Texting Phenomena

Inter individualized talk is vital to humans and is physical exertiond in day-by-day situations. Inter mortalal conversation refers to opposite discourse in the midst of race (35), fit to West and Turner (2007), informants of Introducing communion Theories. West and Turner explain that exploring how relationships reach, the upholding and prolongation of these relationships, and the end of relationships, argon the main characteristics of inter soulal mise en scene.Interpersonal dialogue began as face to face communion between two coarsewealth, unless as technology advanced, it expand to include red-hot communicative technologies such as tele surround c all in all(prenominal)s, email, here and now message, chats, accessible media networks, and schoolbook sheerion pass along. school textbook message through cells phones, also cognize as texting or SMS (Short Message Service), is a form of interpersonal colloquy that place be repre directed through the L inear Model of Communication A message is sent from a ancestor to a pass receiver through a channel, which whitethorn be interrupted by near form of noise.texts atomic number 18 person-to-person messages received from and sent to known individuals. Text electronic pass provides a one-to-one, personalized, and individuating genial medium (Reid and Reid, 2007). The phenomena of text messaging, has researchers and scholars questioning whether this sunrise(prenominal) colloquy technology adds or takes away from interpersonal communication and deals learned communication skills. Review of Literature Texting as a New Phenomenon of Communication E trulyday genial arrangements and interpersonal contact argon now routinely affected by mobile technology (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010).As foreign to 15 years ago, todays youth devour a greater variety of options to choose from when communicating with their peers. Communication, via cell phone and the internet, ar now wid ely available and very popular with the young (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010, 197). The spherical cell phone market now stands at almost 1. 8 billion subscribers, and is estimated to reach 3 billion by the end of 2010, by which time nearly half(prenominal) of all human beings on the satellite be expected to own and purpose a cell phone (Reid and Reid, 2007).A recent survey of 2,000 juvenileagers in the United States revealed that 80% of teens, or approximately 17 million young large number, have a cell phone. 96% of those teens use the texting function, and of that 96%, 1 out of 10 teens say that they text for 45 minutes a day (Conti-Ramsden, Durkin, and Simkin, 2010). Over 900 billion messages were sent in 2005, with expectations that this allow for rise to more than two trillion messages in 2010 (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). Text messaging has be dumb piece a common heart and soul of holding in unending touch with peers, especially among young muckle all ov er the world.The phenomenon of texting is continuing to increase, raising substantial awareness of the new texting language. Researchers are proposing to treat electronic communication as a distinct humour of intermediate communication, in between the oral and the deliver medium (Fandrych, 2007). harmonise to Ingrid Fandrych (2007), author of Electronic Communication and Technical Terminology, Online conversation takes place on the written level, season victimization specific stylistic conventions which are very similar to oral communication, especially abbreviations of frequently used phrases and emoticons to replace nervus facialis ex narrowions (148).Fandrych (2007) claims that acronyms, blends, and clippings are responsible for the characteristic style of Internet English, and that offline usage is increasingly influenced by Internet usage (148). Some new and creative expression formations have dismantle found their way into everyday usage including the acronyms btw (by the way) and ttyl (talk to you later), as well as the blending of certain words like all right into alright. Fandrych (2007) predicts some changes in general (off-line) English repayable to texting language as well (151). lot talk via text messages using the keyboard, they unsex use of abbreviations, they omit non-content words, and they do not capitalize. Fandrych (2007) explains that Electronic interlocutors replace contextual cues which would have been present in face to face communication with abbreviations and emoticons, which are, of course, consciously busy and sometimes intended to entertain, a feature which internet English shares with new(prenominal) jargons and in-group registers (151).Electronic communication, as a medium, shares characteristics with the written language and the oral language. Letters and symbols are used through typing which are displayed on a screen, just at the same time, it is very informal and conversational which replaces the linguistic con text with special cues that do not exist in the traditional written mode (Fandrych, 2007, 151). Text language is neither identical to speech nor writing, further adaptively features characteristics of twain.Fandrych (2007) titles this electronic communication language as Netspeak, and categorizes it as a 4th medium alongside written, utter, and sign language (152). Communication through text is informal and characterized by new elements. Fandrych (2007) concludes that the electronic medium stool be considered to constitute a separate level, between the spoken and the written modes and overlapping, to some extent, with some(prenominal) of them (152).The new texting phenomenon not only creates a new form of language between oral and written mediums, but it also schools a globalized texting standard. English language texts produced by bilingual speakers share more of the features which have been reported for English SMS communication internationally, and provide evidence for wh at one big businessman call a global English SMS standard (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). English messages are strongly represented in all communicative functions of text messaging by bilingual individuals.Deumert and Masinyana (2008), co-authors of, The use of English and isiXhosa in text messages (SMS), paper how English is combined with isiXhosa, one of the official languages of South Africa, in text messages between native South Afri evicts. Deumert and Masinyana state that The historical and continuing assurance of English on the world-wide-web has supported the popular belief that the language of electronic communication in general is English, and in some cases, English eject replace a users first language in this medium (123).In studies focusing