In john Sutherland's "cn u txt?" he states that the dialect of texting is boring and unimaginative, his perspective is prescriptive, describing texters as "chimps with banana phones". He says that texting is leading written language to overtake spoken language but doesn't seem to think it will last very long.
in "2b or not 2b" David crystal, is descriptive in his opinions of text language, he believes that abbreviations and text type shortenings are not recent, they existed far before texting - in 1942 the dictionary of abbreviations was published by Eric partridge. He discusses what can be done with texting, such as examples of stories and poems written purely through the medium of texting. He feels that texts can be linguistically complex, people play with words and the way that they use them, he sees it as an evolution not a disaster.
In my opinion, people nowadays have enough sense to 'turn off' text speak when writing an exam or a letter, to me the ability to almost know two very different languages is an important change and ability, and being able to switch between them when you recognise it would be inappropriate is a positive thing. language is always changing, and change is always met with criticism, so whatever comes after texting will be met with as much backlash as texting has received, it's just how things adapt and improve.
