SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
Because Internet makes a linguist's case for l33t speak, other online-text fads
The Internet has done good things to the English language.
That's the most important thing linguist Gretchen McCulloch has to say in her book, Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language. Though many prominent opinion-havers rage about the imminent death of the English language at the hands of emoji-wielding teenagers, the Internet has done no more harm to English than television, radio, or dime novels.
In fact, McCulloch makes a compelling argument that Internet language, and emoji in particular, is restoring life to the relatively emotionless medium of text. For hundreds of years, public writing was limited to formal contexts like newspapers and books, written by educated people using very formal language for the edification of other educated people. Even fiction draws a clear line between informal dialogue and formal narration. On the Internet, on the other hand, the lines are much less clear. Private, informal writing (like shopping lists or notes passed between students at the back of a classroom) is now publicly visible, and the conventions developed by individuals or small groups for writing informally can spread and interact on a global scale. To McCulloch, this is more exciting than it is scary, and reading Because Internet might convince you to feel the same.
[...] McCulloch is on a mission to make linguistics relatable—and, hear me out, she's on a roll in that respect. She does this not only through Because Internet, but also through Lingthusiasm, the podcast she co-hosts with fellow linguist Lauren Gawne. As its name suggests, Lingthusiasm shows off the hosts' enthusiasm about linguistics and calls on its listeners to get excited about a wide variety of linguistic topics, such as how vowels work, the ways people from different cultures talk about time, and why efforts to create a single world language never catch on. On Lingthusiasm, McCulloch and Gawne dispel myths about language and inspire the kind of excitement that turns curious students into scientists. And in Because Internet, McCulloch continues to demystify and delight.
(Score: 3, Informative) by DannyB on Monday November 04 2019, @03:40PM (3 children)
What did COBOL do for the English language. COBOL seems like mostly a record processing oriented language. Requiring skill with the language to write, but possible for a mere Manager to read.
Fast forward to about 1987. Apple classic Mac gets Hypercard. With its Hypertalk language. (Later a system oriented variant "AppleScript".) Similarly these were both easily read languages. And very similar. The meaning was very clear to a lowly non-programmer. But you couldn't just write plain English. You had to understand the language and its specific syntax.
Like COBOL, these required a programmer to write, but most people could read. Unlike APL (and some say Java) where only a developer could write, and later nobody could read. :-)
Then there is SQL. I remember an experience a few years ago. There had been several occurrences where a certain person "stood over my shoulder" (actually screen sharing and voice call) and watched as I wrote some SQL to obtain some useful information that we needed. On this particular occasion what we needed was a bit more complex to retrieve. I started building some sub-queries and things, and this person said "can't you just say . . . blah blah . . .". Uh, NO. It doesn't work that way. It is a language for a machine to consume and it has highly specific rules.
I suppose books have changed language some. Radio, TV, etc as TFA suggests.
Professions develop jargon because it make communication among themselves more efficient. NASA develops endless acronyms and initialisms as stand-in's for jargon words, because MECO carries a lot of meaning in a small package similar to words like "basketball" or "Easter".
So if the internet develops more concise and efficient language forms for communication, then is this a bad thing? LOL Can we get more accustomed to much differenter things people say? My bad.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Monday November 04 2019, @04:05PM (2 children)
COBOL syntax is modeled after the English, has sentences and paragraphs. And keywords.
The purpose of this was normal people, who never witnessed computers before, could start programming practical stuff very quickly. And understand well what other people coded.
https://www.tutorialspoint.com/cobol/cobol_program_structure.htm [tutorialspoint.com]
Do you notice COBOL syntax is still adequate for dictating programs by voice? No one can pull that with C++...
Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday November 04 2019, @04:18PM
Yep, I understand that.
That was a goal, yes. In practice it was not achieved. Certainly not in what I have witnessed. I think this is also evidenced by the fact that we don't appear to have hoards of (real) programmers who got their start in COBOL. At least I've never met one, or even heard of one.
By "real programmers", I do not mean the "Learn Java/C/C++/Python in 24 hours For Dummies!" variety.
I think it was somewhat successful in achieving that goal.
Also, these same things can be said for HyperTalk / AppleScript. I would argue that those two read even more like natural English than COBOL. Yet they are mode decidedly NOT natural English.
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hendrikboom on Tuesday November 05 2019, @09:48PM
A friend of mine discovered that it was easier to write COBOL if he did it in longhand. This was back in 1967.