Losing It

I am worried. I am concerned about the degradation of the English language and correct apostrophe and homophone usage. Linguists like John McWhorter (on whom, I have to admit, I have an intellectual crush) are more interested in whether altering how we use language interferes with meaning, but I am still vexed.

Language changes, I know. Yet in a time when the release of 250 emojis is exciting news to Internet- and text-obsessed youth, I remain on the side of proscribing correct usage rather than allowing change to occur with abandon. Perhaps this proclivity is the English teacher in me, but I like to think it is my love of clear writing.

What are emojis? you may ask. I hope you are asking this question, because it means that you are not into the world of substituting these cartoon-like images for complete thoughts. That is what emojis are, although many of the images are so convoluted that there are numerous online references to explain emojis’ meanings. In short, emojis are ramped-up, image-based emoticons, except you no longer have to figure out how to use these things we used to call “punctuation marks” to create an image. Now, hundreds of images can convey emotions and situations without the use of words.

Instagram and Snapchat are all the rage, allowing people to share glimpses of their lives through images. People can choose to avoid language to reveal life events. But emojis are different. They are a cheap and diluted form of hieroglyphics or pictographs. “A picture is worth a thousand words” is an adage to which we can connect, but can a limited set of images represent our complex thoughts? While these previous written forms of language are actually syllabary, meaning that the symbols represent sounds in the spoken language, emojis do not even attempt to do this. Indeed, they are stand-alone images that are supposed to represent a whole idea.

Where are we as a society if we can no longer express ourselves using language? We are the only known species on the planet that tells stories. Modern literature developed from ancient story-telling, so mustn’t we be alarmed at the development of a modern tool that narrows our ability to express ourselves in such means?

Some people may claim that how we communicate online or in texts doesn’t matter. It is instant communication. Worrying about how we share ideas electronically is like worrying that the telegraph or telephone will ruin how we correspond with each other. My concern is how it alters other forms of communication. If we rely on someone else’s predetermined image to express a moment in our lives, how well can we articulate this in words? Even more, how will people fifty, one hundred, or a thousand years in the future decipher our meaning?

“Homo sapiens” translates to “wise man.” Anyone looking at a text filled with emojis must question our wisdom. Have we evolved beyond language? Where might clear writing still play a role in our lives if we feel we can converse adequately through this rough form of images? We must ask ourselves: what do we lose as a society when we lose our language?