Answer:
1. The author's argument is that evolutions in language such as "textspeak" do not ruin our language, rather, they are creative ways of incorporating symbols in technology.
2. The author claims that
a. Changes in language do not demonstrate decay, rather they indicate flexibility.
b. Emoticons are not just faces. They convey feelings.
c. The use of emoticons in language makes ideas to be better clarified. They ease the flow of conversations.
d. A symbol can communicate an entire message.
3. Reasons to support the claims
a. History shows that people have always complained about changes in language but time shows that these changes are not harmful but rather innovations.
b. Emoticons convey feelings of happiness, sadness, or anger during text communications. These symbols aid the flow of communication and clarifies ideas that would otherwise not be understood because the communicators cannot see each other physically.
Explanation:
In the article by Lauren Collister, she argues against the popular belief that emoticons are ruining language. She rather believes that these symbols are innovations that should be embraced by all because they ease the flow of communication. Dating back to A.D 63 when some Latin students began writing the French Language, a scholar tagged the language an "artificial language". Today, this is the language of an entire people.
Innovations in language are to be embraced not rejected.
I think it is personification, because personification means to make non living things sound real, and the lines 149-151 follow that. “The taut gut vibrating hummed and sang a swallow’s note.”
what is the story called?
