nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Textspeak. I HATE IT!

thomond2006

Nothing annoys me more in the whole world. :mad:

I think it's unbecoming of someone to use it to be honest.

It's dirty and stupid.

I love facebook but I'm sick to death of people using textspeak, use proper English for fcuk sake!

e.g

is completely fukd 4 economics 2m! any1 up 4 givin me a crash lesson 2m b4 4...???? ANY1......???????

Reply:

go over d tutorial questions we got an ull be d grandest .. dont forget u av done so ur half way dare like!! :D

Mother of God, this kind of stuff really annoys me.

In Gaelic Ireland, poetry was power. I totally agree. If you're going to go to school for 13-15 years to learn how to write, then ****ing do it properly!

Time is no excuse in my opinion.

What do you think?

Credit goes to the boards.ie mods who strictly enforce the "no txtspk" rule. One reason why I love this site.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Liam Byrne

Charco wrote: »

This topic reminded me of the wonderfully erudite Stephen Fry on Jonathan Ross addressing the topic of language snobs who moan about text speak

Since when is it "snobby" to want people to use vowels and not to assume that the digits 8 and 2 be used only where appropriate ?

Personally, if a website has a domain name like "whatever4u" I'll always go look elsewhere for my "whatevers".

Agricola

I use a mild form of text speak to save time but never go in for the incomprehensible rubbish that you see from some people. I thinks its ok to use words like "2moro", 2 instead of "to" etc. As long as it doesnt take someone to decipher it and it saves you afew keystrokes, it should be ok.

But its strictly for phones. Shouldnt be seen anywhere. Especially in exams!

bnt

I see no justification for it whatsover, short of an emergency. I manage to avoid it in text messages and on Twitter, so I never want to see it on any normal website or forum. Is it really so hard to type those extra two characters in "you"?

Liam Byrne

Agricola wrote: »

I thinks its ok to use words like "2moro"

1) "2moro" isn't a word
2) if it were, it would be "twomoro", which isn't remotely like "tomorrow"

The only place "2moro" should ever be seen is in a "buy-one-chocolate-bar-get-one-free" special offer box near the checkouts!

Mmcd

Liam Byrne wrote: »

1) "2moro" isn't a word
2) if it were, it would be "twomoro", which isn't remotely like "tomorrow"

The only place "2moro" should ever be seen is in a "buy-one-chocolate-bar-get-one-free" special offer box near the checkouts!

There is one thing worse than text speak................bad puns!

Liam Byrne

Mmcd wrote: »

There is one thing worse than text speak................bad puns!

That wasn't a pun!!!! It's the only logical place that "2 moro" would actually make sense!

Mars Bar

I hate it.

I feel like I'm trying to read a foreign language I've never seen before when I get a text full of text speak. Takes me a day and an age to decipher it. Ugh.

G_R

I use it a small bit. I think its OK if you just use the odd word like "u" or "y" but i hate when people reduce every word.

Also if someone is sending a text, i don't see any harm saying 'txt' or 'jus' etc to cut down on characters and save the price of a text. But when there is no character restriction (a la boards) then there is no excuse.

Liam Byrne

dannym08 wrote: »

...i don't see any harm saying 'txt' or 'jus'...

Meaning "juice" or "just" or "Jews" ?

sdanseo

I'll shorten things ONLY to fit them into a 160-character text to save cash. Other than that, txtspkers should be banned from society totally. Facebook, boards etc provide lots of free bandwidth, you may as well use it all!

Holsten

HATE IT!

Hate isn't strong enough a word, even back when I was 13/14 I'd be the only one who'd write correctly in a text message...

Does my head in, just makes the person doing it seem incredibly stupid.

G_R

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Meaning "juice" or "just" or "Jews" ?

well if i said "Im jus goin down to the shop for a min" you would know exactly what i mean. No one is going to send jus on its own

Firetrap

I'm not a fan. I don't mind the odd U or 2moro type abbreviation in a text to save space but I can't stand a whole text of garbled nonsense. If someone's posting on a website like Boards and has a full keyboard in front of them, there is absolutely no excuse. Call me an ageing crank but when I see people typing in textspeak, images of airheaded teenagers who scraped a D in pass Junior Cert English spring to mind.

