1887
image of #shutdownjnu vs #standwithjnu
  • ISSN 2213-1272
  • E-ISSN 2213-1280
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In February 2016, one of the premier Universities of higher education in India, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), suddenly came into the limelight for allegedly raising anti-India slogans at one of the protest cultural programmes in the campus. In this paper, I present a study of the co-emergence and spread of the two opposing hashtags in the context of the controversy – and . The study is based on data collected from Twitter over a period of 2 years from February 2016 – February 2018. I present a quantitative as well as qualitative analysis of the emergence and use of these two hashtags on Twitter and understand these in terms of the process of enregisterment and how conflict (and consequently aggression) became normative and conventionalised in the context of these hashtags. I also take a comparative look at the enregisterment of the two hashtags and argue that despite similar conditions, enregisterment is not guaranteed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00028.kum
2019-07-11
2019-10-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Agha, Asif
    2007Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolander, Brook
    2012 “Disagreements and Agreements in Personal/Diary Blogs: A Closer Look at Responsiveness.” Journal of Pragmatics44(12): 1607–1622. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.008 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
    2018 “Relational Work in Multimodal Networked Interactions on Facebook.” Internet Pragmatics1(1): 134–160. 10.1075/ip.00007.bou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00007.bou [Google Scholar]
  4. Bousfield, Derek
    2008Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.167
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.167 [Google Scholar]
  5. Coesemans, Roel, and Barbara De Cock
    2017 “Self-reference by Politicians on Twitter: Strategies to Adapt to 140 Characters.” Journal of Pragmatics116: 37–50. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  6. Conway, Bethany A., Kate Kenski, and Di Wang
    2015 “The Rise of Twitter in the Political Campaign: Searching for Intermedia Agenda-setting Effects in the Presidential Primary.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication20(4): 363–380. 10.1111/jcc4.12124
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12124 [Google Scholar]
  7. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2010 “Conventionalised Impoliteness Formulae”. Journal of Pragmatics42(12): 3232–3245. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2011Impoliteness Using Language to Cause Offense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511975752
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752 [Google Scholar]
  9. Danet, Brenda
    2013 “Flaming and Linguistic Impoliteness on a Listserv.” InPragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication, ed. bySusan Herring, Dieter Stein, and Tuija Virtanen, 639–664. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214468.639
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214468.639 [Google Scholar]
  10. Darics, Erika
    2010 “Politeness in Computer-mediated Discourse of a Virtual Team.” Journal of Politeness Research6: 129–150. 10.1515/jplr.2010.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.007 [Google Scholar]
  11. De Cock, Barbara, and Andrea Pizarro Pedraza
    2018 “From Expressing Solidarity to Mocking on Twitter: Pragmatic Functions of Hashtags Starting with #jesuis across Languages.” Language in Society47: 197–217. doi:  10.1017/S0047404518000052
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404518000052 [Google Scholar]
  12. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar
    2010 “The YouTubification of Politics, Impoliteness and Polarization.” InThe Handbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, ed. byRotimi Taiwo, 540–563. USA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑773‑2.ch035
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-773-2.ch035 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2012 “Politics, ‘Lies’ and YouTube: A Genre Approach to Assessments of Im/politeness on Obama’s 9/9/2009 Presidential Address.” InNew Perspectives on (Im)politeness and Interpersonal Communication, ed. byLucía Fernández-Amaya, Maria de la O Hernández López, Reyes Gómez Morón, Manuel Padilla Cruz, Manuel Mejias Borrero, and Mariana Relinque Barranca, 62–90. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus and Patricia Bou-Franch
    2013 “Relational Work in Anonymous, Asynchronous Communication: A Study of (Dis)Affiliation in YouTube.” InResearch Trends in Intercultural Pragmatics, ed. byIstvan Kecskes, and Jesus Romero-Trillo, 343–366. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781614513735.343
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614513735.343 [Google Scholar]
  15. Graham, Sage L., and Claire Hardaker
    2017 “(Im)politeness in Digital Communication.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 785–814. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_30
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_30 [Google Scholar]
  16. Graham, Sage L.
    2007 “Disagreeing to Agree: Conflict, (Im)Politeness and Identity in a Computer-mediated Community.” Journal of Pragmatics39(4): 742–759. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017 [Google Scholar]
  17. Haugh, Michael
    2010 “When is an Email Really Offensive? Argumentativity and Variability in Evaluations of Impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research6: 7–31. 10.1515/jplr.2010.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.002 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hoffman, Christian R.
