OMG and 'Like' - Impact of technology on language

[-Ralph-]

New thread. Too much of a derail for a D Day thread that should be kept on topic out of respect IMO.

I think it's become representative of the society we live in today where everything is said along these lines:-

"Like OMG!, the olympic flame was like being carried by Jedward and like these old people wanted the news to like have some coverage of some dead people who like kinda fough in some other like foreign country who don't even speak English like; I mean who really cares about some dead people like, what did they ever do for us like???".

I write this after a conversation at the weekend with my 16 year old neice, she's doing her GCSE's & finishes school in a week or two before going to 6th form in September. She showed me her year book where all her friends had written in it & it was just like above like, you know I mean like, OMG!, it's just like that (even the teachers wrote like that!!!).

Everything nowadays has to fit in with social media/social mobility/farcebook/twitter/Jeremy Kyle; and if it doesn't then....................................

I would also like to take this oportunity to say "THANK YOU", may those who paid the ultimate sacrifice to give me the democracy, freedom of speech & freedoms that I enjoy today RIP knowing it was a job well done.

A newborn child is a blank canvas GRH. If there's something important that you dont approve of about your niece, that says more about your brother/sister/in laws.

I know what you mean about education and if she is incapable of writing properly when doing a piece of coursework, her study notes, or writing a CV, etc, then thats an issue her parents should have cared enough about to realise it and ensure it was rectified. Writing OMG and 'like' in her yearbook is just trends and peer pressure. Just like we might have said 'Cool' or 'Dude'. Technology just brings it to our attention. How much of your written work did your Aunts and Uncles see when you were her age? Mine was all on paper in foolscap binders, the only people that looked at those was my teachers and my parents. Nobody but my friends and the occssional teacher when I was caught saw notes passed round the classroom.

If we had had access to the same technology as kids today, would our casual messages to our friends be any better?? We all spoke in slang as kids, and adults shook thier heads. Technology now encorages kids express themselves in writing!

[nikon70]

LOL

[flymo]

I think the context and intent of a piece of writing has more influence over its resulting style than the technology used to create it. 'Text speak' was probably influenced by the relative difficulty of typing quickly on the older, multi letter, keyboards on early mobile phones and of course the text message character limit than anything else.

Writing style in a school yearbook would differ wildly from that used in a formal report, or personal letter, or even an email. Likewise the intended audience and level of formality would alter the choice of style.

In a place like this forum, its the generally accepted norms that influence the style that should be used. If we were all 15 year olds then I'm sure it would be a very different posting style, but it isn't and therefore that mostly explains the reaction that 'text speak' receives in this medium.

I don't have a problem with it provided that there's a point to it and it suits the medium used.

[dizzyblonde]

Text speak, wasn't ' shorthand' like our version back in the day?

I prefer to read a block of text written with thought. In this I mean, its ok to have a bit of grammatical slip up, or spelling mistakes, rather than have an interpreter on hand to figure out what the someone is writing. To me, there is a difference between someone who is genuinely lacking in education or has a problem such as dyslexia......but an apparent ignorance for either the reader or the language written, is a disgrace to society, in my opinion.

[-Ralph-]

I don't have a problem with it provided that there's a point to it and it suits the medium used.

No, me neither, so long as it's used between themselves on email, facebook, MSN, text, etc. It's the cool way to write, it's a trend, and they want to fit in with their friends and do the cool thing.

So long as they know how to and when to write properly, and they do so.

To me, there is a difference between someone who is genuinely lacking in education or has a problem such as dyslexia......but an apparent ignorance for either the reader or the language written, is a disgrace to society, in my opinion.

Agreed on the ignorance thing, but that's about inappropriate use is it not, not the slang itself?

When we used to say something was 'Def' or the 'Shiz Nits' or 'Spazzin' adults looked at us like we were speaking a foreign language too.

The number of thick ears I got from my Dad for sarcasm like 'No sh*t Sherlock' or 'Nice play Shakespeare!' :lol:

[flymo]

When we used to say something was 'Def' or the 'Shiz Nits' or 'Spazzin' adults looked at us like we were speaking a foreign language too.

huh?

[Spank86]

I think 90% of kids that use txt speak CAN also write properly, they just choose not to.

There are varying degrees of ability but most of them are simply to lazy to take the time. Put them constantly in environments where "proper speak" is the norm and they will conform to that instead. I've seen it on plenty of forums where the txt speaker's points get ignored time and again and their posts criticised due to illegibility. Eventually they write properly, or at least close enough to satisfy all but the most virulent grammar nazis.