on bilingual texting, most messages were written in English combined with the local language. Researchers concluded that there is the existence of a global English SMS norm because of brevity and speed, paralinguistic obstruction s with the medium and local language, and the restriction of texting characters (Deumert and Masinyana, 2008). The phenomenon of texting has transformed individuals lives by creating the possibility of being in constant communication at all times, as well as creating a tendency towards cross-cultural homogeny.Texting as a Negative create of Communication Although texting provides the opportunity for constant and ready contact with opposites, it tends to have a displacing effect on face-to-face communication. Similar to face-to-face communication, texting allows for conversational turn-taking, but excludes intonations, emotions, and the ability to send long messages. Llana Gershon (2008), author of, Email my Heart redress and Romantic Break-Ups, performed a study looking at how Ameri give the axes are experiencing and using new technologies to end relationships.Gershon (2008) discusses, through the use of American college students break-up narratives, the ways in which certain co mplaisant media create new possibilities for disconnecting with others (15). Although a break-up may be happening, an individual has the opportunity through text messaging to hold separate or multiple conversations simultaneously with the break-up. This takes away from the personal aspect of intimate relationships and tends to enforce the displacement of face-to-face communication.Teens especially use winking messaging and texting in assorticular as substitutes for face-to-face communication with people from their physical lives, therefore, feeling less psychologically last to their instant messaging and texting partners (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008). This may also damage the emotional quality of a relationship. Online interactions lack burning(prenominal) features of face-to-face communication, such as gestures, eye contact, and proboscis language, making them less rich than offline interactions (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008).Although texting is still communication, social anxiety and anti-social behaviors can be an effect of the lack face-to-face communication with teens today. Reports in the press and surveys from parents find points of view that range from exuberant, discussing how socially-interactive technologies can save youth from social isolation and depression, to alarming, focusing on how constant use of these technologies fosters anti-social behavior (Bryant, Sanders-Jackson, and Smallwood, 2006, 557).The ingenuousness is that texting and other forms of social technology lie between these two extremes. A recent survey revealed that cell phone owners declaring a generalized taste for texting on their cell phones were both lonelier and more anxious than those who preferred talk (Reid and Reid, 2007). People who have social anxiety will not come to terms with their fears without experiencing face-to-face communication and, as an effect, use texting as a divergent, to kill time or avoid some other activity.Texting allows users to cr awfish out from the demands of immediate interactive involvement, releasing time and attentional resources to compose and edit messages (Reid and Reid, 2007). Although texting may be an outlet and a preferred mode of communication for people with anxiety problems, it also may give others a chimerical sense of the persons real personality. Along with peers, there is a growing fearfulness that adolescents extensive use of electronic communication to interact with their peers may louse up their relations with their parents, siblings, and other family members (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008).Subrahmanyam and Greenfield (2008) show how peer relationships are being heighten at the expense of family relationships in an example role of technology in forward-looking family life When the working spouse, usually the father, came through the door at the end of the day, the other spouse and children were often so absorbed in what they were doing that they greeted him only more or less o ne-third of the time, usually with an obligatory hi. About half the time, children ignored him and continued multitasking and monitoring their various electronic gadgets (135).Parents are having a much harder time breaking into their childrens world because of the distance and hiding established through text messaging. Teens are using cell phones to fetch generational boundaries, such as screening calls from parents into voicemail, as well as undermining family rituals, such as mealtimes and vacations (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 2008). Cell phones give adolescents the power to control the people with whom they talk and have more room into which they can share thoughts freely and privately from their family members.The landmarks of the electronic transformation stage include greater teen autonomy, the decline of face-to-face communication, enhancement of peer group relations at the achievable expense of family relations, and greater teen choice (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield, 200 8). According to Raymond Williams (1997), author of Mobile Privatization, new technologies only serve to further aggravate the newfangled human condition of mobile privatized social relations (129). This seems to be a concern that is provoked further by new mobile communication technologies with people talking of detached presence (Lin and Tong, 2007). Adolescents constant use of mobile communication can be seen as a symptom of a general loss of human connectivity in the modern condition (Lin and Tong, 2007, 305). Texting as a Positive Form of Communication Although many studies have shown the negative effects of text messaging, other research has shown that this new form of communication has positive aspects as well. Text messaging is a form of communication that has many uses coordinating plans, multi-tasking, friendship maintenance, information, and amatory relationships. Text messages are convenient, immediate, less disturbing, and have no constraints.Since there are so many c ommunicative functions, text messaging has become a common means of keeping in constant touch, especially among young people in many parts of the world today (Lin and Tong, 2007). Todays youth use text messaging especially to keep in touch and maintain either close or distant relationships. youthful research studies have explored how text messaging can offer a sense of intimacy between friends as well as between strangers. This is especially appealing