Societies nowadays live in a world where interaction through advanced technology is also necessary. Everywhere, people are texting, sending emails, writing their blogs and even tweeting. It is very difficult to go to any places without seeing someone using a gadget or the internet to connect and communicate with others. The growth of computer- mediated communication(CMC) around the world has brought with it changes in how language is utilized, including faster composition and reading of texts (Baron, 2002), and diffusion of oral discourse features into written language (Werry, 1996; Yates, 1996). Instant messaging (IM) is one of the most used means of communication nowadays. As students become technologically- dependent, there is a rapid increased of students who prefer instant messaging as a primary source of communication.
It is a kind of online chat or conversation that offers a real- time text or chat using a medium which is the internet. Some instant messaging applications have an advanced feature that provide its users to transfer files, audio recordings, and communicate withyour friend through video chat. The advantage of instant messenger compared to normal interaction systems is that you can easily know whether your co- workers are available to you and can be connected through selected service. One of the renowned features of people’s text messages is that they do not follow to standard language rules and apply a register that is called textese. In this form of register, people utilizes phonetic replacements , such as w8 instead of wait or ur as a substitute for your and acronyms such as lol and ikr which led to belief that characteristics of textese may leak into students’ general writing , eventually resulting in language deterioration .
Internet is moderately changing the language because of the creation of new lexical items(Crystal, 2008). Moreover , Mphahlele and Mashamaite(2005) emphasized that excessive exposure to the SMS language has a negative impact on the English language proficiency of the learners. This hypothesis tallies with Craig in his article Instant Messaging: The Language of Youth Literacywho asserted that Instant Messaging endangers youth literacy since it produces a series of undesirable patterns in reading and writing and such informal language use harms mastery of formal and standard literary skills. Therefore, constant use of instant messaging applications can lead to the decrease of the ability to spell words correctly, worsening of grammar and even literacy barriers between the users of IM. Textism can be considered as the fastest growing style of electronic communication which is regularly used in Computer Mediated Communication (CMC).
In a study conducted by Chantal Nvan (2016), he found out the withthe children’s increasing use of mobile phones, concerns have been raised about its influence on their literary skills. This research has been expandedto the effects of textese on children’s grammar abilities in written language. Outcomes of some research suggest a negative impact of textese in grammar. However, variability in coding of textese between studies and use of written assignments, which do not strictly embody grammar, may have concealed the effect of textese on children’s grammar abilities. For that reason, the main goal of the present study is to determine whether use oftextese influences children’s grammar performance in spoken language. As time progresses, textisms may no longer be thought of as incorrect.
This is attributed to the idea that our language is constantly changing (Verheijen 2007). According to AHN Media Corp (2010), Philippines has been tagged as the “texting capital of the world”. Many Filipinos exchange text messages or chats with the use of their mobile phones. Filipinos have become frequent texters, and they have started sending messages in shortened ways. This problem cropped up with the innovation of this new technology, and its possible effects on the students’ language proficiency. In instant messaging, abbreviations used, assaults written English and resulted into students poor writing composition, grammar and spelling recognition. On average, eighty two percent of twelve to fifteen year olds and forty nine percent of eight to eleven year olds have a mobile phone (Plester, Wood, Bell 2006).This occurrence is somehow bringing educational crisis which institutions like school should fight.
It is a common scenario in every school seeing students using their mobile phones during their free time. Instead of going to the library to read books in order for them to improve their vocabulary skills, they spend most of their time holding their phones. Even at homes, parents would tend to complain and blame their children’s low performance in quizzes and exams in English because students would spend their time holding their phone to text rather than browsing their books to widen their vocabulary.
According to Cingel and Sundar (2007), adolescents often talk to their friends using their mobile phones and while texting they seem to ignore correct capitalization and punctuation. IM has become a popular medium for casual online interaction between teens in countries where thetechnological means for this exist (Schiano, etal., 2002; Rodgers & Gauntlett, 2002).Many articles in the popular press have targeted Instant Messaging.
They suggest that it is leading to a ” breakdown in the English language,” a ” the bastardization of language” (O’Connor 2005), and even ” the linguistic ruin of the generation” (Axtman 2002). In contrast , linguists argue that it is not the result of students’ lax attitude toward spelling and grammar, but characteristic of ageneral “linguistic whatever-ism” (Baron 2003a, 5). Indeed, some have suggested that discourse on the Internet is a “new species of communication,” complete with its own lexicon , graphology , grammar , and usage conditions (Crystal 2001, 48).
In general, texting has provoked a very strong, negative response fromteachers, parents and language experts. It has been described as the”continuing assault of technology on formal written English” (Lee, 2002).
