:)

Jeez. I thought you were being facetious when you asked people what they thought of emoticon usage in the comments of the personal style poll a while back.

I GUESS that someone getting hung up on moderate emoticon usage can be considered part of their personal style. As in, their preferred style is anal retentive.

If it fills you with unspeakable rage, then yeah, go ahead and pass up that opportunity. You want what you want. But if it fills you with unspeakable rage, maybe you need to have a beer and relax.

Her letter is a masterful fusion of the transgressive sciolism and purblind snobbery only available to those who still suffer from the Lacanian gaze.

oh yeah...

o/

Now this really IS a first world "problem". (Must...not...insert...emoticon...here.)

Otherwise, what melmo said.

But after a few years of dating, and a few rounds with some Slick Ricks, minor sensibility mismatches should pale in comparison with serial cheating and undeclared STDs.

Yeah, problem is most of the good guys will have been snapped up loooong before she learns that lesson

It's a text. Jesus. Emoticons are perfectly appropriate for that medium.

I sort of understand where the letter writer is coming from. I get really turned off if I get an email from a woman and the grammar and spelling is horrible. However, a text is a whole other animal.

I think this is my favorite short column you've ever done, Amy. It's concise while still acknowledging the LW may have a legitimate complaint, and there was still room to call her out on her assumptions at the end. Also, as a fan of a well-deployed semicolon, I love the title.

On the topic at hand, I agree wholeheartedly with MonicaP. If it really turns you off, then it's not something you can overlook. But you might want to take a look at why it turns you off so much. I'm not a fan of emoticons, but I recognize their efficiency in expressing certain emotions in a medium where tone can get lost. So they can actually be a good expression of self in that they can take the place of words. Like you, LW, I am a fan of words and get seriously turned off by intellectual laziness, but I can think of two dozen better examples of that than emoticons. You dislike what you dislike, but get some fucking perspective.

This actually reminds me of a comment I read a while back that I think was either on here or on Amy's book on Amazon. The guy said that sarcasm was low humor and a mark of stupidity. Which means, of course, that, like Sheldon Cooper, he doesn't get it. Smarminess is also a turnoff, LW.

Enjoy your cats.

I'm guessing that the LW is kind of cute and enjoys playing the Queen of Hearts - Off with their heads!

I remember when I was that age and used to catch hell from girls for tucking in my shirt. That wasn't the fashion at the time and they couldn't tolerate the idea of being seen with a guy who didn't hew to their idea of what Mr. Perfect should dress like.

Despite the conventional wisdom, women are actually the shallower sex. Men may discriminate among women based on their physical attributes, but women tend to fixate on those as well + many more traits that are entirely superficial. Such as money, social status, family connections, ethnicity, dress, haircut, taste in music, car, job, school, shoes, preference in dogs vs cats, etc.. The list is endless. Look at the profiles that women place on dating sites.

The LW will probably continue in her silly beliefs until she gets baby fever and then 'settle' for some poor schmuck and forever feel cheated because she'd never met that guy that she 'deserved'.

Dear Amy,

I was on a date with a girl which went great. So well that she came to my apartment afterward for A DRINK. My apartment was clean except for a basket of finished laundry I had left. So while we were chatting, I took the time to fold my laundry. As usual, I tossed the socks in the bottom so I could dump them in my sock drawer. She asked me why I didn't fold the socks and I said I didn't do that. Next thing I know, she's out the door, calling me a lazy bastard. WTF?

A person wants what they want. At least the LW is self aware enought that she questions if she's overdoing it.

But she sounds so full of herself that I wonder if she has room for anyone else.

Look I love the written word as much as anyone and more than most. I shiver when I read something scribbled by an illiterate moron, and I cannot stand "leetspeak" (the use of numbers and symbols to fill in for some letters, commonly used by some of my more mentally handicapped geek bretheren).

But come now, not going on a date with someone because they expressed an emotion in a text or email with an emoticon is just plain silly.