    2018 “Crooked Hillary and Dumb Trump: The Strategic Use and Effect of Negative Evaluations in US Election Campaign Tweets.” Internet Pragmatics1(1): 55–87. 10.1075/ip.00004.hof
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00004.hof [Google Scholar]
  19. Kádár, Dániel, and Siân Robinson Davies
    2016 “Ritual, Aggression, and Participatory Ambiguity: A Case Study of Heckling.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict4(2): 202–233. 10.1075/jlac.4.2.03kad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.4.2.03kad [Google Scholar]
  20. Kádár, Dániel Z., Michael Haugh, and Wei-Lin Melody Chang
    2013 “Aggression and Perceived National Face Threats in Mainland Chinese and Taiwanese CMC Discussion Boards.” Multilingua32(3): 343–372. 10.1515/multi‑2013‑0016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2013-0016 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kaul, Asha, and Vaibhavi Kulkarni
    2010 “Gender and Politeness in Indian Emails.” InThe Handbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, ed. byRotimi Taiwo, 389–410. USA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑773‑2.ch025
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-773-2.ch025 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kreis, Ramona
    2017 The ‘Tweet Politics’ of President Trump. Journal of Language and Politics16(4): 607–618. 10.1075/jlp.17032.kre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17032.kre [Google Scholar]
  23. Kumar, Ritesh
    2014 “Politeness in Hindi Online Texts: Pragmatic and Computational Aspects.” Unpublished PhD Thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
  24. 2017 “Conventionalized Politeness Structures: Empirical Evidence from Hindi/Urdu.” Journal of Politeness Research13(2): 243–279. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kumar, Ritesh, Aishwarya N. Reganti, Akshit Bhatia, and Tushar Maheshwari
    2018 “Aggression-annotated Corpus of Hindi-English Code-mixed Data.” In theProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC – 2018), 1425–1431.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Lea, Martin, Russell Spears, and Daphne de Groot
    2001 “Knowing me, Knowing you: Anonymity Effects on Social Identity Processes within Groups.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin27(5): 526–537. 10.1177/0146167201275002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201275002 [Google Scholar]
  27. Locher, Miriam A., Brook Bolander, and Nicole Höhn
    2015 “Introducing Relational Work in Facebook and Discussion Boards.” Pragmatics25(1): 1–21. 10.1075/prag.25.1.01loc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.25.1.01loc [Google Scholar]
  28. Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Patricia Bou-Franch
    2011 “On-line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings Sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube Video.” Journal of Pragmatics43(10): 2578–2593. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  29. Maíz-Arévalo, Carmen
    2013 ““Just Click ‘Like’”: Computer-mediated Responses to Spanish Compliments.” Journal of Pragmatics51: 47–67. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.03.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  30. Maíz Arévalo, Carmen
    2015 “Jocular Mockery in Computer-mediated Communication: A Contrastive Study of a Spanish and English Facebook Community.” Journal of Politeness Research11(2): 289–327. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0012 [Google Scholar]
  31. Mak, Bernie Chun Nam, and Carmen Lee
    2015 “Swearing is E-business: Expletives in Instant Messaging in Hong Kong Workplaces.” InDigital Business Discourse, ed. byErika Darics, 122–141. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Mak, Bernie Chun Nam, and Erika Darics
    2017 “Swearing and Instant Messaging: Changing Norms of Social Interaction in the Hong Kong Workplace Context.” InAdvances in Swearing Research: New languages and New Contexts, ed. byKristy Beers Fägersten, and Karyn Stapleton, 43–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.282.03mak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.282.03mak [Google Scholar]
  33. Mak, Bernie Chun Nam, and Hin Leung Chui
    2014 “Impoliteness in Facebook Status Updates: Strategic Talk among Colleagues ‘Outside’ the Workplace.” Text & Talk34(2): 165–185. 10.1515/text‑2013‑0042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2013-0042 [Google Scholar]
