Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-1272
  • E-ISSN: 2213-1280
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Often preferred to its face-to-face counterpart, online dating has transformed the way we perceive practices relevant to meeting people, mostly because it offers “a wider pool of potential partners” (Heino, Ellison, and Gibbs 2010, 428). Despite its popularity, however, online dating is an under-researched area in general, crucially in linguistics. Looking at (mostly unsuccessful) naturally occurring initial interactions that have taken place on the popular Tinder application, the aim of this study is to gain some insights into the relationship among language aggression, impoliteness and communication failure in the context of flirting on Tinder. Results show that the most common way that users initiate interaction in this dataset is through sexually loaded language, which seems to be understood as a breach of the norms of appropriateness for first-time contact. Although Tinder has no manual to prescribe what should or should not be said in interaction, it transpires from the data that avoiding overstepping in terms of sexual matters (i.e. refraining from using sexually loaded language and/or innuendos) functions as an unwritten law which sparks impoliteness when not followed. Resulting impoliteness manifests itself mostly through the strategies of sarcasm and ignoring/snubbing the other, used to counteract (perceived) inappropriateness. Tracing this escalation of non-cooperative practices, from inappropriateness to impoliteness, also provides the opportunity to examine the emergence of playfulness and creativity as language behaviours interwoven with aggression. Therefore, online dating seems to lend itself well to the study of impoliteness and violation of norms of appropriate behaviour, providing opportunities for an expansion of contexts for linguistic analysis.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Androutsopoulos, Jannis
    2011 “Language Change and Digital Media : A Review of Conceptions and Evidence.” InStandard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe, edited byNikolas Coupland and Tore Kristiansen, 145–161. Oslo: Novus.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ardington, Angela
    2013 “Negotiating Shared Perspectives that Move in and out of Sociability: Play and Aggression in Technologically Mediated Communication.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict1 (2): 165–93. doi:  10.1075/jlac.1.2.03ard
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.2.03ard [Google Scholar]
  3. Bayraktaroǧlu, Arın, and Maria Sifianou
    2012 “The Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove: How Politeness Can Contribute to Impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research8 (2): 143–60. doi:  10.1515/pr‑2012‑0009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0009 [Google Scholar]
  4. Best, Kirsty, and Sharon Delmege
    2012 “The Filtered Encounter: Online Dating and the Problem of Filtering through Excessive Information.” Social Semiotics22 (3): 237–58. doi:  10.1080/10350330.2011.648405
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2011.648405 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bor, Stephanie, and Jan Boehmer
    2002 “The Internet.” InCommunication Technology Update and Fundamentals, edited byAugust E. Grant and Jennifer H. Meadows, 275–282. Boston: Focal Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bou-Franch, Patricia, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, and Pilar Garcés Conejos Blitvich
    2012 “Social Interaction in YouTube Text-Based Polylogues: A Study of Coherence.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication17 (4): 501–521. doi:  10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2012.01579.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01579.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Bousfield, Derek
    2008 “Impoliteness in the Struggle for Power.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 127–153. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110208344
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110208344 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2010 “Researching Impoliteness and Rudeness: Issues and Definitions.” InInterpersonal Pragmatics, edited byMiriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 101–134. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214338.1.101
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338.1.101 [Google Scholar]
  9. Chayko, Mary
    2008Portable Communities: The Social Dynamics of Online and Mobile Connectedness. New York: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Culpeper, Jonathan
    1996 “Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness.” Journal of Pragmatics25 (3): 349–367. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00014‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2005 “Impoliteness and Entertainment in the Television Quiz Show: The Weakest Link.” Journal of Politeness Research1: 35–72. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2008 “Reflections on Impoliteness, Relational Work and Power.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 17–44. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield, and Anne Wichmann
