NO TXTISM PLZ $:

       It is well understood that as humanity evolves and man’s lifestyles modernizes, society will too, along with its character and ideals. Change is inevitable, yet the emergence of textism is signifying the depletion of English’s former beauty, a truth that must be taken notice of.

       The beginning of mankind started with symbols and pictures – there were no lovely phrases, smoothly sounding sentences, or a network of diverse alphabets and words in which humans greatly admire today. Yes, it is true that drawings and sketches depict their own type of beauty, but the fact that English in itself holds a different sense of artistry – a marking of human development in which so many individuals learned to love, cannot be forgotten.

       By shortening and simplifying a phrase such as “to be” into “2b” exactly pinpoints the apathy in mankind today; a lacking of admiration and passion for the language meant to be learned since young. Typing “2b” on devices such as cell phones and instant messenger is inevitable since there is simply no time in today’s fast-paced society; for education and for learning, on the other hand, this is undoubtedly, unacceptable. English is a type of illustration, meant to be sensationalized and captured into the heart after reading through from the first letter to the last. In other words, a piece of literature can only fully convey its message after manifesting itself into the reader’s mind through its delicate details and small nuances. By changing a word from head to bottom, it has been stripped of its purpose, or whatever the writer had been trying to communicate. Although alterations of words can serve as a memory aid to students, in the long run, yes – they can memorize the piece of literature with no problems, but would they be able to digest the deeper meaning behind it all?

       Not only do altering words provide little benefit to students, they completely crumble the efforts of the writer. For example, Francis Bacon and William Shakespeare are credited for their competency in detail and elegance; altering pieces of great literature is a sign of unappreciation and disrespect.

       In the end, there is no way of anticipating how English will continue to develop in the future. Whether textism is only a trend or another stage of English’s development – there is no knowing. Will “2b” further break itself down into symbols, just like how language all began, or will mankind finally realise the charm of English? Either way, “man’s language will continue to be the mirror of his progress” (Columbus 92).