-use instant messaging systems like WhatsApp over pay-per-message SMS[11] has decreased the need to use SMS language.
Observations and classifications as to the linguistic and stylistic properties of SMS language have been made and proposed by Crispin Thurlow,[12] López Rúa,[13] and David Crystal.
[14] The advent of predictive text input and smartphones featuring full QWERTY keyboards may contribute to a reduction in the use of shortenings in SMS language.
The feature of "reactive tokens" that is ubiquitous in Internet Relay Chat (IRC), is also commonly found in SMS language.
[16] Prosodic features in SMS language aim to provide added semantic and syntactic information and context from which recipients can use to deduce a more contextually relevant and accurate interpretation.
[17][18] Indeed, even though SMS language exists in the format of written text, it closely resembles normal speech in that it does not have a complicated structure and that its meaning is greatly contextualised.
Capitalization too may encode prosodic elements, where copious use may signify the textual equivalent of raised voice to indicate heightened emotion.
[14] While vowels and punctuation of words in SMS language are generally omitted, David Crystal observes that apostrophes occur unusually frequently.
As a result, (as much as it is also a consequence), notable lexicographical efforts and publications (e.g., dictionaries) dealing specifically with SMS language have yet to emerge.
[21] Some experts have suggested that the usage of "ungrammatical" text message slang has enabled SMS to become a part of "normal language" for many children.
Combinations can shorten single or multiple words: In one American study, researchers found that less than 20% of messages used SMS language.
[47] According to research done by Dr. Nenagh Kemp of the University of Tasmania, the evolution of textese is inherently coupled to a strong grasp of grammar and phonetics.
In his book, Crystal argues that: He further observes that this is by no means a cause for bad spelling, where in fact, texting may lead to an improvement in the literacy of the user.
The author cites ambiguity as one problem posed, illustrating with examples such as "lol", which may either be interpreted to mean "laughing out loud", "lots of love", and "little old lady" depending on the context in which it is being used.
[57] By using a self-report survey where the 228 middle school participants would answer questions regarding their texting behaviors, as well as a ten minute in-class grammar assessment, the study gathered information on how the amount of time a student spent online affected their writing.
They concluded that the more time the youth spend on technology, the more they become acquainted with "techspeak" or "textese," and thus allow their approach to grammar and academic writing to change.
[19] The lexical, morphological and syntactic choices of male and female SMS users[15] suggested to Ling that women are more "adroit"[b] and more "literary" texters.
[21] The visual effect elicited by SMS language also lends a feeling of novelty that helps to make the advertisement more memorable.
[21] Companies focusing on the teen market have the tendency to make use of SMS language in their advertising to capture the attention of their target audience.
David Lang, president of the team who created the advertisement commented that they desired to bring across the impression that they identify with youth culture and discourse.
