Zimpapers Logo

Christopher Farai Charamba The Reader
A few days ago, one of those Facebook memories popped up in my notifications. It was a post from 2008 about something trivial to do with a weekend I don’t quite remember.

What struck me though was how the post was written.

I had used Short Message Service (SMS) language, that which is devoid of vowels as well as backward talk, where words are sounded phonetically in reverse. I was quite embarrassed by what I read, for I dread to receive such messages today, and promptly deleted the post.

Such language or rather (mis)spelling has unfortunately, I’d argue, become a common feature of today’s communication. At some point I managed to come to my senses and that SMS language did not cement itself in my communication.

My post however, reminded me of George Orwell’s 1946 essay, Politics and the English Language. In it he wrote, “Modern English, especially written English, is full of bad habits, which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if one is willing to take the necessary trouble.”

At the time, Orwell was talking about the use of dying metaphors, pretentious diction and meaningless words particularly in political speech.

He bemoaned how confusing and hollow writing had become and assumed, though he could not prove it, that this was the case in other languages and not just English.

“The writer,” he wrote “either has a meaning and cannot express it, or he inadvertently says something else, or he is almost indifferent as to whether his words mean anything or not. This mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence is the most marked characteristic of modern English prose.”

Some 71 years after Orwell’s essay was written, in an era where people communicate via 140 characters, there are new issues to contend with in the English language, communication in general.

Abbreviations such as LOL for “laughing out loud”, or BRB for “be right back” frequent writing, particularly in online social media spaces and have also made appearances in modern fiction literature.

Everything Everything by Nicola Yoon, and The Fault in Our Stars by John Green are two such examples, though both authors use this form of writing in specific direct communication between characters, not as their literary style.

During my teaching days, I often warned students not to use SMS language, even in texts to their peers, as it would likely seep into their academic writing. Some refused to take me seriously and it often reflected in their essays.

But one must concede that language, like culture is dynamic and it evolves. If it is to remain static, it is likely to die. Language is used to communicate and so long as it does so and does so effectively then it shouldn’t matter how the world is spelt or pronounced. The important thing is understanding.

That too is what Orwell was alluding to in his essay — the communicating and understanding bit.

“Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent,” is one of the rules he gives.

As language is meant to communicate, if you use words that people do not understand or are confused by, then you have failed in your primary objective.

The reader or listener remains the most important person, when it comes to communicating and as such, one should always look to finding ways of easing their understanding.

While SMS language has gained popularity particularly among the younger generations, simple full text remains the best and most effective means of communication.

“A scrupulous writer,” according to Orwell, “in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus: What am I trying to say? What words will express it? What image or idiom will make it clearer? Is this image fresh enough to have an effect?”