Marsom 1

Kara Marsom
Professor Gomrad
ENC1101
23 October 2014
Texting and Driving as Detrimental as Texting and Grammar?
An epidemic has hit America; our advances in technology have left our nations youth
with minimal skills in the department of literary composition. Many teenagers and children use
iPads, iPhones, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter on a daily basis. While these new-age
innovations are regarded as fun and exciting ways to communicate, Im afraid our means of
communication has been brutally skewed compared to the language in which we would
communicate just 30 years ago. This is a social issue as well as a literary issue, but for the
purpose of my paper I will strictly focus on the literary side of the issue of texting specifically.
Too often do young writers and seasoned writers alike become plagued by stereotypical writing
constructs that limit creativity and flow of ideas and thoughts. Many challenge these rhetorical
situations, aiming to prove the validity or destroy the misconception of the idea. Rhetoric can be
understood as any situation or idea that needs to be altered or changed. In
other words, a rhetorical situation is a situation where a speaker or writer sees a
need to change reality and sees that the change may be effected through rhetorical discourse.
(Grant-Davie 1997) For my paper, I will be analyzing the controversial construct of textings
influence on the grammar skills and abilities of todays youth.
Where u at grl, lets hng l8ter. To anyone who grew up before the 80s this sentence,
or lack of one, probably looks like some obscure, illegible, coded message, but to todays
youth, this text has a very understandable meaning. The younger generation can instantly

Marsom 2
translate this abbreviated message often sent through text message. The ability to
abbreviate and change words and phrases to represent completely different concepts
altogether is completely foreign to our parents generation. Our parents, and every
generation before them, were taught strict grammar rules in school and thats how they
would formally communicate, because thats all they knew. There was no forum for the
random stringing together of letters to try to shorten a phrase or question. But, in todays
society texting has become so prominent, it has introduced a new language, that some are
saying has a very negative effect on the grammar skills of todays teens and preteens.
An article published in The Seattle Times by Michelle Maltais takes a deeper look at
the unfortunate effects texting has proven to have on grammar skills. Maltais begins with
the basic assertion, A new study confirms what many parents suspect. The more kids send and
receive texts, the worse their grammar skills become. She continues to say that kids arent able
to code switchshift between standard grammar and the abbreviations used in text messages,
Sundar said. Those abbreviations have essentially become the words for them. (Maltais 2012)
This is a valid point that really resonates with todays youth. I have mixed feelings about this
topic. Although I believe that I still hold formal grammar in high regard, I do see the lack of
grammatical importance in students younger then me. In the society we live in, parents are
giving their children electronic devices so early in life. An article in The Telegraph, states, the
average age children receive their first cell phone is at merely 8 years old. (Adams 2009) This
statistic is appalling to the elders of society today. If the average age to receive a cell phone is 8
years old, its likely that children will develop the language of texting before theyve even
learned the concrete rules of formal grammar. Therefore proper English will almost be seen as a
second language. I personally feel unaffected by this language barrier because when I received a

Marsom 3
phone at 13 years old I had already had training in formal language through schooling and had
established a strong foundation in it, therefore I could easily decipher the two and I understood
when each was appropriate. I was aware that formal language was for formal writing but I was
permitted to use texting language strictly when texting. The immense problem of todays
younger generation is their inability to know the difference. In todays society children will be
learning the ins and outs of texting language and etiquette before they get concentrated English
skills. For this reason I do see the validity in Maltaiss claim that children will be void of the
ability to readily switch the texting language to proper grammar. Id use the analogy of a foreign
immigrant to describe the problem facing our culture. While the immigrant may hold some basic
communication skills for communicating in America, Spanish (or whatever language of their
original country) will always be their first language, or their foundation. Its evident in foreigners
that while they may be able to put something together when they must communicate in their
second language, theyll always be more fluent in their first language. Theres serious support to
prove this is a major concern with todays youth when it comes to grammar skills that the prior
generations have all learned and had ingrained in them.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, an article published on
Grammarteaching.wordpress.com claims journalists are making way to big a deal out of the
actual effects of texting on students ability to produce grammatically correct writing:
Is texting hurting the grammar skills of middle-schoolers?
Yes, says a recent study by Drew P. Cingel and S. Shyam Sundar and (hereafter: C &
S) in the Journal New Media and Society. C & S studied the texting habits of 6th, 7th, and
8th graders, and found that when students sent and received texts more frequently, it
correlated significantly with poorer scores on a test of grammar. Further, the frequency
with which students sent texts with nonstandard spellings correlated significantly and to a
greater degree with poorer scores on the grammar test. Interestingly, the frequency with
which students sent texts only with nonstandard capitalization or punctuation
(independent of spelling) did not correlate to a statistically significant degree with how
they did on the grammar test.

