上海夏令营学券计划孩⼦与⾳乐电⼦书
报纸的消亡环境保护带薪请假制度
英语的消亡
导读：怪异的短信语⾔是对语⾔的亵渎还是创新？是年轻⼀代⼈堕落的标志吗？语⾔学家得出了与中学教师和语⾔保守主义者不同的结论。
高附加值>fabrication
In an experiment, the more adept children were at text messaging, the better they did in spelling and writing.
the ceiling The most hotly contested controversy sparked by the text-messaging phenomenon of the past eight years is over truant letters. Texte(Text(⼿机短信)+ e(⽤语))组成, a newly born dialect of English that subverts letters and numbers to produce ultra-conci words and ntiments, is horrifying language loyalists and pedagogues. And their fears are stoked by some staggering numbers: this year the world is on track to produce 2.3 trillion messages——a nearly 20 percent increa from 2007 and almost 150 percent from 2000. The accompanying revenue for telephone companies is growing nearly as fast——to an estimated $ 60 billion this year. In the English-speaking world, Britain alone generates
well over 6 billion messages every month. People are communicating more and faster than ever, but some worry that, as texte drops consonants, vowels and punctuation and makes no distinction between letters and numbers, people will no longer know how we were really suppod to communicate. Will text messaging produce generations of illiterates? Could this——OMG(Oh my God)——be the death of English language?
Tho raising the alarm aren't linguist. They are teachers who have had to red-pen some ridiculous practices in high-school papers and concerned citizens who believe it their moral duty to write grammar books. The latter can be quite prominent, like John Humphrys, a television broadcaster and houhold name in Britain, for whom texting is vandalism and Lynne Truss, author of Eats, Shoots and Leaves, who actually enjoys texting so much she never abbreviates. Britain, one of the first countries where texting became a national habit, has also produced some of the most bitter anti-texting vitriol, texte wrote John Sutherland in The Guardian, masks dyslexia. But linguists, if anyone is paying attention, have kept quiet on this score——until now. In a new book, Britain's most prolific linguist finally ts a few things straight.
David Crystal's Txtng: the Gr 8 Db8 (Oxford) makes two general points: that the language of texting is hardly as deviant as people think, and that texting actually makes young people better communica
tors, not wor. Crystal spells out the first point by marshalling real linguistic evidence. He breaks down the distinctive elements of texting language——pictograms, initialisms, or acronyms； contractions and others——and points out similar examples in linguistic practice from the ancient Egyptians to 20th century broadcasting. Shakespeare freely ud elisions, novel syntax and veral thousand made-up words (his own name was signed in six different ways)。 Even some common conventions are relatively novel: rules for using the oft-abud apostrophe were t only in the middle of the 19th century. The point is that tailored text predates the text message, so we might as well accept that ours is a language of vandals. Who even knows stands for? (Post meridiem, Latin for after midday, first recorded by a lazy delinquent in 1666. )
Where the opponents e destruction, Crystal es growth. He believes in the same theory of evolution for language as some evolutionary biologists do for life: change isn't gradual. Monumental developments interrupt periods of stagnation, always as a result of crucial external developments. The American Revolution had much greater conquences for the English language than texting has had thus far. The resulting differences between American and British English, Crystal says, are more pronounced than the differences between, say, the language of newspapers and text messages. (Interestingly, there are hardly any differences between American and Britain texting.)
As soon as linguists began to peer into the uproar over texting, rearchers examined the effects of texting experimentally. The results disproved conventional wisdom: in one British experiment last year, children who texted——and who wielded plenty of abbreviations——scored higher on reading and vocabulary tests. In fact, the more adept they were at abbreviating, the better they did in spelling and writing. Far from being a means to getting around literacy, texting ems to give literacy a boost. The effect is similar to what happens when parents chat away to infants or read to toddlers: the more exposure children get to language, by whatever means, the more verbally skilled they become. Before you can write abbreviated forms effectively and play with them, you need to have a n of how the sounds of your language relate to the letters, says Crystal. The same study also found the children with the highest scores to be the first to have gotten their own cell phones.
Which doesn't let the teenager who LOLS in a term paper off the hook——but that's not so much a question of language ability as of judgment. It, too, should go the way of all slang ever inappropriately ud in a classroom——rebuked with a red pen, not ized upon as a symptom of generational decline. Even if electronic communication engenders its own kind of carelessness, it's no wor than the carelessness of academic jargon or journalistic shorthand. It certainly doesn't engender stupidity. One look at the winners of text-poetry contests in Britain proves that the force be
hind texting is a tendency for innovation, not linguistic laziness. Electronic communication, Crystal says, has introduced that kind of creative spirit into spelling once again. That heathen Shakespeare would have been onboard.
