Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes they are.

    Acronyms are destroying the English language. Most teenagers can't spell simple words that 80% of second graders can. I think it is because they don't have to. They don't have to spell out the words because they can have letters that will speak for them. Like, you can't put "haha?" Really? You have to put "lol?" Really? This is sad. They're just lazy!! But it's not just acronyms, it's spelling period. I mean, I understand misspelling words, yes, but I don't understand "omg did u here wat liz did last nite lyk omg i theenk she is probs preggo!!" By the way, you spelled "acronyms" wrong. There's no "n"

  • Acronyms may be destroying the English Language

    Acronyms are commonly used in day-to-day language. Where its texting friends, posting a status or tweeting on a social website, acronyms are ubiquitous in daily life. Although they are helpful in social media, they should not be included in the English dictionary (not used in real life tense). This is because people in the older generations may not be familiar or quite frankly comfortable with abbreviations; it removes the beauty from the English language (it's not very nice to look at; it isn't aesthetically pleasing to the eye), and in a personal stance I think it hinders intellect. Children in the new generation should fully know words and speak in the true spirit of the English language rather then using "lol","idk" etc. Therefore, these shouldn't be considered a part of the English language.

  • Lately, people (especially the younger folk) have been using acronyms in common conversations as an acceptable thing to do.

    In society, we have been using more and more acronyms as English. Throughout our history, language has always evolved. Now it's been more of a de-evolution. The new generation are saying things like "lol" and "omg" in real life, not just in "texts" and the social media. We need to teach these children proper grammar before it becomes acceptable for everyone. It is not being obsessive nor unrealistic. It is caring for our reputation. Not even our reputation in jobs, but in the world.

  • I am keeping in mind that the question isn't "Are acronyms useful?",

    Because they are useful, they help us save time and energy while texting, and typing each word out in full would probably accumulate to wasting days of our total lives.

    But the question at hand is "Are they destroying English?" and statistical data has shown that as "texting terms" increased, the scores on grammar assessments have shown a drastic decrease, in classrooms of 6th-8th graders.
    The growth rate of acronyms is constantly increasing, and therefore limiting the combination of phrases that youngsters use. A kind of natural selection occurs between the phrases, and the phrases that could be shortened to acronyms would survive, as they are more practical, while the phrases that can't be shortened would almost cease to be used.

    For example, many people now prefer to use the term "to be honest" in both their oral and non oral social interactions, since it is frequently shortened to "tbh" when texting. Equivalent phrases such as if truth be told, as a matter of fact, to tell the truth, frankly, to be frank, in actual fact, etc, seem to be slowly wilting.

  • Acronyms are not destroying English.

    Acronyms are simply shorter ways to type out phrases. Stating that acronyms are the root cause of words being misspelled is crazy and simply untrue. Most acronyms contain short words such as "be right back, laugh out loud, talk to you later" etc. Most people already how to spell those words and no one uses acronyms in day-to-day conversations. Without acronyms it would take a tremendous amount of time to type some things out and it is pointless to do so when it can be typed out in three letters or less, therefore they are very useful.

  • No acronyms are the evolution of the english language

    No, acronyms are not destroying english, english is evolving in the same way it has been evolving for centuries. I am sad to see words be shortened from their original, intriguing origins, but I also know it is a necessity. One day the more commonly used acronyms are probably going to be added to our dictionaries so its best to just accept that fact now rather than be disappointed later.

  • No, acronyms are not destroying English.

    I believe that acronyms are not destroying English. If anything, they help the English language. Many acronyms are so common that they have become a part of our language that we use freely and routinely. They save so much time when writing, especially texting! It would be so tedious and time consuming to write out words completely if we didn't have acronyms.

  • Not so much

    Really what they're doing better than anything else is show us who the real morons are without having to read the full text. At a certain point abbreviation becomes ridiculous, and a lot of the things featured in the image are good examples of that. They do serve a purpose when used sparingly, but they aren't.

  • Not so much

    Really what they're doing better than anything else is show us who the real morons are without having to read the full text. At a certain point abbreviation becomes ridiculous, and a lot of the things featured in the image are good examples of that. They do serve a purpose when used sparingly, but they aren't.

  • No, acronyms are not destroying English.

    I believe that acronyms are not destroying English. If anything, they help the English language. Many acronyms are so common that they have become a part of our language that we use freely and routinely. They save so much time when writing, especially texting! It would be so tedious and time consuming to write out words completely if we didn't have acronyms.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.