Please don’t let them quote me.

Let’s say I gave a very sensible talk about linguistics. And in this very sensible talk, I said that there was a possibility that the spelling of some English words might change as a result of the Internet. And just for fun, let’s say I’m David Crystal. (Oh, come on. Flatter me.)

Anyhow, here’s how the article would pan out once it hit the Sydney Morning Herald.

Internet spells death of English

Traditional spellings could be killed off by the internet within a few decades, a language expert has claimed.

Aaaaugh! Not the spellings!

The advent of blogs and chatrooms meant that for the first time in centuries printed words were widely distributed without having been edited or proofread, said David Crystal, of the University of Wales in Bangor.

As a result, writers could spell words differently and their versions could enter common usage and become accepted by children.

Aaaaugh! Not the children! Won’t someone please, et cetera!

But notice that writers put the most calamitous material at the top of the article. And then by the end of the article, they’ve backed off of all the scary claims, and the whole thing becomes almost sensible.

Professor Crystal told the conference of the International English Language Testing System the internet would not lead to a complete breakdown in spelling rules.

”All that will happen is that one set of conventions will replace another set of conventions,” he said.

But by then, it’s too late because everyone has already fled the house screaming, or are writing angry letters to editors about Kids These Days.

If this article had been about continental drift, the headline would have been ‘Doomed Continents to Collide’.

My advice: When it comes to news articles about language, don’t read headlines if you can help it. They’re written by amphetmine-addled caffeine junkies. Instead, start reading about halfway down.