to youth because they can be bonded to all of their social networks through one device. The virtual presence (or absent presence) of persons elsewhere through mobile communication facilitates networking, deeper relationships, or simply increased contact. People who are physically far away can be brought into immediate cyber presence (Lin and Tong, 2007, 305). Mobile texting allows people to be in constant social contact, which therefore gives them a sense of co-presence at all times. Lin and Tong (2007) explain that text messaging has created new kinds of modalities for co-presence and communication, which contributes to a sense of virtual intimacy (305).Text messages, sooner than standard telephone calls, allow for total individual communication there is no chance of anyone overhearing the conversation and thus supports a sense of bail and secrecy. It is appealing because the text is expected to reach a specific person directly, no matter where they are or the time of day. This form of communication is very popular between adolescents and their peers because they feel as if they can authorize privately, not under the supervision of their parents.Teens travel between their homes, school and close places that are all under a high degree of law by adults. Mobile text messaging has thus fulfilled an important function which provides a sense of co-presence for young people who lack the means to share some private physical space free from adults management (Lin and Tong, 2007, 306). Because this form of communi cation is relatively free from adult supervision, teens often use texting to maintain romantic relationships as well as friendships.A study found that texting is used to negotiate gender relations, especially among couples (Lin and Tong, 2007). For instance, after a fight, couples may not want to directly speak to each other or hear ones voice, but texting avoids the embarrassment of making romantic advances or even when saying no to these advances. The informants of the study also show the fact that some messages are highly private and very meaningful, which can be saved and stored in the mobile device.Since the conversation remains private, even in public location ns, individuals tend to reveal more about their emotional selves through texts. Thus, youth text messaging end on an optimistic note about the positive uses of SMS by young people for gaining freedom from surveillance by adults and for negotiating subtle gender relations (Lin and Tong, 2007). Relationships can actually be strengthened through text messaging because of its convenience, intimacy, and privacy among users. Another strength of text messaging is that it allows people to keep in touch with friends who are apart(p) by physical boundaries.Although other forms of communication such as telephone, email, and written letters allow people separated by distance to keep in touch as well, texting allows both sender and receiver to keep in contact at both of their conveniences. The message is sent and received immediately regardless if the other person is online. It allows for multi-tasking while holding other conversations or tasks, and also is less disturbing, by far, than other forms of communication such as phone calls or face-to-face communication.While people may interact frequently in person with people who are in their lives every day, it may not be possible to meet other friends, family, or acquaintances face-to-face on a unfluctuating basis. To fill in-person communication gaps, people used text messaging to stay connected and make plans to meet when convenient (Quan-Haase, 2007). Text messaging is a more suitable fit to maintaining distance relationships as conflicting to other forms of communication.Aside from convenience, some people actually prefer text messaging because it gives them a chance to conceive of about what they want to say, which is not always possible during face-to-face communication. Text messaging gives people time to think about the wording of their messages, allowing them to be more informal and candid, even with close friends (Reid and Reid, 2007, 425). Some people, due to SMS and other forms of text establish communication, even develop an entirely separate, brave SMS self, which contrasts with their more reserved real-life personality (Reid and Reid, 2007).Text messaging can be used as an outlet to help expand communication and closeness with peers. For instance, in an essay that discusses the relationship between texting and social an xiety, Donna Reid and Fraser Reid (2007) write By delaying or eliminating the audience reactions that normally accompany real-time spoken interaction, SMS may offer anxious individuals a way of making social contact without fear of immediate disapproval or rejection, allowing attention to be refocused away from the observers perspective and towards the composition of messages that more efficaciously deliver the goods self-presentational goals (425).Interactive media, such as texting, allow people to individuate themselves, beam with peers, and accomplish stages of intimate contact that they could not achieve in other interactional settings. Research Questions Texting helps maintain social relationships in modern society, and affords resources to achieve a sense of co-presence and intimacy with both existing friends and new acquaintances, while avoiding having to deal with face-to-face interaction or the intrusive disturbance of a phone call (Lin and Tong, 2007).Although texting m ay be a convenient source of communication that is direct, individualized, and private, it also may be taking away from the importance of face-to-face, interpersonal communication. If people are relying on a text based communication exchange, they are not experiencing or learning interactional conversations involving refreshful inflection, reactions, and especially body language. Nonverbal communication is a big part of interpersonal communication because it shows the reaction of the individual after receiving the message, therefore large the sender a form of feedback that strengthens the communication process.As technology continues to advance, there is arise concern that social, interactional, and communication skills of todays youth and future generations will consequently decline. As a result, this study will address the by-line questions RQ1 Is texting taking away from or adding to interpersonal communication and individuals learned communication skills? RQ2 Will texting a ffect how children and adolescents communicate with one another(prenominal)? RQ3 Do people rely on texting to fulfill their emotional, psychological, and other forms of demand as opposed to other types of communicative technology or face-to-face communication?