Sofiztikated

One of the only people I know that write full words and sentences in texts. The only time I don't is maybe when I have a text that's just gone over the 160 character mark, and I'll just try to chop something down a bit.

A computer has a full keyboard, its not that hard to use, you don't have a limit on the amount of times you can use a key. I will admit to using FTW and AFAIK, and other such terms, but not in every sentence.

What does get my wick is the over use of puntuation though!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't add any more dramatic effect that one would!

Notorious

I think it's acceptable to use in texts if you're trying to save space. Saying that, I never use it though.

Dechipering text speak isn't rocket science.

JIZZLORD

Textspeak pisses me off big time, and as several people mentioned i only abbreviate when it's a matter of sticking to 160 characters when what i've typed is a couple of letters over the limit.

What really pisses me off is seeing people type how they talk, eg. in a sligo town accent "to" is pronounced "ta". a friends girlfriend types like that on facebook the whole time

Biggins

I've had texts at times that I cannot understand a word of.
I've had to reply every time with something like "Can you resend that again - but in English!"

Pisses me off big time and if anyone consistently texts me with it. I don't bother replying any more to them.

robinph

Who still has a phone that is limited to sending 1 160 character text at a time?

Sofiztikated

Very few, I'd imagine, but it does tell you when you bounce over into 2 messages.

Dudess

Meeja Ireland wrote: »

Someone using abbreviations in a text message is saving space, time and possibly money.

That would be fair enough, but it's gone beyond that now to just thinking up ways to mis-spell words/make them look "crazy"... it looks like it does the exact opposite to saving time. It's often unintelligible too, which was never intended by the original shortened versions of words, as these are phonetic.

Palmerstown_guy

T9 dictionary (mobile phone auto speller) should of eradicated text speak years ago. Pity some folk are, well, dumb :cool:

Ferris_Bueller

Voted sometimes, depends who I'm talking to, if I'm texting someone who uses it themselves then I will probably use it back to save time.

The Thing!

I love text speak.

xxlilyxx

Ah i dont detest it, but i dont love it either, id only use it the odd time but most times i use t9 so i dont need to use text speak. But a couple of my friends do and it never bothers me, only when numbers are used for words, that gets to me.

thomond2006

I like the idea of the "stupid tax".

Liam Byrne

Palmerstown_guy wrote: »

T9 dictionary (mobile phone auto speller) should of eradicated text speak years ago. Pity some folk are, well, dumb :cool:

"should've" ?

Sorry - just thought it was funny / ironic since we're essentially talking about replacing letters that are inappropriate but phonetically the same.

Liam Byrne

thomond2006 wrote: »

I like the idea of the "stupid tax".

Unfortunately, it's the opposite that applies.

Those of us who detest this trend have to pay for second and third chained texts, and then pay tax on those.

So basically, by charging per "160-character-section", instead of "per text", the mobile companies are imposing an "intelligence/respect tax".

DOC09UNAM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Unfortunately, it's the opposite that applies.

Those of us who detest this trend have to pay for second and third chained texts, and then pay tax on those.

So basically, by charging per "160-character-section", instead of "per text", the mobile companies are imposing an "intelligence/respect tax".

I have free texts, with o2.

I detest this trend, and yet it costs me nothing.

Rocky77

What bothers me is the way is creeping dangerously out of the realms of text messaging. Consider this, my brother invited a friend to an event he's organising and she replied as follows on his facebook page:

Cnt mak ur gig thing afraid,my graduation dat day..sud giv me a shout if ur ou after it..wil be ou in twn im sur:)

Now, does anyone else find the fact that she's GRADUATING FROM A UNIVERSITY but can't be bothered using the English language correctly a bit unsettling....???

DOC09UNAM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

"should've" ?

Sorry - just thought it was funny / ironic since we're essentially talking about replacing letters that are inappropriate but phonetically the same.

should've and should of, both have the same amount of keystrokes, so it's essentially the same thing

but, yeah, with the T9 dictionary, it takes more button presses to type "hi jon" in txt speak, than it does to say "Hello john"