The revision involves making the essay shorter by omittingunnecessary text. While revising the paper, caution has been taken toensure that the information presented in the essay remains relevantto the topic. Hence, any omissions made have been careful accessed toensure that they are not needed in the essay.
The original essay repetitively uses the names of the authors to thearticles used in making the comparative analysis. Since the authors’full names have already been identified in the introduction sectionof the essay, it is not required to continue using both names insubsequent reference. For instance, one of the authors is introducedas John Humphrys in the introduction. The original essay, whenquoting the author in the body uses both names. This has been revisedto the use of only the surname hence, avoiding repetition. The sameapplies for David Crystal. When mentioned in other sections of theessay, the full names are replaced with the surname, Crystal.
The revised essay omits the repetition of major claims made in thearticles by Humphrys and Crystal. In the original essay, the writerintroduces the claim and progresses to conclude with the same. Thus,the claim is repeated twice in the same paragraph. The revised essayonly mentions the claim at the start of the paragraph, while thefollowing sentences provide support for the claim.
The revision positively impacts the piece. By making the pieceshorter, unimportant text is eliminated and only the important textis retained in the revised essay. This makes the argumentstraightforward. It also ensures that the writing flows from theintroduction to the conclusion.
Comparative Analysis on Text Messaging
Currently, text messaging is a common form of communication,especially among the younger generation. Over time, there has beendebate regarding the benefits and drawbacks of text messages. In “IH8 Txt Msgs: How Texting is Wrecking our Language” John Humphrysargues that text messaging has contributed to the massive destructionof the English language. Contrary, in “2b or not 2b” DavidCrystal argues that the art of texting has improved writing andspelling skills. In the following discussion, the essay is acomparative analysis of the two author’s claims.
Humphrys’ article blames text messaging for the destruction of theEnglish language despite being an economical mode of communication.In specific, the author notes that the art of texting has resulted inthe omission of the hyphen. Humphrys (1) notes that text messagesdestroy punctuation, sentence structures and vocabulary. Heincorporates sarcastic remarks in the article to insist on hisfrustration concerning text messaging. For instance, he rhetoricallyquestions the possibility of replacing the word “answer phone”with “ansafone”. Furthermore, Humphrys (1) laments that thewidespread use of emoticons in text messaging appears to be replacingcolons and semicolons. For instance, his computer often displaysemoticons instead of colons and semicolons. Also, the authorevaluates the use of abbreviations in text messaging and the impacton the English language. Humphrys clearly notes that some forms ofabbreviations like “BTW” for “By the Way” and “U” for“You” are accepted. However, he expresses frustration over therampant use of abbreviations when texting. He uses the illustrationof the word “LOL”, which might refer to “Lots of Love” or“Laugh out Loud” to note that using such abbreviations makes textmessaging an inconvenience instead of a solution. Humphrys arguesthat text messaging specifically affects young people as they aremost likely to use text messages.
Contrary, Crystal argues that text messaging contributes to thegrowth of the English language. Crystal begins his article by notingthat people believe recent technology has adversely affectedlanguage. However, research demonstrates that such beliefs are falseowing to proof ascertaining the significance of text messages. Henotes that most people uphold the notion that young people merely useabbreviations when texting. Crystal (1) dismisses the notion as amisconception, which increases false beliefs on text messaging. Hepoints out that abbreviation have been in existence since timeimmemorial. For instance, “IOU” for “I Owe You”, “gf” for“girlfriend” and “LOL” for “Laugh out Loud” among others.In addition, Crystal argues that it is possible to abbreviate anyword and that abbreviations in text messaging are not constant. Hesupports his claim by informing on the Dictionary of Abbreviations,published by Eric Patridge in 1942 (Crystal 1). The dictionary hasbeen in existence even prior to the realization of text messaging,meaning the English language has always used abbreviations. Thus, itwould be illogical to assume that text messaging has brought aboutthe art of abbreviation. Crystal explains that abbreviations actuallyimprove the English language, specifically in children. The use ofabbreviations in writing, reading and spelling skills in childrenmeans that the children are often familiar with the original word.
The articles provide an overview on the benefits and drawbacks oftext messaging as a mode of communication. It is apparent that everyauthor has different views concerning the art of texting. Humphrys’article highlights the drawbacks of text messaging. By usingsarcastic remarks to directly attack those associated with textmessaging, the author aims at questioning the use of text messages.Generally, Humphry believes that text messaging has hugely resultedin the destruction of the English language. According to Humphry,specific areas of the English language that have been affected arepunctuation, spelling, sentences and vocabulary. Nevertheless, it iscrucial to note his approval of the economical nature of textmessages. Crystal’s article highlights on the benefits of textmessaging. He believes that any negative remarks on the art of textmessaging are propaganda. Crystal argues that the use ofabbreviations is not a result of text messaging. Abbreviations werepresent long before the introduction of text messaging. Most peoplehave been using abbreviations and should not now condemn young peoplefor choosing to use them. He acknowledges that text messages improveliteracy among children by improving vocabulary, spelling and writingskills.
In conclusion, many people, specifically the young generation, haveadapted the use of text messaging making it a common mode ofcommunication in society. Humphrys and Crystal’s articlescritically explore the art of text messaging. Irrespective of thedifferences in their analysis, there is a clear relationship amidboth articles. The authors concentrate on their perceived good aswell as bad views on text messages. Globally, individuals speakdifferently from how they text (McWhorter 1). Hence, it is notpossible to have a generalized view on the fate of texting because ofthe differing debates. There are individuals that support or refuteeither Humphrys or Crystal’s arguments. It becomes impossible toinfer the actual merits or demerits of text messaging to the society.
Crystal, David. 2b or Not 2b? The Guardian, 5 July 2008. Web.13 Oct. 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/jul/05/saturdayreviewsfeatres.guardianreview
Humphrys, John. I H8 Txt Msgs: How Texting is Wrecking our Language.Mail Online Associated Newspapers, 24 Sept. 2007. Web. 13Oct. 2015.
McWhorter, John. Is Texting Killing the English Language? Time,25 April 2013. Web. 6 Dec. 2015.http://ideas.time.com/2013/04/25/is-texting-killing-the-english-language/