Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t say spoke for email, texts or chats. I would say communicated or checked or similar.

That’s a bulky conversation.

You speaking with a neighbor in person about Betty and her ailing husband.

Yeah, so Betty texted that Phil is going to be in the hospital for a while. She communicated that he’s going to be okay but it’s going to be a long road. I asked if she needed anything and she responded with milk and bread. She also communicated that her brother in law will be visiting and parking in her driveway.
***
That would take too much thought. I’m going with “said” and not worrying about it.

Just say, "we emailed: or "we texted,"

I wouldn’t say spoke for email, texts or chats. I would say communicated or checked or similar.

Anonymous wrote:I've learned to say: I texted with Mary. Or emailed with Mary., to avoid confusion. Actually speaking to someone can make a difference in terms of depth of understanding of a situation or issue. It also implies an actual conversation. Too many times things are misconstrued or not that clear via text and to a lesser degree with email.

Would you then say something like “she said” or does that imply a spoken conversation? Or would you always say “she typed” or “she also texted,” etc?

I've learned to say: I texted with Mary. Or emailed with Mary., to avoid confusion. Actually speaking to someone can make a difference in terms of depth of understanding of a situation or issue. It also implies an actual conversation. Too many times things are misconstrued or not that clear via text and to a lesser degree with email.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fine unless you're in a deposition or something.

Yeah, it only matters if there's some specific context. Like, Mary was kidnapped and you say you "spoke" to her. It's important to know if that was voice or text because the kidnapper could have been texting on her phone.

But if it's planning a group dinner and you say "I spoke to Mary and she said Saturday was fine" then I don't care if you did that over text.

I agree with the kidnapping vs dinner plans dissection.

DCUM does not do context. Every communication is vitally important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't use spoke unless it was verbal.

How about sign language?

Some sign language involves verbal, some not.

Do you use sign language? Or were you just being a pedantic glass bowl?

If we are going to be pedantic about the meaning of spoke, we should be pedantic about verbal.

Verbal means in words. Including written words. Refer to the Verbal part of the GRE,

So, email, being written words, is verbal communication. Therefore, we can use "spoke with." However, ASL is right out not being written or spoken.

Speak implies speaking. Say texted or emailed or sent smoke signals.

That said, I wouldn’t care. I can’t imagine anyone would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't use spoke unless it was verbal.

How about sign language?

Some sign language involves verbal, some not.

Do you use sign language? Or were you just being a pedantic glass bowl?

If we are going to be pedantic about the meaning of spoke, we should be pedantic about verbal.

Verbal means in words. Including written words. Refer to the Verbal part of the GRE,

Anonymous wrote:In a work setting, if you told me you spoke with someone and I later found out that it was a text/ping/email, I would think that you had been disingenuous.

Why? Honestly asking.

In a work setting, if you told me you spoke with someone and I later found out that it was a text/ping/email, I would think that you had been disingenuous.

I connected with

Anonymous wrote:Words matter. I'm a journalist and you can never write "spoke to" if it was actually over text or email. It's not being pedantic, it's actually being misleading (implying a closer access than what actually happened.)

Context matters too. In casual speech it's fine. In a printed referencing a source, article it's not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's fine unless you're in a deposition or something.

Yeah, it only matters if there's some specific context. Like, Mary was kidnapped and you say you "spoke" to her. It's important to know if that was voice or text because the kidnapper could have been texting on her phone.

But if it's planning a group dinner and you say "I spoke to Mary and she said Saturday was fine" then I don't care if you did that over text.

I agree with the kidnapping vs dinner plans dissection.

Words matter. I'm a journalist and you can never write "spoke to" if it was actually over text or email. It's not being pedantic, it's actually being misleading (implying a closer access than what actually happened.)