  34. Markman, Kris M.
    2013 “Conversational Coherence in Small Group Chat.” InPragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication, ed. bySusan Herring, Dieter Stein, and Tuija Virtanen, 539–564. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214468.539
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214468.539 [Google Scholar]
  35. Marwick, Alice E., boyd, danah
    2010 “I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience.” New Media & Society13(1): 114–133. doi:  10.1177/1461444810365313
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313 [Google Scholar]
  36. O’Driscoll, Jim
    2013 “Situational Transformations: The Offensive-izing of an Email Message and the Publicization of Offensiveness.” Pragmatics and Society4(3): 369–387. 10.1075/ps.4.3.05odr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.4.3.05odr [Google Scholar]
  37. Page, Ruth E.
    2012Stories and Social Media. Identities and Interaction. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Planchenault, Gaëlle
    2010 “Virtual Community and Politeness: The Use of Female Markers of Identity and Solidarity in a Transvestites’ Website.” Journal of Politeness Research6(1): 83–103. 10.1515/jplr.2010.005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Reicher, Steve, Russell Spears, and Tom Postmes
    1995 “A Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Phenomena.” European Review of Social Psychology6: 161–198. 10.1080/14792779443000049
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779443000049 [Google Scholar]
  40. Sifianou, Maria, and Spridoula Bella
    2019 “Twitter, Politeness, Self-Presentation.” InPatricia Bou-Franch and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (eds.), Analyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, 341–365. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑92663‑6_12
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92663-6_12 [Google Scholar]
  41. Sinkeviciute, Valeria
    2018 “‘Ya Bloody Drongo’: Impoliteness as Situated Moral Judgement on Facebook.” Internet Pragmatics1(2): 271–302. 10.1075/ip.00013.sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00013.sin [Google Scholar]
  42. Terkourafi, Marina
    2001 “Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A Frame-Based Approach.” Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.
  43. 2003 “Generalised and Particularised Implicatures of Linguistic Politeness.” InPeter Kühnlein, Hannes Rieser, and Henk Zeevat (eds.). Perspectives on Dialogue in the New Millennium. 149–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.114.09ter
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.114.09ter [Google Scholar]
  44. 2005 “Beyond the Micro-Level in Politeness Research.” Journal of Politeness Research1(2): 237–62. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.237
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.237 [Google Scholar]
  45. Turnage, Anna K.
    2007 “Email Flaming Behaviors and Organizational Conflict.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1): 43–59. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2007.00385.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00385.x [Google Scholar]
  46. Upadhyay, Shiv R.
    2010 “Identity and Impoliteness in Computer-mediated Reader Responses.” Journal of Politeness Research6: 105–127. 10.1515/jplr.2010.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.006 [Google Scholar]
  47. van Dijk, Teun
    1998 “Opinions and Ideologies in the Press.” InApproaches to Media Discourse, ed. byPaul Garrett, and Alan Bell, 21–63. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Watts, Richard J.
    2003Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]
  49. West, Laura, and Anna M. Trester
    2013 “Facework on Facebook.” InDiscourse 2.0: Language and New Media, ed. byDeborah Tannen, and Anna M. Trester, 133–154. Washington, D.A.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Zappavigna, Michelle
    2011 “Ambient Affiliation: A Linguistic Perspective on Twitter.” New Media & Society13(5): 788–806. 10.1177/1461444810385097
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385097 [Google Scholar]
  51. 2012Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How we Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. London: Continuum International.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00028.kum
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00028.kum
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: aggression; conventionalisation; JNU; social media; Hindi; enregisterment
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error