As for dyslexia, Somehow everyones parents managed to learn a half decent ability at writing without the aid of a spellchecker, You would think legible sentences at least would be possible with it.

[Owenski]

+1
There is a time and a place for it and I think most people would recognise the suitability based on their environment and choose to write accordingly.

We used to speak "pig latin" in my school years, parents and teachers didn't have a clue what we were on about (or so we thought) but speaking it didn't mean we simultaneously forgot how to speak English. Osa hillca utoa ouya ldoa itga

[flymo]

Osa hillca utoa ouya ldoa itga

:-)

everna eensa hatta eforeba. mia tudyingsa ncryptionea taa heta omentma osa aughtca yma nterestia

[Owenski]

akesta omesa ettingga sedua ota henwa eadra ubta peakingsa tia sia ropperpa sayea

[Bibio]

As for dyslexia, Somehow everyones parents managed to learn a half decent ability at writing without the aid of a spellchecker, You would think legible sentences at least would be possible with it.

hahahhaaaaa. i'll write some stuff and see if you can understand what i'm saying without the spell chacker.

no like i was saying OMG you know what i meen some people are just so lush and my dinner tonight was like the best ever si i must remember to blog it or get right on facebook and tell everyone how wonderfull i am because i'm so special you know thats why my mum makes me such awsum food like coz i need a special diet coz i'm special and if i eat to much food i'll get fat and ugly and noone will like me so i dont eat much to stay lush so all the boys will give me what i want OMG i just rememberd i need to go shopping tomorow to get more nice clothes so i can look even more specila and get all the fit blokes chasin me and i need a new fone coz this one is worn out just like my lady bits from all the humpin i have been doin coz i look lush like you know those modles on tv OMG i just remembred that my lush friend is like going on kyle tomorow to have it out with her boyfriend who like got her up the duff and ran away like coz he was lush and all but the bucky got the better of her like and before she know what was goin on he had his nutz and shot hiz load like and now she is pushin a prem like coz its ok coz he was lush and if it dont work out im gona get in there and have like good lush hump times.

[grh1904]

A newborn child is a blank canvas GRH. If there's something important that you dont approve of about your niece, that says more about your brother/sister/in laws.

I know what you mean about education and if she is incapable of writing properly when doing a piece of coursework, her study notes, or writing a CV, etc, then thats an issue her parents should have cared enough about to realise it and ensure it was rectified. Writing OMG and 'like' in her yearbook is just trends and peer pressure.

Ralph,

Not sure if you got exactly what I was getting at or maybe it was the way I wrote it. I have no issue about how my sister-in-law raises her kids, nor I do I have any issue that I don't approve of about my neice.

My first comment in my OP was a bit of a generalisation, written as to how I had seen comments in my neices year book & how many of the younger generation speak & the generalisation they have about historic events.

Many have no idea what WWII entailed for this country, & what it took to fight off the jackboot of tyranny. To them it's ANCIENT history that has no relevance in their society - ask them about Dunkirk, or Battle of Britain, the Desert Rats, Burma, D-Day & they'd probably struggle to answer. That is a failing of the eductaion system & society in general not to ensure that future generations know of the sacrifices made for them by their ancestors.

In relation to her yearbook, the comments in it were not written by her but by others, (isn't that the whole idea of a yearbook?????), she's of to 6th form college to get the grades she needs to go to uni & is chosing one with a ladies rugby team (both union & league as she has ambitions of playinng for country one day).

I'm a bit disappointed that my OP is taken as more of a complaint against my neice etc when I was trying to have a go at the "modern" society in general.

When everyone now a days wants to play out their relationships on the Jeremy Kyle show while watching complete nonentities like Jedward on Big Brother & the likes; I believe that this is a sad reflection on society as a whole & it doesn't surprise me why the news channels would prefer to cover 2 totally untallented morons like them carrying an oversized matchstick as opposed to a D-Day anniversary.

[-Ralph-]

My response is generalistic as well GRH, using your niece as a hypothetical example (note use of the word 'if' etc). You've taken it to heart a bit too much mate.

[-Ralph-]

To depersonalise it - IF a child of 16 does something that somebody disapproves of, then that person should see that as a reflection of the parents, not the child.

