More Columnists

• Brent Batten: One marathon ends, another begins in Florida
• Jay Ambrose: A lesson from India: We must remain prepared to fight terror
• Thomas Sowell: Freedom, as understood by the far left, is oppression

Tell us about it

• What would you add to this story? Tell us what we missed.
• Do you have photos from this event? Documents we need to see? Share with us.
• Upload photos & videos
• More ways to get your stuff online and in the paper.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

Share and Enjoy [?]

Barack Obama’s decision to announce his running mate via text message was cute.

Clever, too, designed to lure jaded journalists into the faux excitement of the future. It worked because mainstream media people are anything but jaded about the Democrat nominee and his new pal, Joe Biden.

Headline writers, enamored by the whole Obama-My-Obama phenomenon, might trumpet the text heard round the, um, Beltway, like this:

“Awesome! World-Changing News Comes Via Test Message, LOL.”

But enough about the politics of hope and hilarity. I’m amazed by the texting craze.

As an official geezer, I am embarrassed to report that until recently I had never sent a text message via my PDA/cell phone/camera/thing. But having grandchildren and, alas, even grown children who “text,” is a challenge.

Yes, “text” is now a verb, in the way that “office,” “parent” and “impact” are verbs.

Many people really say things like, “Where do you office?” That means, in old English, “Where is your office?” “To parent” also is commonplace, now that this trend is impacting our daily dialogs.

Fighting against these changes to our endangered English language has become quixotic. Only us crusty museum specimens who know that “I” and “me” are not interchangeable still worry about lazy language.

Texting (OMG, it almost sounds normal) is more insidious because it corrupts the written language, as well. I mean, the “texted” language.

Here’s an example, using the www.lingo2word.com Web site:

In normal English, a message might read: “What are you doing tonight? Let’s go hang out somewhere and have some laughs.”

In text talk, it comes out as: WUD 2nite? Let’s go hng ot sumwhr n av sum lols.”

Another example: “Hi Mom and Dad. Classes are really hard here at State University and I am studying so hard. You would be very proud. Please send more money. You can’t believe the cost of a couple of beers here.”

In text lingo:” Hi mom n dad. classes r realy hrd hre @ st8 uni +I am swating so hrd. ud B vry proud. plz snd mor $. u cnt bleev d cost of a cpl of beers hre.”

That’s how accomplished texters communicate via cell phone, probably using both thumbs to do so.

Critics of us critics of what text messaging is doing to the language claim that we are nothing but old fogies (now there’s an outdated phrase) and that text language is clear, concise and to the point. Concise? Yep. Clear? LOL, derisively.

I am not suggesting we return to the days when a man in Manhattan might write a letter in longhand on parchment, with flowery language full of double entendres, seal the envelope with hot wax and dispatch it with a night rider to his long distance lover, pining away in Marco Island.

Maybe there’s a middle ground. Even the lingo of e-mail, with its convenient but incorrect spellings and its total abolition of capital letters, even emailese becomes almost charming and quaint by contrast.

In summary:

“en wl outlast txt msgN. itz a fad, a passin fanC. sumday we’ll l%k bac @ it as we now rembr spats, hoola hoops n bell butts. oops, they’re bac.”

E-mail Don Farmer at don@donfarmer.com