Bare vexed

I disagree with Isabelle Kerr, the language the youth use is for specific reasons and displays creativity. They use slang because it excludes other people and is used in personal relationships.

She claims to be a part of the young generation when she is in fact older than the people that use these words. Isabelle Kerr is a hypocrite because when she was younger she most likely used slang and spelled words differently without using proper English.

She also states Shakespeare would be turning in his grave, but Shakespeare himself was very creative with language and invented his own words which was considered genius among his peers and future generations still appreciate his work. He would be proud of this creativity. Shakespeare alone created 1700 common words by changing nouns into verbs, changing verbs into adjectives, connecting words never before used together, adding prefixes and suffixes, and just making up new words completely such as addiction, champion, cold-blooded and rant. It is very ignorant for her to disrespect the younger generations creativity just because she isn’t intelligent enough to understand it.

She also thinks younger people talk this way all the time however it is just with friends they still know how and when to talk standard English. The language the youth use represents their culture, their background and where they are from, who is she to disrespect this.

“Regardless the future of the English language looks bleak” Isabelle Kerr states but I strongly disagree. As the times change obviously the language naturally develops as well, with new inventions and technology comes new phrases and sayings that young people will use while others will be oblivious. For instance ‘Selfie’, this is a new word created because of technology, it describes the act of taking a photo of themselves so the word ‘Selfie’ follows on from that quite logically. Young people also refer to exciting and enjoyable things as ‘live’ this also makes perfect sense as they are describing their enjoyment is causing them to feel full of life. Conversely if something is boring or dull it would be referred to as ‘dead’.

I find it ironic how she quotes people from twitter, which is a platform that only allows you to use 140 characters which encourages people to become creative with language. Yet she later states her anger at people who use abbreviations such as ‘srsly’ instead of writing the whole word, which would waste characters on twitter. Twitter is where ‘smh’ originated, it stands for ‘shake my head’ a term used to express disappointment, ‘smh’ allows you to express those feelings without taking up a lot of space, it is a necessity in the world of twitter.

To summarise I have explained why I strongly disagree with Isabelle Kerr and the pointless argument she puts forward. I see creativity and expressive language used by young people, I don’t see disrespect and stupidity as she continuously states. Lastly I believe Shakespeare himself would be proud of this language that they use.