The previous researches on the language in social
media and textism focus majorly on the negative
effects on English language whereas the current
study initiates a new outlook.
Textism, also known as Text Message Slang
(TMS) does not include text only, it has the
addition of symbols, special character keys,
digits, emoticons and smileys. According to the
present time, social media applications like
WhatsApp, Twitter, and Facebook have added
too much depth and expanse to communication
like memes, videos, audio clips, and images.
Being a second language speaking nation of
English, Pakistanis are very much conscious
about language use. All the researches done on
SMS languages encompass areas of English
Language Teaching (ELT) and survival of
language reforms from the perspective of
training and education. The focus of these studies
is to preserve the standard language, and limit (or
stop) the influence of TMS on teenagers, school
goers and youth. It is because this group of users
usually get more influenced while passing
through the phase of learning a language. The
gap lies in knowing the perspective of students
how they interpret these effects, if they support
the change in standard spellings that teachers and
researchers view negatively, or if they have the
same viewpoint the language trainers and
researchers have regarding the preservation and
sustenance of formal use of English language.
So, a selected group of words, which does not
include any digits or other symbols, was
presented to the participants so as to see if they
accept the slightest of change in letters. Other
elements of communication like emoticons were
excluded because those are not related to
reformation of spelling structure or ease of
pronunciation.
There is a case study from Sindh, Pakistan that
focuses on the negative effects of SMS text
language upon students (Khatoon, Abidin,
Abdullah, & Shah, 2018). The researchers have
very clearly analyzed the five categories of SMS
expressions (vowel deletion, alphanumeric
homophony, graphones, short forms, and
emoticons) habitually used by students in their
formal assessments. Vowel deletion in words
causes one or more vowels in a word to be
omitted, like cn for can, or gv for give. Second
category, alphanumeric homophony, is an
interesting combination of alphabets and
numbers which approximately matches the actual
pronunciation, like f9 for fine, or g8 for gate.
Another category is graphones which replaces
the entire word with a single letter, like r for are.
Short forms include abbreviations and acronyms
like LOL, BRB. Last one is a group of emoticons
and smileys which are facial expressions made
with keyboard characters and facilitated small
images, like :-) for a happy face. The current
study also followed the same division of textism
as categorized in this research.
Linguistics, unlike language teachers, does not
marginalize language variety from the
perspective of prescriptivism. Its role is to
objectively observe and identify how language
evolution and its practice takes place throughout
human history. There are many ELT researches
which have presented the deficiencies,
drawbacks, and after effects of getting
accustomed to textism. For instance, “SMS
Texting and Its Potential Impacts on Students'
Written Communication Skills” (Dansieh, 2011),
“Effects of SMS on Writing Skills of the
University Students in Pakistan” (Yousaf, 2013),
“The Effects of Text Messaging and Instant
Messaging on Literacy” (Verheijen, 2013),
“Mobile Phone: Calling and Texting Patterns of
College Students in Pakistan” (Kamran, 2010),
and “A Study on the Negative Effects of Social
Networking Sites (SNSs) on Students Language
in Pakistan” (Hina & Kouser, 2018). These
researches are not within the scope of current
research because the study does not set any bar to
approve or disprove any kind of language use.
Rather, objective observation has been the key to
explore the research questions.
There have been many English language spelling
reforms including “De Recta et Emendata
Linguæ Angliæ Scriptione” (Smith, 1568), “An
Orthographie” (Hart, 1569), “Booke at Large for
the Amendment of English Orthographie”
(Bullokar, 1580), “Logonomia Anglica” (Gill,
1903), “English Grammar” (Butler, 1634), “The
New English Grammar” (Howell, 1662),
“Spelling Progress Summer Bulletin” (Tune &
Bisgard, 1977) and so on. The proposals given
previously were implemented to a small extent as
either some were applied on a limited population
or due to parliamentary rejection, the process of
spelling reforms was stopped, or some were not
accepted. Webster, in 1828, succeeded in
reforming English spelling structure to some
extent but with much criticism.
The objectives for conducting the research
include exploring the reasons for a different
English text slang, finding out the perspective of
students about the effects of textism on language,
exploring the positive side of SMS language
from the viewpoint of SL speakers, and lastly,
determining if text talk provides better matches
for pronunciation than the Standard English (SE).