Consider:

See you soon. :)

or

See you soon. I'm smiling.

Yeah I'm oversimplifying, but the emoticon does serve a practical shorthand purpose, and many phones and email systems now automatically turn the typed symbol into a little graphic image for what that symbol means. Not going on a date because of a smile is like not going on a date because he didn't think the crescendo of Beethoven's 9th in D represented a rapist unable to achieve release. (a thought actually posutlated by some idiot "feminist scholar", a number of years ago)

This lady needs to learn to relax. Have a beer, or a glass of wine, and find out if the guy's smile in person is genuine or not. Seems like that should matter more than the use of a colon next to parentheses.

At least he didn't invite her upstairs to view his Rod McKuen collection...

How does one major in love language? That sounds like a euphemism one would find in the "adult services" section of the classifieds (and do you speak Greek??).

Anyway, I'm an English MA, and I spent most of my time awake either writing or reading, so it's important to me that anyone I date have cracked a book in the last year, but I'm not going to scrub a date based on one emoticon.

Heh. I use emoticons when I text, email, and post! I guess that makes me intellectually lazy, too. But I don't care. It's not the BFD that the LW is making it. But as others have posted, she wants what she wants. She might have to deal just with what's left, though. There's picky, and then there's picky. Sometimes ya just gotta lighten up!

o.O

OFFSYDTBA (oh, for fuck's sake, you deserve to be alone).

I'm oversimplifying, but the emoticon does serve a practical shorthand purpose

Yep! They are great for establishing tone in a medium that it's otherwise difficult to convey. If a love of language is important to the LW, I'm sure she can analyze his emails/messages to see if he reads and writes at at least a 5th grade level. It's true that you like what you like. But passing someone up because their otherwise well-written, grammatically sound message has some emoticons thrown in seems just a little *too* picky.

I'm dating a graduate student in English Literature (specializing in poetry of the Victorian era), and he uses emoticons quite a bit. In cute texts to me. Not in his Master's thesis. As an editor for a literary journal, I am a firm believer in adapting ones colloquial style to the piece ay hand. So, if you're writing about Victorian poetry, a formal tone is necessary (unless you're a brilliant, transgressive Tom Wolfe sort, but let's leave that aside as anomalous). If you're writing a piece of fiction from the perspective of a Latino teenager, that tone would be ridiculous. And if you're sending your girlfriend a text saying, "See you later. You looked awesome today in class! Love the new sweater! :-) " . . . an emoticon is perfectly fine. Cute, even. In other words, get over yourself lady. As Charles Dickens never said.

I think LW shall be even more stringent:
If you want to be crazy, be crazy with a style!

Any guy who fails the Chicago manual of style for his correspondence shall be condemned to rot in hell full of unemployed editors.

I don't use emoticons, but I never thought of shunning someone who does.

"That might be okay for you, and I do know that you can't have somebody who fits a long list of characteristics to a T, but the kind of man I'm attracted to would not use them." So if Greg sent you a text with a smiley face you're done? If I were in his place and read this column you'd get smileys for the next few days our of sheer noodgeness (adjective form of noodge). But to each their own.

My first question would be is he using a smart phone or an old school phone. If he's old school then she has no leg to stand on. I never texted till I got a modern phone. So if you are getting any texts be appreciative he's putting in the effort.

The second though would be what he does for a living. If he has an intellectually stimulating job he may want a break from it during the day. He may also just think it's cute.

If you want the Homer (not Simpson) and Shakespeare in every email GTFOYS.

>> but the kind of man I'm attracted to would not use them.

How do you know that? I'm not aware of any research that has established a reliable psychological profile for emoticon users. And Gregg has never used an emoticon? Ever??

Here's the thing, an individual who is mature and has some self confidence typically isn't so concerned to make every statement an 'expression of self'. If they use an emoticon, it's not because they're trying to convey some deep insight on their identity and worldview. It's just a sort of casual annotation to convey the sense of a statement.

