Do you think it would make much of a difference in what people said to each other, if the only way we could communicate was in writing?

With the ubiquity and popularity of e-mail, blogs, Twitter, Fluther, Facebook etc., I communicate much more in writing than orally. I’m generally in the camp that these media have rendered writing skills to a commodity.

I actually don’t know what my opinion is at this time on exactly how we will be affected. There are any number of studies that indicate some negative consequences to our current communication methods, but I can also think of many positive effects. It’s much easier to be confrontational in writing; it’s much easier to “lie” in writing (for some); it’s much easier to create an image of yourself in any particular light in writing.

Welcome to Fluther, @stoker, and I hope I’ve written something that makes sense to you.

Yes. I get the feeling people take more time in writing/emailing/texting to choose how they say what they think or feel than the time it takes to blurt out… “you stupid bitch!” or whatever.

Absolutely, because when you really have something to say, especially when angry you can be pissed and say whatever you want, then upon revising, you get a more clear perspective and can take out all the curse words.

And that my freinds, makes me feel better!

I think it’s definitely easier for me to get out what I’m saying in a professional matter if I am writing/typing it. Also I feel that people have a feeling that they can say whatever they want in text but to say it in person would be a different story. So yes, I feel it would be different if our only form of communication was through text. I like having a voice! :)

I do like typing though… :P

There would be a lot more misunderstandings. Written communication seems stronger than verbal, which can be softened by facial expressions ans body language.

I don’t know that we’d say less.. probably because I tend to be much more lengthy when I’m writing then speaking, but that’s just me.

Maybe it would give us more of a chance to revise our words. Writing appears more permament once it’s sent out, so being more careful with what you write is normal. But if someone’s angry enough, they may go and send the writing without much thought, much as people say things before thinking through…

We’d have to develop a more complex writing system, because as efficient and effective as the written word is, it often needs someone to put to it inflection and emphasis at appropriate points. Without ever having heard, or spoken, that layer is gone from what can be communicated.

Italicization and CAPITALIZATION and smaller fonts and bolding would probably become used more and more, in an attempt to bring that back.
Different spacings, more punctuation, etc, as well.

We wouldn’t be able to interrupt each other, because we’d all have all the time we wanted to write out our complete thoughts. In that way I find it very nice.

I’m going to get a bit technical here now… but since it’s writing as communicating that gets rid of all forms of communication, not just talking. Pictures, artwork, dance, body language, math—if numbers aren’t considered writing—etc.
Things like smiling and crying would be ineffective. We’d have to rely entirely on : ) and :.(

Only getting one medium of expression when we all use well more than one… it would be limiting. Maybe not as much as using a method that isn’t as widely used, but still very limiting to have it as the only option.
(Even on Fluther, a written question-and-answer site, purely words aren’t used, we get external links for when words are inadequate, ineffective, not as good.)

I’m guessing people would adjust, but it’d be a difficult adjustment at first.

@marinelife The other side of that thought is that with writing we can resolve arguments over what was actually said. So if we wanted to we could find agreement.

@DancingMind: You just taught me how to cry!!!

I believe so. Inflection is important with communication, and while fonts can help a bit I believe we’d see the death of subtlties in things like: sarcasm, impersonation, mixed emotions, and degrees of genuine enthusiams/disgust.

@picante Thanks. A few follow-up questions re your reply…

”...easier to be confrontational”- Do you think people edit some or all of the negative stuff out and, if so, why?

”...easier to lie”- Do you think people worry much about things being “in writing”?

”...create an image”- Do you think someone’s writing reveals much about them, or that other people assume much based on it?

@Neizyestnaya Thanks. A follow-up question re your reference to “sarcasm”... other than humor, how do you think sarcasm benefits communication?

@Neizvestnaya: yayy ; )

…ooh wink! ahah…

Yes , I think many people would not hold back if they would write what they have to say and send it on without changing their minds .
Fear sometimes keeps us from confronting someone face to face .

Good morning, Stoker. In response to your questions to me—I think we can hide behind our written words in ways that we simply can’t in talking face-to-face. We can be “confrontational” by exhibiting more bravado than we would in person (at least I think that’s the case). In writing, we can be as strong or as weak as our command of the written word allows us to be.

People should worry about things being in writing, but I’ve found that any time I’ve challenged someone around something they wrote that seemed to contradict reality, the defense is that “it was a joke” or “it was simply a work of fiction.” Here on Fluther, as an example, other than following the rules established for the community, there is no accountability for actions. I would contrast this “written world” of Fluther with a courtroom, as an extreme example, a church or a community gathering, as milder examples—places where I believe one is held more accountable for being true to one’s word.

I do believe that writing, just like the spoken word, reveals a great deal about a person. But those who have a greater command of the written word can use this skill for good or evil—again, no different from the spoken word.

Bottom line for me—language, whether written, spoken, signed or telepathically transmitted, has the power to create images that can demonstrate profound truth or total nonsense, and everything in between. Words are useful tools, destructive weapons and beautiful works of art. Ain’t it swell ;-)

Absolutely. If you are old enough to remember way back when we had no computers or text messaging. Our only long distance communication was with a landline phone call or a hand written letter.

The written word, on paper, has different meaning, rather than any other form of communication. To write a letter, makes a person think, before the words are written. Computer communication is cold, if you think about it.

A good example are hand-written love letters. The recepient of a love letter can just “feel” the words and their meaning, from the writer. Many a love letter has tear stains on the paper, Not so, with a text message.

@stoker: I don’t understand what you’re asking. I don’t think I wrote anything about sarcasm in this post. Personally, I happen to love sarcasm but between strangers then it’s tough to pick up on in written communiques unless pointed out with something like, heh or snicker-snicker, etc.