Shud i b wrried?

A Darwinian perspective of the word “evolution” refers to an organism’s fitness to the environment. This definition can also be applied to the evolution of language, and how it changes to fit our modern environment. When the question, is language evolving or devolving, is posed, the answer is that language evolves, because it adapts to our modern environment. However, the answer of evolution or degeneration does not simply lie in whether or not language is changing, but in what we lose by its changing. The author of “Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business”, Neil Postman, explains when we move from medium to medium, something is always lost in translation. When televangelists attempt to preach on T.V., they inevitably lose a central part of their message. The use of shorthand, brief interactions, and the movement from spoken word to texting all exemplify the development of language overtime. The extent to which this development is a good or bad thing exists in considering what is lost in the move, and what it means for society.
Often, language is considered to be degenerating due to increasingly widespread use of text-speak and shorthand. However, the use of shorthand allows more information to be spread in a shorter amount of time. Nonetheless, people continue to worry that text-speak is ruining the world. Perhaps they worry so much, they overcompensate and use “pretentious words”, as George Orwell calls them. Orwell actually dislikes the overly grandiloquent ways of writing, because he finds them silly and inefficient. Writers spend so much time, and waste much of their reader’s time, by using over-used words and phrases in attempts to sound intelligent and credible, despite sometimes saying nothing of importance. On the flip side, it is important to consider whether modern society spends so much time trying to be efficient, it begins to lack depth.
We are so constantly rushing around, that our interactions are quick and only extract the bare essentials. Ray Bradbury portrays a world in which everyone is content enough to speed about with their business that they stop caring for one another. They are no longer able to have deep, meaningful conversations and are no longer interested in what they themselves think, let alone those around them! The movement from spoken word to shorthand and text-speak are not the sole culprits. Many claim that we are mixing up a technological world with reality. Or, are we living in a reality that is over infused with technology?

So, really, is language evolving or devolving?

There is no clear cut answer. As Orwell says, “language merely reflects existing social conditions”(Orwell 10). Language evolves with the times, and current times seem to demand faster paced communication. In regards to efficiency, text speak and short hand are a good development. In regards to the future of our social relations, emotional wellbeing, and our abilities to think deeply and complexly…idk.

Works Cited:
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 1953. Print.
Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New  York: Viking, 1985. Print.