4 ms·

The language of the reviews is quizzical. I caught myself thinking how high-brow language once was. Then, it dawned on me the sense of intentionality and crafts

The language of the reviews is quizzical. I caught myself thinking how high-brow language once was. Then, it dawned on me the sense of intentionality and craftsmanship displayed by each sentence. U up? Who dis? :emoji :emoji :emoji I'm not sure if I'm nostalgic, sad or just a little bit of, "get off my lawn."_

pkage 5y ago
You're comparing highbrow literature reviews in leading magazines to short instant messages, which are a significantly different medium designed to be read by one or two people once, and then thrown away. Your best comparison is telegram style[0], which is not dissimilar to today's texts—complete with its own slang and shorthand. Nobody's writing "u up" in the New Yorker. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_style https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_style
- relaunched 5y ago
  I can't help but think that telegram style was more a function of the exorbitant cost and pricing model of sending a telegram. https://newatlas.com/last-telegraph-message/28314/#:~:text=In%201860%2C%20for%20example%2C%20a,cost%20%24100%20(about%20%242%2C600) https://newatlas.com/last-telegraph-message/28314/#:~:text=I.... Relative to wages in the 1860s, telegrams were very expensive. https://www.portablepress.com/blog/2016/10/where-the-money-wentin-1860/ https://www.portablepress.com/blog/2016/10/where-the-money-w...
  - mwcampbell 5y ago
    Composing a text message on a touchscreen keyboard has its own cost. Not monetary, but still something to minimize.
drzaiusapelord 5y ago
If you think they didn't have slang in the 19th century then you are mistaken. You can't compare academic writing to slang and pretend society has devolved. We live in a time where people who would be locked out of the publication process for "reasons" can now write books. Where literacy is the highest ever. Where more books get published than ever. The incredible progress in publishing should be praised, not disingenuously mocked.
- avian 5y ago
  > We live in a time where people who would be locked out of the publication process for "reasons" can now write books. People could write unpublished books back then just as well, and people can be locked out of the publication process today. The difference is that "reasons" were given by a person and today you're locked out by an Algorithm that doesn't even tell you why.
yeetaccount 5y ago
More effort was put into expressing meaning when people weren’t constantly stimulated. There’s still meaning today, but I can’t help but feel it’s shallow and unappreciated by reader and writer alike.
ZeroGravitas 5y ago
Highbrow term for the ability to switch language usage as required by communication context: kairos. > James Kinneavy is largely credited with reintroducing the importance of kairos into the discipline of Rhetoric and Composition and, thus, the composition classroom. According to Kinneavy, kairos is “the appropriateness of the discourse to the particular circumstances of the time, place, speaker, and audience involved”
dredmorbius 5y ago
TELEGRAPHY CHANGED LANGUAGE STOP CHARGING BY WORD STOP FLOURISHES TOO COSTLY STOP That era was just starting by 1850, but showed in some language, especially in newspapers, and to an extent Mark Twain. Hemmingway remains the exemplar though. I strongly suspect that the ornate language also served trust and signalling purposes. With faster communications, that could be indicated by other means (returning texts immediately rather than long exhortations of faith, fearing the correct gods, and infinite gratitude to one's superiors, should one have any). This turns up in business correspondence, and the history of business writing and messaging as communications increased in speed and bandwidth are interesting. A small handful of companies (the Souther Pacific Railroad, DuPont Chemical, General Electric) had an absolutely outsized impact on standards of correspondence and recordkeeping, particularly from about 1880 -- 1910 or so. Even standardisation of fields on memos, most of which were later reflected in RFC 822 email message headers, date to this time, and were aimed at improving ease of reference and filing.

pkage 5y ago

You're comparing highbrow literature reviews in leading magazines to short instant messages, which are a significantly different medium designed to be read by one or two people once, and then thrown away. Your best comparison is telegram style[0], which is not dissimilar to today's texts—complete with its own slang and shorthand. Nobody's writing "u up" in the New Yorker. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_style https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegram_style

relaunched 5y ago
I can't help but think that telegram style was more a function of the exorbitant cost and pricing model of sending a telegram. https://newatlas.com/last-telegraph-message/28314/#:~:text=In%201860%2C%20for%20example%2C%20a,cost%20%24100%20(about%20%242%2C600) https://newatlas.com/last-telegraph-message/28314/#:~:text=I.... Relative to wages in the 1860s, telegrams were very expensive. https://www.portablepress.com/blog/2016/10/where-the-money-wentin-1860/ https://www.portablepress.com/blog/2016/10/where-the-money-w...
- mwcampbell 5y ago
  Composing a text message on a touchscreen keyboard has its own cost. Not monetary, but still something to minimize.

drzaiusapelord 5y ago

If you think they didn't have slang in the 19th century then you are mistaken. You can't compare academic writing to slang and pretend society has devolved. We live in a time where people who would be locked out of the publication process for "reasons" can now write books. Where literacy is the highest ever. Where more books get published than ever. The incredible progress in publishing should be praised, not disingenuously mocked.

avian 5y ago
> We live in a time where people who would be locked out of the publication process for "reasons" can now write books. People could write unpublished books back then just as well, and people can be locked out of the publication process today. The difference is that "reasons" were given by a person and today you're locked out by an Algorithm that doesn't even tell you why.

yeetaccount 5y ago

More effort was put into expressing meaning when people weren’t constantly stimulated. There’s still meaning today, but I can’t help but feel it’s shallow and unappreciated by reader and writer alike.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

Highbrow term for the ability to switch language usage as required by communication context: kairos. > James Kinneavy is largely credited with reintroducing the importance of kairos into the discipline of Rhetoric and Composition and, thus, the composition classroom. According to Kinneavy, kairos is “the appropriateness of the discourse to the particular circumstances of the time, place, speaker, and audience involved”

dredmorbius 5y ago

TELEGRAPHY CHANGED LANGUAGE STOP CHARGING BY WORD STOP FLOURISHES TOO COSTLY STOP That era was just starting by 1850, but showed in some language, especially in newspapers, and to an extent Mark Twain. Hemmingway remains the exemplar though. I strongly suspect that the ornate language also served trust and signalling purposes. With faster communications, that could be indicated by other means (returning texts immediately rather than long exhortations of faith, fearing the correct gods, and infinite gratitude to one's superiors, should one have any). This turns up in business correspondence, and the history of business writing and messaging as communications increased in speed and bandwidth are interesting. A small handful of companies (the Souther Pacific Railroad, DuPont Chemical, General Electric) had an absolutely outsized impact on standards of correspondence and recordkeeping, particularly from about 1880 -- 1910 or so. Even standardisation of fields on memos, most of which were later reflected in RFC 822 email message headers, date to this time, and were aimed at improving ease of reference and filing.