Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

C this takes twice as long

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • C this takes twice as long

    C this takes twice as long

    By GREER McDONALD - The Dominion Post | Wednesday, 10 December 2008


    Abbreviated "text speak" may save time, but takes twice as long to read than normal language, a study shows.
    Research by an Australian psychology lecturer found that common abbreviations used in mobile phone text messages could sometimes not be understood and were often misinterpreted.
    Results from the 55 students tested by Nenagh Kemp of the University of Tasmania showed that text-speak saved time for the writer, but the recipient took nearly twice as long - 26 seconds - to read the message out loud. It took 14 seconds to read messages sent in conventional English.
    The most common abbreviations that were easily understood included 2, 4, c and u. The most difficult abbreviations included ttyl (talk to you later), bbs (be back soon), pu (pick up) and cn (seeing).
    Dr Kemp told The Dominion Post yesterday that combinations with numbers such as 2moro (tomorrow), 4get (forget) and l8 (late) took a little longer to read, but people always got them in the end.
    "I think that we're so accustomed to reading words spelled in conventional English, which we can read without sounding out the words, that when a spelling like frendz comes along, we have to stop and sound it out, so it slows us down, even if we get to the right answer."
    Abbreviations which left out letters or spelled words as they sounded took "longer than I expected" for people to read. Students in the study sometimes failed to guess words such as wld (would), myb (maybe) and xamz (exams).
    Dr Kemp said more obscure abbreviations were tied to social groups, so not everyone would be able to guess what was meant.
    It took students 220 seconds to compose a message in text-speak, but 258 seconds in conventional English.


    "There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says 'yes,' you know he is a crook." Groucho Marx

  • #2
    I see absolutely no reason to use txt (thought I would throw one in) speak anymore. If you have a keyboard use it. If you have a phone, use predictive (it works very well). If you are writing, don't be such a lazy ar$e.

    Can anyone give me a good reason to use it?

    Comment


    • #3
      Not me. It drives me CRAZY I use full English text including punctuation when I send a message. I get texts from tenants that I can barely understand and I think it creates a bad impression.
      Jo Birch
      Looking for someone to manage your next project or event? Then call now!
      +61 450 148 678

      Comment


      • #4
        I expect text speak from certain people, but what surprises me is when an otherwise well educated person starts to communicate that way. I guess it's laziness.

        Comment

        Working...
        X