That's why the LW's complaint seems so childish. She's putting far too much significance into something that doesn't even indicate what she assumes it to indicate.

Ahh, imaginary boyfriends....
Make them to be whatever you'd like!

What Ana said.
Also, this chick is 24 -- so what Amy said. She can live a little longer and then re-scramble her priorities...there will (hopefully, for her) come a day where she realizes that the man of her dreams doesn't have to be perfect right down to communicating the precise way she's being educated (or, fine, the way she was raised, or wherever she's getting this standard).

It's fine to care about your date's intellect and expression (on the first date, mind you), which LW states are her concerns, but it's also good to consider the zillions of ways there now are to communicate and maybe get a little more flexible. Or, like someone said, she can enjoy her cats' lack of communication skills.

Of course, most of the people I know and am friends with are writers, highly literate, and in the business of communication in some way.

It occurs to me that it might be an generation thing...most of my friends are writers and editors as well. And most (if recent texts I've gotten are any indication) use emoticons. They're also all in their early to mid 20s...so maybe emoticons are just the norm for many in that age group? If that's the case, LW (age 24) is SOL.

Granted, I have my own silly deal-breakers (Self-identifying as religious. Using "your" and "you're" incorrectly several times in the same e-mail. Watching sports regularly.) Shallow, yes. But, if the LW is willing to shrink her dating pool to find the right guy, more power to her.

FWIW, first message my boyfriend ever sent me had this in it:

^_^

he is a serene kitty cat!

Welcome to the 21st century!

this is a penis - 8=======D

Asians tend to use the emoticon ^_^ because they tend to smile with their lips closed. "We are smile with our eyes!" my students from Japan and Korea tell me.

How important is it that personal style and sensibilities match in a relationship?

I truly think this LW left out one major part of her question: To whom. To herself? To Amy? To the huddled masses? So, if Amy says it's not that important, it will suddenly become not that important to the LW as well? I believe LW is the only one who can truly answer it. It's a personal choice, not a matter of etiquette.

If she believes so strongly that emoticons are a deal-breaker for her (the "epitome"? REALLY?) then they are and she needn't ask.

So why is she asking? Does she need/want validation that her very narrow POV is OK? Amy didn't give it to her.

As an oldster, I am horrified by such things as:

"Bob gave that to Sally and I"
"I can only find 6 examples and you want 7."
"I am really enamored by big diamonds."
"I didn't have the sweet potatoes the recipe called for, so I substituted them with russets"
And apostrophes before every SINGLE "s"? PLEASE. (jeez, i dunno if i should put an apostrophe there, so... i'd better just in case)

Those are far more heinous to me than emoticons because we, as a general population, are getting sloppier with our grammar/spelling/syntax. Just a few weeks ago, I wrote to the editor of our city's newspaper because a secondary headline above the fold on the second section said: "An outbreak of the insects are defoliating our forests." That's a pretty basic mistake to get by both the writer and the editor.

The reason I don't mind emoticons so much is that in this day and age, text messages are usually very short, as few words as possible, and we all know the written word can be easily misunderstood since there is no facial expression, no body language, no intonation to help with the translation. A simple wink emoticon will help someone understand that the four word text they just received was teasing, not mean.

I agree with flydye: I hope she enjoys her cats.

The LW sounds like your typical narcissistic 24 year old girl. Every other guy that she meets is trying to fuck her and so she's come to the conclusion that she can weed them out based on whether they use emoticons. Whatever. It could be that they drive a foreign car, or have long hair, likes the bands she likes, voted for Barack Obama, ... It doesn't matter. She's just playing her hand and trying to determine who she'll let into her pants. Unless she's got something to offer, she's going to be able to play this game for another three of four years and then will be hopping on any guy who'll give her the time of day.

Get over yourself LW. You're going to need a man who'll be able to support you with your worthless lit degree. Forget the emoticons. Look for a nice stable beta who'll put up with your pretentious BS. You are a diminish commodity.