Marsom 4
Of course, when scientific research like this gets into the hands of journalists, the results
are depressingly predictable: news feeds overflow with insta-reporting that ignores the
prior research on the topic, elides the researchers methodology, uncritically repeats the
studys results, and sexes up the most startling conclusions. Such reporting resonates
most when the take-home message aligns with what the public already believes: kids
these days are behaving slothfully, and English is decaying. (Roth 2012)
Dan Roth (the author of this article) continues on with bolded sections discussing the flaws and
errors in the research. Citing that good grammar doesnt equal good writing, questionable
statistical analysis, and age of students studied and poor design of the grammar test (Roth 2012)
are all variables and inconsistencies within the experiment. Roth argues that instead of a generic
multiple choice test the results should have been based on a holistic perspective of the students
overall performance in the class. Roth also emphasizes the mistakes C & S made when
correlating age to the issue:
Recall that according to Lieberman, C & Ss results show that students grade level had a
stronger effect on how they did on the grammar test than their texting behavior. We could
interpret this to mean that the 8th graders did better on the exam because they have
cumulatively received more writing instruction. Or consider a somewhat complimentary
explanation: perhaps the 8th graders also did better because, with age, theyve gained skill
at register-switching. (Roth 2012)
While Roth can successfully support the variables and inconsistencies within C & Ss research,
his analysis of the research in order to refute the argument is lacking. Its not enough to simply
state that theres not necessarily a direct correlation, therefore there is no effect of texting
influencing grammar. This statement and idea Roth is trying to force upon the audience is not
supported by enough factual evidence.
On the contrary, while examining Maltais article, it becomes evident that children are
suffering from the detriments of texting. Grammar and formal English rules are taking a
back seat to the quickly abbreviated messages obvious in texting. When texting takes over
as an alternative language it becomes harder and harder to decipher the two, this is the

Marsom 5
pure evidence for decreased literacy performance among kids and teens. Of course the
simple and obvious solution to this issue is to place higher emphasis on literary skills, and
avoid over use of texting as a medium for communication, however with the importance
society places on cell phones and fast immediate messaging, the solution maybe impossible
to resolve.

Marsom 6
Works Cited

Adams, Stephen. "Children get first mobile phone at average age of eight." The Telegraph.
Telegraph Media Group, 18 June 1928. Web. 22 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/4680507/Children-get-first-mobilephone-at-average-age-of-eight.html>.
GrantDavie, Keith. "Rhetorical situations and their constituents." Rhetoric Review 15.2 (1997):
264-279. Print.
Maltais, Michelle. "OMG! Texting may ruin grammar skills, study says." The Seattle Times. The
Los Angles Times, 6 Aug. 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2014.
<http://seattletimes.com/html/homegarden/2018863278_textinggrammerparent06.html>.
Roth, Dan. "Sorry, but I'm not Convinced Texting is Destroying English Grammar." Grammar
Pedagogy for Writing Teachers. N.p., 14 Sept. 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2014.
<http://grammarteaching.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/sorry-but-im-not-convincedtexting-is-destroying-english-grammar/>.