If it impedes understanding and causes to person you’re talking to take more time and/or effort to understand the message you are trying to convey then it is incorrect.
There is a small extra cognitive shift where the brain realizes those aren’t typos or random letters and are intended to represent those words, so it does add an impediment to understanding. If it became common for people to write them as ‘r’ and ‘u’ then over time that would become correct.
Just like if it was common for people to pronounce “gif” one way and then someone came along and said “Well the creator wants it pronounced another way” the correct response is “who gives a fuck? This is how the word is used now.” The ‘creator’ of the word “island” did not have an ‘s’ in it, but no one is arguing for it to be spelled “eyland”.
You re-read sentences much more often than you might suspect and it happens with all kinds of sentences, even grammatically correct ones. Garden-path sentences, for example “the old men the boat”, are specifically crafted to demonstrate this and they essentially are doing the same thing as using ‘r’ and ‘u’ as a substitute for words: they violate the Gricean maxim of manner and that one relies a lot on expectation.
However, one could make a case that in some situations, like a “how r u” via text, the replacement is ubiquitous and somewhat expected and doesn’t cause any impediment to understanding. It’s definitely a hinderance when a more verbose communication is expected. Might be a neat subject for a phonetic study, honestly.
And if u spel werds liek this and r stil understud is it kerect?
If it impedes understanding and causes to person you’re talking to take more time and/or effort to understand the message you are trying to convey then it is incorrect.
So r u saying that writing “are” and “you” that way is correct? Because I’m pretty sure it doesn’t impede understanding in the slightest.
There is a small extra cognitive shift where the brain realizes those aren’t typos or random letters and are intended to represent those words, so it does add an impediment to understanding. If it became common for people to write them as ‘r’ and ‘u’ then over time that would become correct.
Just like if it was common for people to pronounce “gif” one way and then someone came along and said “Well the creator wants it pronounced another way” the correct response is “who gives a fuck? This is how the word is used now.” The ‘creator’ of the word “island” did not have an ‘s’ in it, but no one is arguing for it to be spelled “eyland”.
You re-read sentences much more often than you might suspect and it happens with all kinds of sentences, even grammatically correct ones. Garden-path sentences, for example “the old men the boat”, are specifically crafted to demonstrate this and they essentially are doing the same thing as using ‘r’ and ‘u’ as a substitute for words: they violate the Gricean maxim of manner and that one relies a lot on expectation.
However, one could make a case that in some situations, like a “how r u” via text, the replacement is ubiquitous and somewhat expected and doesn’t cause any impediment to understanding. It’s definitely a hinderance when a more verbose communication is expected. Might be a neat subject for a phonetic study, honestly.
English changes over time, but you can’t just change spellings all willy-nilly without it looking weird. This happens pretty slowly.