SoFar. I am in agreement with you. I think it is primarily a generational thing. I have never been around a man in my age group that sent me anything with an emoticon.
My children are in their 20's and my son uses them more than my daughter. He is highly intelligent and literate. He was a professional musician for a while, but is now a well paid computer geek.

He has had long distance girlfriends without ready access to a computer and he communicates with them mostly by text.

I think sarcastic people who joke a lot learn to use them while texting.
You can lose a lot of friends by being taken too seriously.

I have never met anyone with only "one" hang up(like the emoticon thing) I would be interested to hear what other things this young woman thinks are deal breakers, once she actually meets a guy.

In my experience, little things like this are a harbinger of a whole lot of hypersensitivity to come. Much of which could make a life with her simply unendurable for an ordinary mortal man.

"Bob gave that to Sally and I"
"I can only find 6 examples and you want 7."
"I am really enamored by big diamonds."
"I didn't have the sweet potatoes the recipe called for, so I substituted them with russets"
And apostrophes before every SINGLE "s"? PLEASE. (jeez, i dunno if i should put an apostrophe there, so... i'd better just in case)

@Cathyem -- these never fail to hurt my nerves too! i'm a freelance editor and people/companies pay me to help them not write this way; however, if i were as picky as LW, i wouldn't have any friends, a husband, relatives (most of whom have master's degrees)...again there's a difference between noticing/caring about such things and making relationship choices based upon them.

Bob gave that to Sally and I

Hearing someone saying "Between you and I" makes me actually, physically shudder sometimes. I think it's because people think it sounds proper to use "I" instead of "me." I blame elementary school teachers who browbeat kids for using "me" as a subject without telling them it is proper to use it in a prepositional phrase. I had some like that.

Rounding out my top three are erroneous apostrophes and using "less" instead of "fewer." A radio station here in Nashville has a slogan that says "More music, less commercials." I cringe every time.

That said, if using one of those hot-button mistakes was an every-now-and-again quirk, I'd probably just get over it. If it was indicative of a larger problem with the English language, I don't know that I could. Hearing and reading those things can actually make me lose focus on what's being said/written. So I'd advise the LW to give guys a chance and see if it's something that will make her Hulk out or if becomes less of a big deal as she gets to know the guy. If it's the former, there's nothing wrong with that, she just has to be prepared to accept the consequences. She can't dismiss guys over things like emoticons and still expect to be able to find hordes of "suitable" men.

Despite the conventional wisdom, women are actually the shallower sex. Men may discriminate among women based on their physical attributes, but women tend to fixate on those as well + many more traits that are entirely superficial. Such as money, social status, family connections, ethnicity, dress, haircut, taste in music, car, job, school, shoes, preference in dogs vs cats, etc.. The list is endless. Look at the profiles that women place on dating sites.

Eh. I think both genders are full of shit when it comes to what they want.

Men start with someone fun, attractive and low maintenance and end up with this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw1KTlyqoSM

And women...it's not different. Just different criteria.

Eh. I think both genders are full of shit when it comes to what they want. ... And women...it's not different. Just different criteria.

Yes. And both genders see what the other wants as shallow because it's not what evolution bred them to want.

Modern times have changed things environmentally, but not from the standpoint of what men and women want. There's no good reason for men to prefer young women when science can help 45-year-olds get pregnant, and there's no reason for women to prefer men with good salaries when they can make those salaries themselves, but they still do.

Of course, men and women want some of the same things in a partner, too, such as loyalty and honesty. But let's face it: If a guy can get those things in an attractive woman, he's not going to hit on the ugly chick to prove how open-minded he is. And if a woman can get those things in a financially stable man, she's not going to shack up with Scratchy, the homeless guy who "lived" in front of my building.

After years of flame wars, Ihave learned to embrace emoticons. People use facial expression cues to catch the tone of messages, and emails can often be taken the wrong way because of it. Emoticons give a lighter, goofier tone.

