Due to the evolving world's increasingly minimalist perspective, it is only natural that punctuation also becomes less important and adjusts to differing norms.
Punctuation is not essential to communication. When people text, they compress complex sentences into three letters, so how does a period really help? Austen's poem, "On Punctuation," displays clarity without using punctuation by forgoing punctuation yet remaining easy to understand (Source B). In the modern world, conciseness is valued above all else. If people are to reduce the number of words they use, why not reduce the number of punctuation marks? People use punctuation marks too much and often incorrectly anyways, creating errors such as the comma splice. Twitter's 140 character limit forces users "to be concise and less flowery with language," and this limit applies not only to words but to punctuation marks as well. (Source F). If one's writing is clear and concise, then additional punctuation doesn't have a purpose. On the other hand, some people argue that the rules for punctuation form a long established tradition and changing it would be detrimental to communication. The truth is that there is no such tradition as punctuation is always changing. In his article on the evolving rules of communication, Hitchings states that punctuation marks "such as the pilcrow and the hedera enjoyed temporary places in common usage before fading from view," proving that punctuation comes and goes while English continues to thrive. (Source A).
The rules of Punctuation should be considered a form of government, and when these rules do not serve a purpose, "it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government."

No comments:
Post a Comment