How has 'text speak' affected languages apart from english?

You are too young. When the first microcomputers on the scene they had only 1k (kilobytes) of memory and it cost $1,000 and it was 1980. Before that we had the IBM monster machine that you used punch cards to program and used FORTRAN while the business types used COBOL. Then BASIC came along. It was an adaptation of Fortran by a college professor to teach programming to students. Intel invented the programmable chip so we had the programmable calculator. We wrote our programs on these specialized calculators. Then a popular electronics magazine introduced a microcomputer kit the Altair or something. A programming whiz kid named Bill Gates approached the Altair people and sold them the BASIC translator which he hadn't written. When he got the contract he worked feverishly with Paul Allen an electrical engineer to finish the translator. Bill Gates father was a establishment lawyer of some sort as his mother sat on the same charity board as the Chairman of IBM. IBM was behind on the microcomputer scene as Apple was the dominant manufacturer and Radio Shack was producing microcomputers as well as bunch of other companies. A professor who worked with Intel proposed to them that they should write an operating system for their chip. Intel was not interested so the good professor wrote it for Apple which was CPM. At that time all the micros were 8-bit computers so IBM was trying to leap-frog the competition by introducing the 16-bit computer but they had no operation system. An electrical engineer in Seattle had adapted the CPM system to 16-bit. IBM failed to get the professor to adapt his CPM system for their 16-bit computer. As a last resort the Chairman of IBM must have known about Bill Gates and given inside info to his mother. Bill Gates bought out the Seattle engineer's adaption of the CPM system and called it DOS for $17,000. This is the DOS system that went on the first IBM personal computer. Bill Gates was very clever in that for the IBM computer all the executing programs were given the suffix '.com' while for all IBM-compatible computer it was '.exe' So IBM was not very happy. Everybody now had a computer but there was no network to communicate. The only way people could communicate was by bulletin boards it was like morse code that it had to be short thus the abbreviations which was like short hand.
For ten years or more this was the state of affairs. It was expensive but it was like teletype. So a lot of computer geeks learned the computer short hand using combination of character and symbol keys to convey ideas or feelings. With the Internet people now could communicate without the short hand but even at A2K people use the bulletin board teletype short hand. Omsigdavid is a prime example.

Thank you, talk, I didn't realise what had gone before.

That one is great!

MDR! (Mort de rire).

I don't text out of principle and if I get a text message that is not written out
completely, I won't understand and will not reply. In other words, I refuse to
buy into it.

However, German kids are exclusivley texting (SMS as they call it) due to
the high cell phone cost.

"WZTSD?" (Wo zum Teufel steckst Du?) Where in devil's name are you?
"KO10MISPÄ" (Komme 10 min spaeter) I'll get there in 10 minutes.
"OK WWW" (okay, wir werden warten) Okay, we will wait!

Without being into the texting scene, one never would know what the meaning of all these abbreviations are.

Did I say already that I refuse to text? It's a terrible way of communicating!

I don't think this is any different from earlier technological advancements in the area of communication.

The telephone changed our form of greeting. The word "hello" was not a common expression until the the telephone was invented.
The telegraph was all about abreviation. SOS is still a commonly used phrase.
Rail transportation added all sorts of expressions to our culture.
The rise of literacy dramatically changed our way of using the language including improvements to spelling rules and abbreviations.

I wonder if people thousands of years ago refused to send a letter by mail because of how it affected the language.

I don't think letters had a negative effect on language but I refuse to use "text speak". That doesn't mean I refuse to use text messages (I have my qualms with them, but mainly because I think cell phone companies are raping their customers with the pricing for SMS, which is an inferior medium to mobile email) but when I do send text message I write like I would anywhere else. So does everyone who texts me. The medium doesn't need to make you look like a lazy retard.

If I was paying postage by weight, and my correspondence was by stone slab, I'd probably be texting madly.

Isn't the the term "negative effect" rather subjective? An English speaker from 500 years ago would probably think you speak like a "lazy retard". That our older generation scoffs at the language of young people is not surprising. It always happens that way.

Some of the changes from language due to new technology will certainly die out as a passing fads. Some of them will become common in the future.

Of course. Do you think that people should refrain from ever claiming anything is a negative effect? If not, then what is your point?



Why? Do you think English speakers from 500 years ago sound like lazy retards? If not, why on earth do you think 500 years from now they will think that of the way I write?

It may seem different and archaic to them, but you have no reason to call it lazy.



I am of the text messaging generation, speak for yourself.



So? That doesn't mean it's not a lazy way to communicate.

i find it annoying, much like dave's font and phonetics party.

I am suggesting a one way pattern-- older generations always show disdain for the language and behavior of younger generations. I don't think it works in the other direction.

Agreed. It makes you instantly look thick.

Are you sure? Using slang from just a few years ago can get you mocked with young people. Slang from earlier generations (e.g. "groovy", "far out", "heavy man") will come across as funny and amusing at best with lame and pathetic being the more likely impression.

But I don't get why that matters, just because generational disdain is common doesn't mean it never has a valid point. And because I am part of the very generation I'm criticizing I don't get why you are bringing it up.

Whatever!

I think you mean wot eva.

"Whateva I do what I want!"

I'm on facebook. I have several young/teenage friends, mostly family and what not...
I find the kids that use text speak can't write a normal sentence. Period. They can't spell and have no sense of grammar at all. While I understand some of the cost benefits of writing text speak, I think it looks lazy and unintellegent. Especially when used in other mediums other than texting.

pure comic genius.