People critise young people a lot when actually had we lived in the same world they do today would we be any better? They have different pressures and inflences to us. The lines between the written (or typed) word, and spoken slang are very blurred nowadays, but when we were young the only written communication between two young people had a postage stamp on it. Thats the point of the thread, not GRH' niece.

[Spank86]

hahahhaaaaa. i'll write some stuff and see if you can understand what i'm saying without the spell chacker.


The problems in that have nothing to do with the spelling, which is in part intentionally atrocious, it's more to do with the formatting.

[metalangel]

Anyone remember a Chris Moyles rant on what he called 'OMGIs', young people who were intelligent and well spoken... until they were around their friends when they'd lapse into pseudo-gangsta talk and say 'oh my god innit' (hence the acronym).

It's one thing to have a spoken dialect or accent, but it's jarring to see it written down (my mother is unable to decipher half the text in Viz because it's written in Geordie).

On the flipside you get those Jocks who talk incomprehensible gibberish but write the most beautiful, flowing prose ;)

[Spank86]

Christ moyles is a hypocrite, I doubt he uses the same language at the pub, on the radio, and when talking to his nan.

Vry few people do.

[johnnyrod]

For my 2p it is a lazy way to communicate, and it spills over into more formal writing or speaking, or even informal, where people can't be arsed to say something with more than a nanosecond of thought in it (in which case, is it worth listening to?). When did the word "slash" replace "or", for example?

[dizzyblonde]

For my 2p it is a lazy way to communicate, and it spills over into more formal writing or speaking, or even informal, where people can't be arsed to say something with more than a nanosecond of thought in it (in which case, is it worth listening to?). When did the word "slash" replace "or", for example?

Indeed, I read all this text speak and OMG language that much, my own educated grasp of the English Language has started to suffer*. I have to question my spelling or phrases, as I see things written in such a way now, the real way looks wrong! :smt101

*which is bad, as I'm usually a walking dictionary, and studied English language at a higher level.

[-Ralph-]

and studied English language at a higher level.

You went to school in Scotland?

[allantheboss]

My verbal and written language differs very little from speaking with my best friends to writing a Molecular Bioenergetics paper. Why would it? It's not saving me time or making speaking easier by talking like an idiot.

Despite there's a generation gap, generations interact. I will be interviewed by the generation above me for jobs and will probably be working hard to impress them. Habituating to talk like an imbecile by using text-speak in any form will only make it harder. I tell my friends (and Reeder did too, smart man) that poor grammar even on facebook chat will eventually result in a slip-up when it counts. My father immediately bins CV's with a spelling error, and this is more likely to occur with people who insist on using poor English. This kind of text-speak is not deeply-set enough in the English language to be classed as.."English language". Why use it?

There is a difference between using slang (as someone suggested. "Dude" "Cool", I even use those with professionals, they understand and like it, because they have been rooted in English long enough to have a significantly individual meaning) and speaking rubbish because you're too lazy to say/write the whole word.

Don't even get me STARTED on most modern rap and speaking good English.

[allantheboss]

Bibio I facking love your post.

[dizzyblonde]

:smt041My verbal and written language differs very little from speaking with my best friends to writing a Molecular Bioenergetics paper. Why would it? It's not saving me time or making speaking easier by talking like an idiot.

Despite there's a generation gap, generations interact. I will be interviewed by the generation above me for jobs and will probably be working hard to impress them. Habituating to talk like an imbecile by using text-speak in any form will only make it harder. I tell my friends (and Reeder did too, smart man) that poor grammar even on facebook chat will eventually result in a slip-up when it counts. My father immediately bins CV's with a spelling error, and this is more likely to occur with people who insist on using poor English. This kind of text-speak is not deeply-set enough in the English language to be classed as.."English language". Why use it?

There is a difference between using slang (as someone suggested. "Dude" "Cool", I even use those with professionals, they understand and like it, because they have been rooted in English long enough to have a significantly individual meaning) and speaking rubbish because you're too lazy to say/write the whole word.

Don't even get me STARTED on most modern rap and speaking good English.


:thumleft:

[-Ralph-]

There is a difference between using slang (as someone suggested. "Dude" "Cool", I even use those with professionals, they understand and like it, because they have been rooted in English long enough to have a significantly individual meaning) and speaking rubbish because you're too lazy to say/write the whole word

Devils advocate:

"Dude" "Cool"... have been rooted in English long enough to have a significantly individual meaning

Back in the 70's and 80's the words 'Cool' and 'Dude' were only used by 18 yr old surfers with long straggly hair. They would never enter a professional conversation.

