The first study, published in 2008, showed that 11 and 12-year-olds in Britain who used more textisms — whether misspelled words (“ppl,” instead of “people”), grammatically incorrect substitutions (“2” for “to” or “too”), wrong verb forms (“he do” instead of “he does”), or missing punctuation — compared to properly written words tended to have slightly better scores on standardized grammar and writing tests and had better spelling, after controlling for test scores in other subjects and other factors. A 2009 study, conducted by some of the same researchers on 88 kids between 10 and 12 years old, found similar associations between high textism use and slightly better reading ability.
Hovertext from the xkcd comic: I’d like to find a corpus of writing from children in a non-self-selected sample (e.g. handwritten letters to the president from everyone in the same teacher’s 7th grade class every year)—and score the kids today versus the kids 20 years ago on various objective measures of writing quality. I’ve heard the idea that exposure to all this amateur peer practice is hurting us, but I’d bet on the generation that conducts the bulk of their social lives via the written word over the generation that occasionally wrote book reports and letters to grandma once a year, any day.
why is this so hard for people to understand
he was a boy
she was a girl
can i make it any more heteronormative
he was a punk, she did ballet
why couldnt they be gay
He wanted girls, she’d never tell,
But secretly she wanted girls as well
karma’s only a bitch if you are
share a coke with the indescribable, omnipresent feeling of dread in the pit of your stomach
making HONEST ANTAGONISTS who believe they’re in the right and firmly believe in what they’re doing is SO MUCH MORE INTERESTING than making them “crazy” because of some outside influence. make villains who believe they are the protagonists
Me at parties