    2003 “Impoliteness Revisited: With Special Reference to Dynamic and Prosodic Aspects.” Journal of Pragmatics35 (10–11): 1545–1579. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00118‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00118-2 [Google Scholar]
  14. del-Teso-Craviotto, Marisol
    2006 “Language and Sexuality in Spanish and English Dating Chats.” Journal of Sociolinguistics10 (4): 460–480. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2006.00288.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2006.00288.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Dynel, Marta
    2015 “The Landscape of Impoliteness Research.” Journal of Politeness Research11 (2): 329–354. doi:  10.1515/pr‑2015‑0013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0013 [Google Scholar]
  16. Ellison, Nicole B., Rebecca Heino, and Jennifer Gibbs
    2006 “Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11 (2): 415–441. doi:  10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2006.00020.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x [Google Scholar]
  17. Fiore, Andrew T., Lindsay, Shaw T., Xiaomeng Zhong, G. A. Mendelsohn, and Coye Cheshire
    2010 “Who’s Right and Who Writes: People, Profiles, Contacts, and Replies in Online Dating.” InProceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10. Los Alamitos, CA: Computer Society Press. doi:  10.1109/HICSS.2010.444
    https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2010.444 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fraser, Bruce
    1990 “Perspectives on Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics14(2): 219–236. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90081‑N
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90081-N [Google Scholar]
  19. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar
    2010 “The YouTubification of Politics, Impoliteness and Polarization.” InHandbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, edited byRotimi Taiwo, 540–563. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑773‑2.ch035
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-773-2.ch035 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2013 “Introduction: Face, Identity and Im/Politeness. Looking Backward, Moving Forward: From Goffman to Practice Theory.” Journal of Politeness Research9 (1): 1–33. doi:  10.1515/pr‑2013‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2013-0001 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2018 “Globalization, Transnational Identities, and Conflict Talk: The Superdiversity and Complexity of the Latino Identity.” Journal of Pragmatics134: 120–133. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gatter, Karoline, and Kathleen Hodkinson
    2016 “On the Differences between TinderTM versus Online Dating Agencies: Questioning a Myth. An Exploratory Study.” Cogent Psychology3 (1): 1–12. doi:  10.1080/23311908.2016.1162414
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1162414 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gershon, Ilana
    2010 “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Media Switching and Media Ideologies.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology20 (2): 389–405. doi:  10.1111/j.1548‑1395.2010.01076.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1395.2010.01076.x [Google Scholar]
  24. Gibbs, Jennifer L., Nicole B. Ellison, and Chih-Hui Lai
    2011 “First Comes Love, Then Comes Google: An Investigation of Uncertainty Reduction Strategies and Self-Disclosure in Online Dating.” Communication Research38 (1): 70–100. doi:  10.1177/0093650210377091
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210377091 [Google Scholar]
  25. Graham, Sage L.
    2007 “Disagreeing to Agree: Conflict, (Im)politeness and Identity in a Computer-Mediated Community.” Journal of Pragmatics39 (4): 742–759. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2008 “A Manual for (Im)Politeness?: The Impact of the FAQ in an Electronic Community of Practice.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 281–304. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Graham, Sage L., and Claire Hardaker
    2017 “(Im)politeness in Digital Communication.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)Politeness, edited byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 785–814. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_30
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_30 [Google Scholar]
  28. Grainger, Karen
    2011 “‘First Order’ and ‘Second Order’ Politeness: Institutional and Intercultural Contexts.” InDiscursive Approaches to Politeness, edited by LPRG, 167–188. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238679.167
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238679.167 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hall, Jeffrey A., Steve Carter, Michael J. Cody, and Julie M. Albright
    2010 “Individual Differences in the Communication of Romantic Interest: Development of the Flirting Styles Inventory.” Communication Quarterly58 (4): 365–393. doi:  10.1080/01463373.2010.524874