>> And women...it's not different. Just different criteria.

My point is that there are so many more criteria for women. Sure men have some superficial preferences but almost all of women's preferences concern superficial traits that are typically just proxies for money and social status.

I've got teenaged daughters, so I see this first hand. The way that they and their friends evaluate young men is a real eye opener. I honestly think that we, as a society, go to such great lengths to deny this because if it were acknowledged it would destroy the institution of marriage. So we've spun this whole romantic narrative about the way that women think, but it's largely untrue. The truth is kind of ugly.

Could be.

I have this theory that guys start out by just wanting a girl with big hooters and as they get older, the list gets more and more detailed, while women start with this huge laundry list (starting with NO EMOTICONS) and generally winnows itself down to 'Can I bring him to dinner with mother without humiliating myself and does his sperm work?'

Of course, you get the odd bird who refuses to winnow her list at all and she breeds cats or writes blogs.

Granted, this is a theory in work...

>> Like guys are rushing to date the homely girls, KarlST.

Obviously not and girls aren't rushing to date homely guys.

I guess that I'm not making my point very clearly so let me pose this question.

Which sex uses a greater number of criteria to determine attractiveness and what proportion of these criteria concern characteristics that derive from popular fashion, status, money, and group affiliation?

Here's another one. Which sex is more likely to end a relationship because of changes popular fashion, status, money, and group affiliation?

Simpler way of saying the same thing:

How many guys are going to not date a girl if she texts him an emotie?

Granted, some guys get ultra finiky but I'm betting it has more to do with 'evolutionary' committment issues then whether he really cares if she smells like soup.

Like guys are rushing to date the homely girls, KarlST.

Isn't that his point? That guys have A criteria: Is she hot y/n?

If no? next! (I don't think it's quite that simple. But I recall the disgust of one girl who asked if we'd marry a stupid girl if she was beautiful and disliked our {male} answer. Granted we were young...)

Meanwhile I bet Emotie girl, if asked, probably has a hell of a lot of issues with slang, poor spelling, type of car, fashion sense, hair sense, upward economic mobility on TOP of his attractiveness.

"Here's another one. Which sex is more likely to end a relationship because of changes popular fashion, status, money, and group affiliation?"

I think that men are more likely to end a relationship if they themselves are faithful, and the wife is cheating, OR if they have a dead sexual relationship within the marriage, and are ethical enough to want to divorce rather than having an affair.

I think women are inclined to end a marriage for those same reasons, and also a whole host of other ones, some of which are financial, social status things, and some that are just petulance.
For example, my BIL's wife wanted a divorce,(and got one) because my brother in law would not bend to her wishes to quit his very good job and move 2000 miles to be closer to her parents. She thought after the divorce, she could just waltz off with the kids and his only duty would be to send them all most of his pay check. Needless to say, the state courts didn't see it that way, and she is stuck there, with the kids, until the youngest turns 18.

In retaliation, she now won't even allow him on the property when he comes to pick up the kids.

Well, I'm as much of a grammar nazi as the next person. My texts are almost always grammatically correct including punctuation. And I consider clear, concise, well written communication in any form a turn-on.

But for heaven's sake LW, lighten up. Emoticons exist because it's hard to convey nuances in text. They were around a long time before text messaging. I use them all the time.

I agree with those saying she is probably in a position to be very picky at the moment. I'm corresponding with a woman 10 years younger than me who ends almost every sentence she writes with multiple exclamation marks!!! which grates on me a bit. But I recognise it as a way of trying to add colour and personality to a sterile medium. Not everyone is Shakespeare.

Also, well, she's hot :)

Asians tend to use the emoticon ^_^ because they tend to smile with their lips closed. "We are smile with our eyes!" my students from Japan and Korea tell me.

Yep! He says he picked that emoticon up in Japan and thought it was cute. I agree.

My children are in their 20's and my son uses them more than my daughter. He is highly intelligent and literate.