Naturally as you grow up, you drop the slang that you used with your peers as a teenager. I come off a rollercoaster now and even excited and loaded with adrenaline would describe the experience very differently to how I would have done to my peers at 16-18 yrs old. So most of the stuff the teenagers say now will drop away as they get older.

What will stick though, and will have become 'rooted in English long enough' to be accepted by 2042?!

[-Ralph-]

My verbal and written language differs very little from speaking with my best friends to writing a Molecular Bioenergetics paper

Bibio I facking love your post.

:lol:

[dizzyblonde]

What will stick though, and will have become 'rooted in English long enough' to be accepted by 2042?!

Dunnooo, the earth will have self imploded into a great big fiery ball of death by then to matter anyway :smt101:rolleyes:

[-Ralph-]

LOL. Dizzy's got her tin foil hat on again!

[dizzyblonde]

No, its Pegs, it seems to migrate in bed over night, I keep giving it back, but it won't leave me alone!

[allantheboss]

To depersonalise it - IF a child of 16 does something that somebody disapproves of, then that person should see that as a reflection of the parents, not the child.

People critise young people a lot when actually had we lived in the same world they do today would we be any better? They have different pressures and inflences to us. The lines between the written (or typed) word, and spoken slang are very blurred nowadays, but when we were young the only written communication between two young people had a postage stamp on it. Thats the point of the thread, not GRH' niece.

Ralph you are FIT.

Now, I actually wrote that without planning to use and example, but notice how I write "fit" which is a very modern term to describe Ralph being sexually attracted. It is a joke to friends so I am comfortable not using solid literacy, but it doesn't mean I go the whole 9 yards and write "Ralph ur FIT". And not all the time, for every sentence. I like to think that pretty much everyone on here is relatively intelligent, and few people on here write like that. It's not a coincidence.

Anyway back to my original point. I agree about it reflecting on the parents. I'd be interested to see how having to be qualified to be a parent would work out. We need a license to drive a bike, fire a gun, but 16 year-olds can have 20 babies by law? So that uneducated 16 year-old will reflect on their kids, and then onto the second generation, and so on, as you say. Don't grab your guns though folks, I'm speaking of a baby-license to ensure that a parents can bring up a child in good health, not IQ thresholds for parents.

TL;DR, Don't make excuses for the younger generation to use poor English!

[dizzyblonde]

'FIT'?

No idea what it means, I've heard the term, but to me it means.....

http://paponerd.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/scrawny.jpg

Yeah, Ralph baby, thats you that is.....yer well fit innit!

[-Ralph-]

Think it very much depends on whether they are using poor English in order to fit in with their peers (I know I did), or whether it's the only thing they know!

I think being a good parent means you need to ensure that they are able to speak and write properly, and communicate at all levels and adjusting your manner appropriately (from playing with a young child, to chatting to the working man in the pub, to meeting the Queen), but good parenting also includes an element of remembering what it was like to be young! ;-)

So long as my son does the above well at the appropriate times, I don't think I'll get too stressed about it if he uses slang in order to fit in with his friends.

[-Ralph-]

Yeah, Ralph baby, thats you that is.....yer well fit innit!

Diz, if you can give me a way of loosing that much weight, I'll love you forever (but only actually lose half of it!) ;-)

[timwilky]

Use of language is really determined by your target audience. In my case, at work this is middle age graduates in management positions. Yet in the pub for football, it is the sad deluded fools who believe beer goggles will at least mask some of the shame.

The issue is will it be acceptable in 20 years time to address your management board with OMG/like etc. Simply because it was the norm amongst your peer group at some formative point in your life. The simple answer is that this scenario would never happen. If you cannot speak / write English, you will never get beyond the interview.

[flymo]

you will never get beyond the interview.

then hopefully natural evolution will be able to handle it from here.

[dizzyblonde]

Diz, if you can give me a way of loosing that much weight, I'll love you forever (but only actually lose half of it!) ;-)


http://mediapickle.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/beer_goggles_31.jpg
:D

[Bri w]

Use of language is really determined by your target audience. In my case, at work this is middle age graduates in management positions. Yet in the pub for football, it is the sad deluded fools who believe beer goggles will at least mask some of the shame.

The issue is will it be acceptable in 20 years time to address your management board with OMG/like etc. Simply because it was the norm amongst your peer group at some formative point in your life. The simple answer is that this scenario would never happen. If you cannot speak / write English, you will never get beyond the interview.