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2010.524874 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hardaker, Claire
    2010 “Trolling in Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communication: From User Discussions to Academic Definitions.” Journal of Politeness Research6 (2): 215–242. doi:  10.1515/jplr.2010.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.011 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2013 “‘Uh. … Not to Be Nitpicky,,,,,But…the Past Tense of Drag Is Dragged, Not Drug.’: An Overview of Trolling Strategies.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict1 (1): 58–86. doi:  10.1075/jlac.1.1.04har
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.1.04har [Google Scholar]
  32. Hasinoff, Amy Adele
    2013 “Sexting as Media Production: Rethinking Social Media and Sexuality.” New Media and Society15 (4): 449–465. doi:  10.1177/1461444812459171
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812459171 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hasinoff, Amy Adele, and Tamara Shepherd
    2014 “Sexting in Context: Privacy Norms and Expectations.” International Journal of Communication8 (1): 2932–2955. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2264
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Haugh, Michael
    2010 “When Is an Email Really Offensive?: Argumentativity and Variability in Evaluations of Impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research6 (1): 7–31. doi:  10.1515/jplr.2010.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.002 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2013 “Im/Politeness, Social Practice and the Participation Order.” Journal of Pragmatics58: 52–72. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2015 “Impoliteness and Taking Offence in Initial Interactions.” Journal of Pragmatics86: 36–42. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.018 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2016 “‘Just Kidding’: Teasing and Claims to Non-Serious Intent.” Journal of Pragmatics95: 120–136. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  38. Haugh, Michael, and Donal Carbaugh
    2015 “Self-Disclosure in Initial Interactions amongst Speakers of American and Australian English.” Multilingua34 (4): 461–493. doi:  10.1515/multi‑2014‑0104
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2014-0104 [Google Scholar]
  39. Haugh, Michael, and Danielle Pillet-Shore
    2018 “Getting to Know You: Teasing as an Invitation to Intimacy in Initial Interactions.” Discourse Studies20 (2): 246–269. doi:  10.1177/1461445617734936
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734936 [Google Scholar]
  40. Haugh, Michael, Dániel Z. Kádár, and Sara Mills
    2013 “Interpersonal Pragmatics: Issues and Debates.” Journal of Pragmatics58: 1–11. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  41. Heino, Rebecca D., Nicole B. Ellison, and Jennifer L. Gibbs
    2010 “Relationshopping: Investigating the Market Metaphor in Online Dating.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships27 (4): 427–447. doi:  10.1177/0265407510361614
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510361614 [Google Scholar]
  42. Herring, Susan C., Kirk Job-Sluder, Rebecca Scheckler, and Sasha Barab
    2002 Searching for Safety Online: Managing “Trolling” in a Feminist Forum. The Information Society18 (5): 371–384. doi:  10.1080/01972240290108186
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240290108186 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kádár, Dániel Z., and Michael Haugh
    2013Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139382717
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kiesling, Scott F.
    2011 “The Interactional Construction of Desire as Gender.” Gender and Language5 (2): 211–237. doi:  10.1558/genl.v5i2.405
    https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.v5i2.405 [Google Scholar]
  45. 2013 “Flirting and ‘Normative’ Sexualities.” Journal of Language and Sexuality2 (1): 101–121. doi:  10.1075/jls.2.1.04kie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.2.1.04kie [Google Scholar]
  46. 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. doi:  10.1177/0146167201275002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201275002 [Google Scholar]
  47. LPRG – Linguistic Politeness Research Group
    LPRG – Linguistic Politeness Research Group 2011 “Introduction: The Linguistic Politeness Research Group”. InDiscursive Approaches to Politeness, edited byLPRG, 1–17. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238679.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238679.1 [Google Scholar]
  48. Locher, Miriam A., and Derek Bousfield
    2008 “Introduction: Impoliteness and Power in Language.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 1–13. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Locher, Miriam A., and Richard J. Watts
    2008 “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behaviour.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 77–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 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. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  51. McDaniel, Anita K.