Exactly. Maybe she finds emoticons silly and unattractive, but the idea that they reflect a person's education level and love of language is ridiculous hipster b.s. I, for whatever reason, find guys who wear sports jerseys when they're watching the game to be unattractive -- but I'd never be so arrogant as to assume that they're uneducated jocks who don't read.

Then again, if a hatred of emoticons is important to her in a partner, it's better that she dates only those who don't use emoticons.

ooops meant to write "when they're NOT even watching the game" in the above post.

and see the emoticon as the epitome of intellectual laziness and bad expression of self.

Someone has already picked on the "majoring in love language" bit, so I will point out that "and bad expression of self" makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

That should be "an emoticon" not "the emoticon" too. There are more than one of them.

I wouldn't normally bother, I got sick of being a grammar and spelling pedant years ago. As long as someone is reasonably clear I'm happy. But the LW may want to go back to college for a refresher course.

I think that men are more likely to end a relationship if they themselves are faithful, and the wife is cheating, OR if they have a dead sexual relationship within the marriage, and are ethical enough to want to divorce rather than having an affair.

I'm not so in love with my gender to ignore that a small but significant number would leave their spouses if they could 'trade up'.

"but the idea that they reflect a person's education level and love of language is ridiculous hipster b.s."

"Ridiculous hipster BS" I wish I could have said it so succinctly.

I think literature majors in general need to watch themselves. If I recall correctly, back in the good old days, my more brainwashed lit professors were fond of making the class examine every phrase, and parse every sentence, period and comma for the "underlying meaning".

More often than not, the "meaning" only existed in some post modernist literary critic's imagination (or Masters thesis)

To paraphrase, the thoroughly discredited Freud, "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" and an emoticon is just a convenience.

"I'm not so in love with my gender to ignore that a small but significant number would leave their spouses if they could 'trade up'."

Agreed. Certain personality types are always looking to 'trade up', whether they be a man or a woman. With a little due diligence, most of these people can be spotted in advance, as their lack of ethics, and kindness spills over into other areas of their behavior.

LW - get over yourself and go get your self a Battery operated boyfriend, be sure you have plenty of batteries so the "BOB" lives up to your standards. %o)

LW: How important is it that personal style and sensibilities match in a relationship?

I'd recommend looking at the big picture. There will likely always be some specific things that you don't like about someone but, overall, they may be a great person.

How about trying this: suspend judgment for a while and go on dates with guys, even if they offend your sensibilities with a :) or :( . If every one of them turns out to be uninteresting then you can return to screening out guys based on their émoticonage. But you just might end up meeting a cool guy.

It's funny how picky people can be about certain things. I'm reminded of a woman (in her late forties) I met online about five years ago. She asked me if I wore t-shirts. I thought it was a rather odd question but I told her yes. She said she couldn't deal with a man who wore t-shirts in public. Or even any kind of crew-neck shirt. Real men, she memorably said, wear shirts with collars.

"Enjoy your cats." Crunch!

"this is a penis - 8=======D "

And this one is white: 8=D

And this is a guy with a ball cap drooling at you:
d8>P~~~~

And this is, well, guess: (.)(.)

That's right. Eyes!

And some special characters let you do lots more, but you get the idea. It's not like nobody has the time to figure this out.

About the construction 'Jane had lunch with John and I'. It's exactly what you say NumberSix - being continuously told 'John and me is never correct'. My friend who's a philologist says the phenomenan is called overcompensation.

It's a losing battle.

@NumberSix and AntoniaB --

the 'Jane had lunch with John and I' thing is what we in the linguistics world call 'hyper-correction.' 'Overcompensation' works; never heard it -- but it has bothered me for eeons, hearing people speak like this.

There's a great line at the end of Catcher in the Rye in which Holden's teacher says something to the effect of, "You may pick up just enough education to hate people who say, 'It's a secret between she and I.' "
True and hilarious; however, I agree that it is a losing battle. Except with we few language nerds.

