Debate Our side Internet Culture Enrichment of Traditional Language and Culture

Hello everyone! Before summarizing today's debate, I would like to share with you a very simple truth, that is, the more serious you take a new thing, the more you fear it and reject it, so you become timid and hesitant. Today, in the eyes of the other side, why is the Internet language so vulgar and repulsive, and so seriously affecting our traditional language and culture? Because they take the emergence of Internet language too seriously, thinking that a simple language phenomenon is an impact on the traditional language and culture which has been rooted in our blood for thousands of years. The root cause of all this comes from the misunderstanding of Internet language and the underestimation of the strong inclusiveness of traditional language and culture. We frankly admit that there are both dregs and essences of cyber language, so in the process, cyber language has both favorable and unfavorable aspects to traditional language and culture, so if you and I want to further explore the truth, the only way is to focus on a kind of judgment on the trend and the result, that is to say, from the cultural level, whether cyber language is inextricably linked with traditional language and culture and mutual fusion, or mutually exclusive with them. The only way to determine the trend and outcome is to look at the cultural level and see whether cyber language and traditional language and culture are inseparable and integrated or mutually exclusive. After understanding the opponent's psychological orientation and our only judgment standard, let's review the logic of the opponent's argument. The other side has been emphasizing the high rate of Internet language usage, trying to play the emotional card to tell us that traditional language and culture are in danger. But is this really the case? Please think about it calmly, we use Internet language more in a specific environment, especially on the Internet, while in life, the use of traditional language is absolutely dominant. This is just like our dialects, the use of which has certain limitations. It is naturally impossible for us to speak Henan dialect with a person from Xinjiang, and according to the logic of the other party's discerning friend, is he trying to tell us that Henan dialect is also an impact on the traditional language and culture? What is even more puzzling is that the opposing side argues for the impact with the irregularity of Internet language. This is a logical mistake of not seeing the forest for the trees. The other side has obviously ignored two points: firstly, the two have the same root and the same origin, and secondly, the inclusiveness of traditional language and culture. Language is the carrier of culture, and culture comes from life. We have never understood what the other side means by "norms". Is it set in stone or stuck in a rut? In fact, the standardization of language is a relative concept, and it will develop with the development of history. If we compare the vernacular language with the ancient Chinese language, does it mean that today's vernacular language has no norms at all? If we compare simplified Chinese characters with traditional Chinese characters, are today's simplified Chinese characters not standardized at all? In ancient times, there was hieroglyphics and now there is awkwardness; in ancient times, there was tongyong, and now there is weibo, all of which originated from traditional language and developed traditional language and culture. From oracle bone to literary language, from literary language to vernacular language, traditional language and culture have absorbed various kinds of essence, and thus become rich in substance. So why is it that what the ancients called richness in their behavior is now called shock? At a time when we are all focusing on innovation, the other discernment is openly repairing and secretly stealing shock for change. If I accidentally step on my opponent's foot on my way back from a game, he will tell me that it is a shock to his physical and mental health. But all innovations are changes, but not all changes in pine oil are shocks, and shocks show a kind of exclusion and incompatibility. Production technology has been innovative, we cheered, and today, we have made innovations in the text, but we want to deduct us a big hat impact on the traditional language language and culture. Is this really what we want to see? Are we to treat emerging cultures with nothing but denial? In that case, what difference is there between us and the time a century ago when we were stuck in our ways? I think what we should do is to beat the pulse of the times with a compatible attitude, using the network language for our traditional language and culture to write a new chapter, so that the network language is not only rich in language vocabulary, but also enriched the connotation of our traditional language and culture, so that the network language of the spontaneity of the uninhibited, for the traditional language to inject new blood, so that the traditional language and culture to renew new vigor!