The Influence of Netspeak on Students' Writing
Abstract
This study on Netspeak writes about words or phrases that are abbreviated and used frequently by Internet users. Language incorporates explosive items which need special care when handling the components in it. Wide knowledge regarding the various aspect of language will help readers to be able to handle the substance. Therefore, the author calls for a deeper comprehension of certain linguistic realities. This study helps to enlighten the various types of language used while using different mode of communication, thus avoiding harsh judgments regarding the informal use of language. The study also hopes to show that there is nothing linguistically eccentric about using Netspeak while communicating online. They are regarded a negative influence only if they are used in a formal environment. This study deals with the notion that Netspeak is a common language used especially by the younger generation to communicate with one another while online. Although, most educators have regarded the influence of Netspeak as negative and detrimental towards students’ writing, however, Netspeak is still prevalent. This study also gives the statement of problem, its objectives, significance and limitations. It is hoped that the people in the society, especially educators will not view Netspeak as only a cause of the decline of students’ writing standard, but a fixture in language, which is acknowledged for its passing style and momentary trend.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abrahao de los Santos, Eduarda 2012. Lolcats and Lolspeak: the importance of the Internet culture for English. BELT Journal, Porto Alegre, 3(1), 62-76.
Baron, Naomi 2001. Language of the Internet. In The Stanford Handbook for Language Engineers, Ali Farghali (ed). Standford California. CSLI Publications 1-63.http://www.american.edu/cas/faculty/nbaron.cfm.
Carrington, John H. (2005). Instant messaging and teen language. American Speech. Vol. 83, No 1.
Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Crystal, David 2006. Language and the Internet. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, David 2008. Txtng. The Gr8 Db8. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ferrara, Kathleen, Brunner, Hans & Whittemore, Greg 1991. Interactive Written Discourse as an Emergent Register. Written Communication 8(1).
Grabill, J. & Hicks, T. (2005). Multiliteracies meet methods: The case for digital writing in English education. English Education, 37(4), 301-311.
Griffiths T. Richard 2002. History of the Internet, Internet for historians (and just about everyone else). http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/history/ivh/.
Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2006). Weblog worlds and constructions of effective and powerful writing: Cross with care, and only where signs permit. In K. Pahl & J. Rowsell (eds.), Travel Notes from the New Literacy Studies: Instances of Practice. (pp. 72-92). Retrieved from: http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/lib/australiancathu
Kwak, Hyokjin, Morrison, Michelle, Peters, Cara Okleshen & Zinkhan, George M. 2003. Web Based Chatting: Consumer Communication in Cyberspace. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (1 & 2), 17-27.
Lankshear, Colin & Knobel, Michele 2008. Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies, and Practices. In New Literacies and Digital Epistemologies, Colin Lankshear & Michele Knobel (eds). New York: Peter Lang, 1-17.
Lee B. Abraham & Lawrence, Williams 2009. Electronic Discourse in Language Learning and Language Teaching. Amsterdam: Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Lee, Jennifer. 2002. I Think, Therefore IM: Text Shortcuts Invade Schoolwork, and Teachers Are Not Amused. New York Times, September 19, E1.
Maniam. M (2010). ‘Da’ Influence of SMS Language on ‘Skul’ Children’s Writing: A Survey In A Secondary School In Petaling Jaya’.
Mann, Chris & Stewart, Fiona (2000). Internet Communicatio and Qualitative Research: A Handbook for Researching Online. London; Sage.
Merchant, G. (2009). Web 2.0, new literacies, and the idea of learning through participation. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(3), 107-122.
Miriam Tanti (2007). ‘Literacy Education in the Digital Age: Using Blogging to Teach Writing: Teaching English with Technology, Special Issue on LAMS and Learning Design, 12(2), 132-146.
Nadzrah Abu Bakar & Kemboja Ismail. (2007). Using Blogs to Encourage ESL Students to Write Constructively. European Journal of Social Sciences. 584-604.
Netlingo. www.netlingo.com
‘Netspeak’ Doing More Good Than Harm to English Language, Experts Say 2005. (Author unknown). http://www.jewishworldreview. com/0305/netspeak.
O’Connor, Amanda 2005. Instant Messaging: Friend or Foe of Student Writing. New Horizons for Learning Online Journals. http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/
Peyton, Joy Kreeft. “Dialogue Journals: Interactive Writing to Develop Language and Literacy.” ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. 2000. http://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/peyton01.html
Peyton, Joy Kreeft and Staton, Jana. Dialogue Journals in the Multilingual Classroom. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1993.
Pinkman, K. (2005). Using blogs in the foreign language classroom. The JALT CALL Journal, 1(1)
Scotsman, 2003. Teaching and Learning in the English Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shaughnessy, Michael. 2008. An Interview with Jacquie Ream: What’s Happening With Writing? http://ednews.org/articles/an-interview-with-jacquie-ream-what’s-happening-with-writing.html
Stavfeldt, Einar 2011. Friend or Foe? Netspeak in English Language Teaching. University of Gothenburg. http://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/25876/1.pdf
Staton, Jana (1988). “The Power of Responding in Dialogue Journals.” In The Journal Book. New Hampshire: Boynton/Cook Publisher. 1988. pp. 48-67.
Ten Have, Paul (1999), Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage Publications.
Tomita, Dean 2009. Text Messaging and Implications for its use in Education. Hawaii: University of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu.
Urban Dictionary. http//:www.urbandictionary.com.
Werry, Christopher C. 1996. Linguistic and Interactional Features of Internet Relay Chat. In Computer Mediated Communication. Linguistic, Social and Cross Cultural Perspectives. 47-63.
Wikipedia. http//www.wikipedia.com.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i1.963
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2015 Intelektual Pustaka Media Utama
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn)
ISSN: 2089-9823, e-ISSN 2302-9277
Published by Intelektual Pustaka Media Utama (IPMU) in collaboration with the Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science (IAES).