Please allow me to sign up as a language nerd. My husband just finished his Master's Degree and often uses the incorrect "I" construction. He has asked me to gently remind him of the correct construction when he slips. I said "You just try and stop me!"

(NO, I didn't!)

There's word afoot that colloquial (incorrect) constructions, such as the two mentioned above, actually come to be considered grammatically correct with continued usage. You can find the "try and" construction in many works of literature, including Dickens, Bram Stoker, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Jane Austen... and even Bob Dylan's "Try and Catch the Wind". You can argue that the authors were using the constructions, knowing they were incorrect, because that's what their characters would say... but it nonetheless grates on my ear. Languages DO evolve and this is what evolution looks like. This true for texting and email as well. Like the LW, I don't care to see the language (d)evolve into something unrecognizable, but I wouldn't limit my dating pool because of it. My husband is a wonderful person and I am lucky to have him in my life. There were no text messages when we met, so emoticons were not on the table. If, on our first encounter, he had used an incorrect construction and I had scratched his name off my list of possibilities because of it, I would have missed out on many years of happiness and peace.

By the way, there is a website that language nerds should check out: PainintheEnglish.com

Fascinating! I could read for hours. Oh wait, I HAVE READ for hours!

Most public schools stopped enforcing more than minimal writing standards in the early 70's, along with the teaching of grammar and composition. It was deemed too oppressive (i.e. hard ). So now we have a very large population of people who have never learned to write properly.

Maybe it's partially related to careers. I work for a tech company, I was a computer science major, and when I use IM (instant message), I use emoticoms. Occasionally in a casual e-mail, I might use an emoticom. I normally use only :) or :( depending on the emotion. It's a way of sounding friendly, and it's a normal way to communicate among my friends and co-workers. I read a lot and think that I'm quite literate.

Ms. Alkon, why are you trying so hard to force your opionion on a good number of people who don't agree with you? This is the third post where you've made on the exact same point. Maybe you consider it rude or dumb. We get it. We don't agree. I don't think Appeals to 'authority' (Greg?) are going to change anyone's mind.

I'm much more offended by leet speak and texting abbreviations then I am by the occassional emoticon, so I'll agree with you that far. I want to scream at my daughters when I see a 'u' instead of a 'you' in their IMs to me

I take their IMing as an oppotunity to correct their spelling and grammar, what little I know.

A half a dozen retorts came to mind, but the one that struck the truest was this: When the hostess asks you to leave, the party is over...at least for you.

Sorry for causing a scene and enjoy the conversation.

I shall miss conversing with almost all of you. LS, Spartee and NumberSix in particular.

Emoticons are glyphs. Glyphs have been used in writing for centuries as have stylized signatures to ornament and signify the sense and significance of written works. The argument against emoticons seems to boil down to the complaint that peons are using them. If some well regarded writer or lit critic started using emoticons, the Lit crowd would be criticizing people for not using them.

Well certainly not now. But what if they'd become fashionable in those circles back in the 90's when the internet was becoming popular? At that point they were being used by an emerging elite of technophiles. It's not implausible that some Lit authority could have endorsed their adaptation for casual writing. The fact that the hadn't probably has more to do with the fact that writers were typically very slow to pick up on the web. They were too busy complaining that writing should never be read on a monitor. Only paper conveyed the soul of a work.

George, I think you have hit on the essence of it. As others on this thread have suggested, emoticon use is nothing more than a sign that you are probably, under 30, (a young techie) and grew up texting on a standard phone OR if you are older, that you closely associate with young techies, and have picked up the habit yourself.

It seems to be somewhat cultural, as it appears ubiquitous among Asians.

You can assign all sorts of meaning to it if you are looking for ways to divide the world into "us" (the high brow cultured patricians) and "them" (the low brow nerds who in addition to their use of emoticons, probably make all sorts of undeserved money without having a masters degree in English lit) Oh, the injustice of it all!

