Patsy Said:

Is this the evolution of the [written] english language?

We Answered:

in my personal opinion, abbreviations (like the ones you named; lol, gj, brb, etc.) are perfectly fine. they save time.

but what i absolutely cannot stand (and once again, this is just my opinion) is when people use "u" for "you", "r" for "are", "y" for "why", "2" for "two", "4" for "for", etc. it bothers me for the same reason that "your" in place "you're" bothers me. it's because it neglects the grammatical function of the word and focuses rather on the phonetics. and this is what causes ambiguity in languages.

it wouldn't be so bad actually, if they systematically always used "2" for 'to", "to" for "too", and then "too" for "two" or something like that. it would be confusing for the rest of us, but at least that person will have kept the pathways to the different meanings separate. and ultimately, that's what's really important.

Deborah Said:

Journalists and English teachers out there! How fast can you write in shorthand?

We Answered:

96w/min

Cindy Said:

Why do people complain if you use some shorthands at writing?

We Answered:

Because older people (and I am one) can't read the shorthand as quickly as the full version. It is really grating to us to have to translate the shorthand into "proper" English, and some words just can't be translated(for instance, what is "ans"?). I use sms regularly, and don't need to shorten my words to get the message across.

Viola Said:

Any body know the Sloan Duployan Shorthand system?

We Answered:

Knowing the sloan duployan shorthand system: up to standard idea

Floyd Said:

Writing shorthand for acts and scenes in essays: AIsii???

We Answered:

Oh, hopeless - it's Act 1 Sc 2.

Her way sounds like the name of my Auntie. But there is no point in antagonising her - do it how she tells you.

It can also be Act i Sc ii - either Roman or Arabic, not both.