But what will English be in 20yrs time?

Once upon a time have a gay day didn't have the meaning it does now. And if you go back further there's Shakespeare and Chaucer to decipher.

[timwilky]

Bri

In 20 years it will still be the educated and articulate in positions of power and influence. It will still be that section of society that you need to influence if you have any hopes of social mobility. It doesn't matter what your background is. What does matter is that every child should be given the skill to ensure they can compete at the highest levels.

Language is indeed dynamic. The evolution, particularly technical over the past 50 years has moved at an unprecedented pace. and the English of Chaucer or Shakespeare is no longer recognisable Yet in its day would have been "modern" English.

As for a gay day, no it is quite unpleasant today. Cold and damp. If you are attempting to use the word gay within its pooftah connotation you have failed. Surprisingly when my younger brother came out it was to a challenge from my mother of Are you a poof? to which he responded no mum, I am gay. 30 years later he dismisses the "gay" scene as just a bunch of poofs. Guess it takes one to know one.


My own son has learning difficulties, dyslexia and found school difficult. Strange that the only lesson that ever captured his imagination and engaged him was when he was forced to study Macbeth. For most the language would have been difficult. For him the story grabbed him. He could still tell a good synopsis. Most of his peer group would not even know who wrote it, never mind what it was about. After all Bill was only a story teller for a time when most were illiterate.

[Bri w]

As for a gay day, no it is quite unpleasant today. Cold and damp. If you are attempting to use the word gay within its pooftah connotation you have failed. Surprisingly when my younger brother came out it was to a challenge from my mother of Are you a poof? to which he responded no mum, I am gay. 30 years later he dismisses the "gay" scene as just a bunch of poofs.

Tim,

Only using gay as an example of how words and their usage can change. Not quite sure how I failed. When my youngest daughter came out it wasn't a challenge for me. People are who they are irrespective of their sexuality.

[metalangel]

My father immediately bins CV's with a spelling error, and this is more likely to occur with people who insist on using poor English. This kind of text-speak is not deeply-set enough in the English language to be classed as.."English language". Why use it?


The internal news/information site at work has gained a reputation for poor spelling and grammar. It's become an informal competition for people in the comments section to spot the mistakes. The people responsible for writing the articles have responded by removing any comments like this, claiming they 'violate the guidelines'. I guess it's quicker to churn out garbage and delete comments than it is to take the time and do a good job the first time around.

The most recent error claimed that a signalbox was closed down, stating that as the signalbox was 50 years old "the queen was on the throne for ten years before it was built." :lol:

[Berlin]

I was at someone's house last week (Southern Alberta, Canada) and I wasn't looking at the 18 year old girl speaking. To her she was telling the most important story ever told about a customer driving through the drivethrough where she works.

In the background I heard:

"...and I was like...."

"and he was like...."

"..So I was like...."

"....So he was like..."

"...so i was like f***"

"he was an As***ole"

She honestly thought that what she was telling us was world-changing. I missed the facial expression so I have no idea what either of them were like but I'd guess it was "Am I Bovered" for her and irate from him. after all, her job is customer service and she seemed to have a problem with that. She also repeatedly dropped the F-Bomb in front of her parents, which to me is a huge No-no. I still don't swear in front of mine and I'm 42.

We left soon after that to pour hot bleach into our ears for even more fun! :-)

I also had a guy apply for a job with me last year who used Text speak in his cover letter. He only got a call back to tell him never to use text speak in a cover letter.

C

[littleoldman2]

It's a shame we can no longer use the word gay in its original meaning as there is no direct replacement, carefree and others don't really mean exactly the same thing to me.. It's also a pity that the homosexual community feel the need to use it, as those who may be influenced probably don't need to be and those that need to be don't care.

[DJFridge]

The internal news/information site at work has gained a reputation for poor spelling and grammar. It's become an informal competition for people in the comments section to spot the mistakes. The people responsible for writing the articles have responded by removing any comments like this, claiming they 'violate the guidelines'. I guess it's quicker to churn out garbage and delete comments than it is to take the time and do a good job the first time around.

The most recent error claimed that a signalbox was closed down, stating that as the signalbox was 50 years old "the queen was on the throne for ten years before it was built." :lol:

That's a very common one. A lot of people can't differentiate between how you would describe something verbally and how it should be written down.

