Sunday, February 22, 2009

Whither Language?

I'm no Henry Higgins, or any sort of student of language, but I have been wondering lately what the English (or American) language will sound like in a hundred years. I recently got a Twitter account, which is an amusing little service (though of minimal use to me personally, some, like Gary Vaynerchuk, seem to be using it to great effect). The thing about Twitter is that one is limited to messages of 140 characters.

That got me thinking about the other pressures we have to compress our messages into the fewest words. Cell phone text messages are similarly limited; TV sound bites force public figures to over simplify their message; and the sheer volume of information available to people on the web reward those able to get their point across quickly and efficiently, if not comprehensively.

So, what does that mean for language structure? Our language patterns obviously change fairly rapidly, and to a more significant extent than just the shift in popular slang. Backed up by no research whatsoever, it seems to me that 50 to 75 years is about the length of time it takes for significant style changes to occur. Movie dialogue and political speeches from the 40s and 50s is decidedly different than today, to say nothing of the 1860s or 1770s.

It seems that the pressures of information flow will force us to strip language down to its bear bones, ensuring the essential meaning is communicated quickly as one may not have the opportunity to get further. Americans in general have the reputation of going straight at the heart of a topic, compared to other cultures who approach issues more leisurely. It may be that those cultures may have more of a language adjustment in the near term than we will. (a sampling of the latest Twitter messages often reveals at least a couple posts in Japanese and Chinese, and sometimes in languages I don't even recognize)

In all, I hope that we will find some sort of balance between the need to quickly share information with the benefits of being able to fully explain context, and the beauty of well written or well spoken words.



P.S.- For those disappointed in my lack of posting lately, I would like to highlight the "no periodicity" clause of my blog introduction. Sure, I'd like to be inspired more often, but such is life.

3 comments:

laurafingerson said...

You POSTED!!! And I *know* you have *lots* to comment on in your daily life. You lead an interesting life. The trick is to have the time and inclination to sit in front of the computer writing out your thoughts. Maybe you should post your twitter postings?! Okay, that would be redundant. Well, not redundant for me since I am still in 1999 with no twitter account. Or a facebook account. I just have friends who have accounts, like you, and they tell me about it. As for having our written word reduced to a few characters? After sitting in faculty meetings and conference presentations for years, I think that sounds like a swell idea. Then again, the length of this comment immediately contradicts anything I might say about it.

Anonymous said...

Eric; Welcome back to the blogging world. I don't even know what twitter is. My knowledge of text messaging is minimal. The success of a community is dependent on the ability of the inhabitants to clearly communicate with each other. I feel more and more Americans are unable to comunicate intelligently with each other. This will be to our detriment. Dad

Da Paulie said...

Hehehe... I just got on teh FaceCrack, and I'm fighting the siren song of Twitter.... I think there's an efficiency argument for small communication, the technological grunts and gestures of our age. We still need the mental stimulation of art and discourse, though that might come in digital form, too. Enter: Second Life (which I'm also currently resisting). Great article about the intertwining of art in Second Life and in the real world: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/magazine/08fluno-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=filthy%20second%20life&st=cse