BUT at least we can show our social superiority by using "real" English, even if we don't understand that "bad expression of self" is extremely poor grammar, and makes no sense. :-)(sarcasm intended)

Amy your entire argument amounts to an appeal to authority. Marlin Brando !?!?

:P

LOL

>> It seems to be somewhat cultural, as it appears ubiquitous among Asians.

Perhaps because they're acquainted w/ ideographic writing.

"On the contrary, my assistant, who is a writer, and who just crested 30, thinks emoticon use is terribly dumb, and I have a number of friends in their 20s who also do not use them, and I would guess, probably for the same reason."

Why people would have any thoughts at all about emoticons, and what they "may" signify about another person's education or personality, is what continues to amaze me.

There must be a huge number of people needing to assign a judgement of "smart" or "dumb" to something they don't personally do, (or won't admit to doing) if it enables them to envision themselves as either more sophisticated or educated than the peons.

Amy. you might consider that when you ask someone, if they agree with you that emoticon use is "dumb", if you have not possibly framed the question in such a way or such a tone of voice, to get the answer that you are looking for, i.e. "agreement" rather than an objective opinion.

I think an actual research study might have quite a different result than anecdotal evidence.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>> Marlon Brando contrary ...

ಠ_ಠ

My point is that no one cares about what Marlon Brando's opinion might have been on emoticons.

It's not surprising that people who self consciously regard themselves as 'literate' ( as opposed to?) won't use emoticons.

I have a niece who likes to put her pinky out when she drinks from a glass or cup. Because she wants to be lady-like and purportedly that's what ladies do. But it's cute because she's six. Otherwise it would just be an annoying affectation.

According to Scott McDowell, writing for productivity and ideas blog:

There’s a negativity bias to email – at the neural level. In other words, if an email’s content is neutral, we assume the tone is negative. In face-to-face conversation, the subject matter and its emotional content is enhanced by tone of voice, facial expressions, and nonverbal cues. Not so with digital communication.

One suggestion he makes to deal with this problem:

3. Consider emoticons. Until keyboards can actually perceive the emotional content of our digital messages (not so far off!), emoticons may be the simplest method of clarifying tone. I've had to let go of my own perception that emoticons are silly. They may currently be our best tool for elevating the emotional clarity of digital messages.

More first world problems!

The self-styled literati (who may not actually be professional writers) should feel free to look down their noses at those who use emoticons to more clearly communicate the tone of email and text messages. Meanwhile, the rest of us will cheerfully ignore the painfully petty literati while we go about enjoying our emoticon-filled lives. Got it!

LW should dump the guy and move on. She'd be doing him a favor since he can do better. XD

I like the ongoing joke that if a woman does not drop some of her criteria, she will end up with "cats" or writing "blogs."

So what? Maybe she doesn't need a cat to keep her company. Being single rocks.

@cathyem, thanks for the Pain in the English website - awesome! ;) emoticon intended!

I am never sure about the definition of irony, but being chided on emoticon etiquette by a reader known as "lol cats" may be close.

I was once mystified by the apparent idiocy of ee cummings, whose apparent claim to fame was a broken Shift key.

Custom is a strange thing. Sometimes it's trivial. At other times, it leads to the legal segregation of races, colors or creeds.

Does anyone remember the Seinfeld episode where Elaine broke up with one of her many boyfriends because he didn't use an exclamation point? I thought it was so funny, but true to life, by showing how people can get annoyed with such picayune, minor things...

For instance...I hate the cliche "man's man"...it always puts a picture in my mind of some beer-swilling guy chasing Bambi with his double-aught six...but that's just me...

Rachel, shouldn't that be "except with US few language nerds"? :) :) :)
Sorry, the spirit of the discussion compelled me to.

O_O
GUESS I'M INSIPID YOU GUYZ.

:D

Thank you for any other informative website. The place else could I get that type of information written in such a perfect means? I have a project that I am just now operating on, and I've been at the glance out for such info.