[Mrs DJ Fridge]

Who can honestly say that they were not pleased that their parents did not understand what they were talking about? This is not a new argument, it goes right back throughout history, one generation complaining about the language of the next, it is to be expected and lauded, if we stop we are going to stagnate and that would be bad. An earlier post referred to Chaucer and Shakespeare, they both spoke a different language to the one we speak now (and to each other). Personally I applaud the constant fluidity of the language, it is better than the mid Atlantic language that we are threatened with by our total reliance on American television.

Regarding their lack of knowledge of WW2, I am in my mid 40's and we were not taught anything about either World War, they were considered to be too close to judge correctly. I have made it my job to learn about it since leaving school (Zoe Ball mentioned the same thing on Radio 2 today, she is 41). If the children have brains they will endeavor to use them, just maybe not yet.

[allantheboss]

Devils advocate:

"Dude" "Cool"... have been rooted in English long enough to have a significantly individual meaning

Back in the 70's and 80's the words 'Cool' and 'Dude' were only used by 18 yr old surfers with long straggly hair. They would never enter a professional conversation.

Naturally as you grow up, you drop the slang that you used with your peers as a teenager. I come off a rollercoaster now and even excited and loaded with adrenaline would describe the experience very differently to how I would have done to my peers at 16-18 yrs old. So most of the stuff the teenagers say now will drop away as they get older.

What will stick though, and will have become 'rooted in English long enough' to be accepted by 2042?!

Yep, this is what I believe. I guess people back when you were 18 in 1652 had few words you'd use to describe a particularly laid-back associate whom partook in surfing on occasion and hence "dude" arose. It became popular because it was pleasant to the ear and when people used the term it gave the listener quite a convenient description of what personality you're implying.

Same with the convenience of saying "cool" to describe someone like Brando instead of "Well he was quite a laid-back fellow with a calming aura whom appeared to not be bothered about many things, but ironically his aura also provoked demand for respect".

On the contrary, I don't think saying "like Oh Em Gee he was so totally buff" will ever find it's own comfortable niche in language.

[ixlr8]

Context surely should determine appropriate usage, e.g. txt for phones and mates, formal for official situations. Seems an easy differentiation to make, I'd have thought but have had to "offer" suggestions to my (gen Y) offspring with job applications on occasion.

It's not being able to transition from informal to formal that immediately puts up a barrier to class mobility, IMHO. Or, if you like, inappropriate language use.

And don't start me on precisely the same issues with dress.

Regarding technology's effect on thinking rather than just its expression, what I've also noticed, is the offspring type so fast, I don't think they give themselves time to consider niceties, depth, detail or even being strictly correct, speed being the most important factor. In a fast moving online discussion, your reply can become irrelevant in 10 seconds.

In the same vein, OMG and its cousins seem devoid of any nuance more complex than an 8 year old could muster. Er, electively dumbed-down seems to fit.

[-Ralph-]

Regarding technology's effect on thinking rather than just its expression, what I've also noticed, is the offspring type so fast, I don't think they give themselves time to consider niceties, depth, detail or even being strictly correct, speed being the most important factor. In a fast moving online discussion, your reply can become irrelevant in 10 seconds.

Somebody finally got one of the main points of the OP :cheers:

We don't put pen to paper anymore. Essays at school are done in Word, letters are written by email, and even if they are posted they are typed on a computer first and printed.

The older generation learned to write and speak first, keyboard much later - today kids are learning keyboard first, my 4 yr old son has learned all his alphabet and the shapes of letters on a kiddies toy laptop! By the age of a teenager they type 90 words a minute without ever having to learn typists skills.

Then they get into interactive online chat and speed is imperative to them, and fitting in with friends on the other end of that chat is imperative too.

If typing in this manner on online chat is so habitual for you (hours per night for my two teenage cousins, whereas girls just used to spend hours on the phone instead), then how difficult must it be when you then have to open word and write a covering letter and a CV!

[timwilky]

One issue is that I have recently sat a couple of exams. These are multiple choice answers. Whilst they were a tad difficult in that generally you could dismiss 1, eliminate a second and then have to deliberate over 2, at least the answer was there and even a guess had a 25% chance for the foundation levels. I am told that they are a vast improvement for the candidate who until 2008 had to sit a 3 hour written practitioners exam.

OK so what. Most of us sitting these exams are 40+. The last time we held a pen for 3 hours was for final exams 20 years ago. I think my hand would seize up if I had to write for 10 minutes theses days.

Sometimes thank god for modern technology and a different way of assessing knowledge.