    2005 “Young Women’s Dating Behavior: Why/Why Not Date a Nice Guy?” Sex Roles53 (5–6): 347–59. doi:  10.1007/s11199‑005‑6758‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-6758-z [Google Scholar]
  52. Mortensen, Kristine Køhler
    2015 “Informed Consent in the Field of Language and Sexuality: The Case of Online Dating Research.” Journal of Language and Sexuality4 (1): 1–29. doi:  10.1075/jls.4.1.01mor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.4.1.01mor [Google Scholar]
  53. 2017 “Flirting in Online Dating: Giving Empirical Grounds to Flirtatious Implicitness.” Discourse Studies19 (5): 581–597. doi:  10.1177/1461445617715179
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617715179 [Google Scholar]
  54. Murnen, Sarah K.
    2000 “Gender and the Use of Sexually Degrading Language.” Psychology of Women Quarterly24 (4): 319–327. doi:  10.1111/j.1471‑6402.2000.tb00214.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb00214.x [Google Scholar]
  55. Ogiermann, Eva, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
    2019 “Im/Politeness between the Analyst and Participant Perspectives : An Overview of the Field.” InFrom Speech Acts to Lay Understandings of Politeness: Multilingual and Multicultural Perspectives, edited byEva Ogiermann and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108182119.001
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108182119.001 [Google Scholar]
  56. Pillet-Shore, Danielle
    2011 “Doing Introductions: The Work Involved in Meeting Someone New.” Communication Monographs78 (1): 73–95. doi:  10.1080/03637751.2010.542767
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2010.542767 [Google Scholar]
  57. Reed, Lauren A., Richard M. Tolman, and L. Monique Ward
    2016 “Snooping and Sexting: Digital Media as a Context for Dating Aggression and Abuse Among College Students.” Violence Against Women22 (13): 1556–1576. doi:  10.1177/1077801216630143
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216630143 [Google Scholar]
  58. Schneider, Klaus P.
    1988Small Talk: Analyzing Phatic Discourse. Marburg: Hitzeroth.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Sinkeviciute, Valeria
    2015 “‘There’s Definitely Gonna Be Some Serious Carnage in this House’ or How to be Genuinely Impolite in Big Brother UK.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict3(2): 317–48. 10.1075/jlac.3.2.04sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.2.04sin [Google Scholar]
  60. Surra, Catherine A., and Jill M. Boelter
    2013 “Dating and Mate Selection.” InHandbook of Marriage and the Family, edited byGary W. Peterson and Kevin R. Bush, 211–32. US: Springer. doi:  10.1007/978‑1‑4614‑3987‑5_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3987-5_10 [Google Scholar]
  61. Surra, Catherine A., Christine R. Gray, Tyfany M. J. Boettcher, Nathan R. Cottle, and Adam R. West
    2006 “From Courtship to Universal Properties: Research on Dating and Mate Selection, 1950 to 2003.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships, edited byAnita L. Vangelisti and Daniel Perlman, 113–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511606632.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511606632.008 [Google Scholar]
  62. Teneketzi, Korallia
    2022 “Impoliteness across Social Media Platforms: A Comparative Study of Conflict on YouTube and Reddit.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict. 10.1075/jlac.00066.ten
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00066.ten [Google Scholar]
  63. Terkourafi, Marina
    2008 “Toward a Unified Theory of Politeness, Impoliteness, and Rudeness.” InImpoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, edited byDerek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 45–74. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Turner, Tammara Combs, Marc A. Smith, Danyel Fisher, and Howard T. Welser
    2005 Picturing Usenet: Mapping Computer-Mediated Collective Action. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication10 (4). doi:  10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2005.tb00270.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00270.x [Google Scholar]
  65. Tyson, Gareth, Vasile C. Perta, Hamed Haddadi, and Michael C. Seto
    2016 “A First Look at User Activity on Tinder.” In2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), 461–466. IEEE. doi:  10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752275
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752275 [Google Scholar]
  66. Ward, Janelle
    2017 “What Are You Doing on Tinder? Impression Management on a Matchmaking Mobile App.” Information Communication and Society20 (11): 1644–1659. doi:  10.1080/1369118X.2016.1252412
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1252412 [Google Scholar]
  67. Watts, Richard J.
    2003Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): aggression; impoliteness; norms; online dating; playfulness; Tinder
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