(Newsweek <>,August,2,2008)
⼀次实验表明，⼿机短信发得越是熟练的孩⼦，单词拼写和写作能⼒就越强。在最近8年中，由⼿机短信现象引起的最激烈的争论是关于不规范⽤语。“短信语⾔”作为⼀种新兴的表达⽅式，*了字母和数字，创造出极其简洁的词汇和情绪表达⽅式，令语⾔的尽忠信守者和学究们惶恐不已。⽽⼀些⼤得惊⼈的数字⼜加剧了他们的惶恐：今年全世界发送的短信数量将达到2.3万亿条，⽐2007年增加了将近20%，⽐2000年增加了近150%.随之⽽来的电话公司的收⼊也以近乎同样的速度增长——今年预计达到600亿美元。在说英语的国家中，仅英国每⽉发送的短信就⼤⼤超过60亿条。尽管⼈们之间的交流更多更快了，但有⼈担⼼，随着短信语⾔省略了辅⾳、元⾳和标点，对字母和数字不加区别的使⽤，⼈们会忘记正常的交流⽅式。发短信会造就⼏代⽂盲吗？上帝啊(短信⽤语：OMG)——英语会就此消亡吗？
性剥削什么意思 提出警告的并⾮语⾔学家。他们中有不得不批改中学学⽣试卷中⼀些荒唐⽤法的⽼师，也有认为⾃⼰有道德义务编写语法书的忧虑的公民。后者包括相当知名的⼈物，如英国家喻户晓的电视主播约翰
汉氟莱斯，他认为短信是“对⽂化的恶意破坏⾏为”。还有《吃、射、⾛》⼀书的作者林恩特拉斯，她实际上⾮常喜欢发短信因⽽从不使⽤缩写。英国是⾸批发短信已成国民习惯的国家之⼀，但这⾥也产⽣了针对短信⾏为的最激烈尖刻的批评。约翰萨瑟兰在《卫报》上写到：“发短信是针对诵读困难的掩饰。” 但语⾔学家(如果当中有谁关注此事的话)却⾄今对此保持沉默。英国产的语⾔学家最终在⼀本新著中澄清了⼏件事。
戴维克⾥斯特尔所著的《发短信：⼤讨论》(⽜津⼤学出版社出版)中提出了两⼤论点：⼀是短信语⾔并不像⼈们想的那样离经叛道，⼆是发短信实际上使年轻⼈交流得更好，⽽不是更差。克⾥斯特尔通过收集现实中语⾔例证清楚地阐述了第⼀点。他分析了短信语⾔的特殊要素——象形⽂字，词⾸字母缩略或缩拼词，缩略词等。他还列举⾃古埃及⽂字到20世纪⼴播中都存在的类似语⾔应⽤的例证。莎⼠⽐亚随意使⽤的省⾳、新奇句法和数千个⾃造词(他的名字便有6种不同的签法)。即使是⼀些常见⽤法也是相对新奇的：常被滥⽤的省字号撇号的⽤法规则直到19世纪中叶才定型。重要的是规范过的语⾔先于短信的出现，所以我们也可以认为我们的语⾔是恣意破坏⽂化者的语⾔。谁知道p.m.代表什么呢？(Post meridiem，拉丁语“中午之后”，1666年由⼀位懒散的失职者⾸次记录。)晚上好日语怎么说
反对者看到毁灭的地⽅，克⾥斯特尔则看到成长。如同⼀些⽣物学家相信⽣物进化论那样，他相信语⾔同样展现着进化论：变化不是渐进的。⾮常的变化会打破停滞期，其原因总在于重要的外部变化。美国独⽴战争对英语的影响远远⼤于发短信迄今为⽌对英语的影响。克⾥斯特尔说，结果美国英
练习的英文亲和力英文语和英国英语的差别⽐报纸语⾔与短信语⾔之间的差别还要显著。(有趣的是，美国和英国的短信之间差别⼏乎没有。)
斯坦福大学公开课 语⾔学家刚⼀开始关注关于短信的争议，研究⼈员就通过实验来检验发短信的影响。实验结果与传统看法相悖：去年在英国举⾏的⼀项实验表明，写短信和⼤量使⽤缩写的⼉童在阅读和词汇考试中成绩更好。实际上，他们使⽤缩写越熟练，就越擅长拼写和写作。写短信远⾮避开识字的途径，反⽽是为识字增添助⼒。其效果类似家长对婴⼉叨叨咕咕，或者给刚会⾛路的孩⼦读故事：⽆论以何种⽅式，孩⼦接触语⾔越多，语⾔能⼒就越强。克⾥斯特尔说：“在有效使⽤缩写词并巧妙对此加以运⽤之前，你必须了解语⾔的声⾳与字母之间的关系。”这项研究还发现得分的孩⼦最先拥有他们⾃⼰的⼿机。
neea ielts
让⼗⼏岁的年轻⼈的学期论⽂不能轻松通过的原因与其说是语⾔能⼒问题，不如说是判断问题。它也应该像在课堂上使⽤不当的俚语⼀样，以红笔判错，但并不作为⼀代⼈堕落的表现。即使电⼦通讯产⽣⼀种特有的随意，但并不⽐学术术语或新闻⽤语的简略表达法所产⽣的随意更糟糕。它肯定不会造成愚蠢。只要看看英国短信诗歌⽐赛的获胜者就会明⽩，写短信的驱动⼒是创新的追求，⽽不是语⾔的惰性。克⾥斯特尔称，电⼦通讯“已经将创新精神再次引⼊到单词拼写中来”。如果离经叛道的莎⼠⽐亚再世，他也会热衷于短信语⾔。
