Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6740
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9935
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This study examines the use of ungendered third person Chinese pronoun in digital first-and-third person voiced discourses (i.e. small stories). The study asks what implications the script choice , as opposed to gendered ‘he’ and ‘she’, has for audience design and the facilitation of character empathy. The study draws on 131 digital texts from celebrity verified accounts on social media platform Sina Weibo in October 2015. From a Discourse Analytical perspective focused on deixis relative to the notion of empathy in storytelling, the study investigates emergent practices which involve the orthographic manipulation of gender. The study proposes that is an interpersonal resource whose deictic properties as a non-standard spelling are exploited as a property of audience design to facilitate an appeal to empathy. This facilitation is advanced by the script choice which offers a wider scope of reference, and thus targets a wider audience.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Allan, K., Capone, A., & Kecskees, I.
    (Eds.) (2016) Pragmemes and theories of language use. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑43491‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9 [Google Scholar]
  2. Androutsopoulos, J.
    (2012) “Greeklish”: Transliteration practice and discourse in the context of computer-mediated digraphia. InA. M. Jaffe, J. K. Androutsopoulos, M. Sebba, & S. A. Johnson (Eds.), Orthography as social action. Scripts, spelling, identity and power (pp.359–392). de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9781614511038.359
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614511038.359 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2014) Languaging when contexts collapse: Audience design in social networking. Discourse, Context & Media, 4(5), 62–73. 10.1016/j.dcm.2014.08.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2014.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  4. Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR)
    Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) (2012a) Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Committee. aoir.org/ethics/
  5. Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR)
    Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) (2012b) Appendix 1, AoIR Guidelines: Ethical Decision Making and Internet Research Ethics. Ethics Graphic. aoir.org/ethics/
  6. Bach, K. & Harnish, R. M.
    (1979) Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Baker, A.
    (2016) Feeling like stories: Empathy and narrative engagement (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield, White Rose eThese Online). etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/14293/
  8. Bakhtin, M.
    (1981) The dialogic imagination: four essays. https://hdl-handle-net.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/2027/heb.09354
  9. Bamberg, M.
    (2012) Narrative analysis. InH. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp.85–102). American Psychological Association. 10.1037/13620‑006
    https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-006 [Google Scholar]
  10. Barthes, R., & Duisit, L.
    (1975) An Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative. New Literary History, 6(2), 237–272. 10.2307/468419
    https://doi.org/10.2307/468419 [Google Scholar]
  11. Baym, N., & boyd, d.
    (2012) Socially Mediated Publicness: An Introduction. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 320–329. 10.1080/08838151.2012.705200
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.705200 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bell, A.
    (2001) Back in style: Reworking audience design. InP. Eckert & J. R. Rickford (Eds.), Style and sociolinguistic variation (pp.139–169). Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bell, A., & Ensslin, A.
    (2011) “I know what it was. You know what it was”: Second-Person narration in hypertext fiction. Narrative, 19(3), 311–329. 10.1353/nar.2011.0020
    https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2011.0020 [Google Scholar]
  14. boyd, d.
    (2008) Taken out of context: American teen sociality in networked publics. (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, SSRN).   10.2139/ssrn.1344756
  15. boyd, d., & Ellison, N. B.
    (2008) Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2007.00393.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x [Google Scholar]
  16. Brown, R., & Gilman, A.
    (1960) The pronouns of power and solidarity. InT. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp.253–276). Cambridge: Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cao, X.
    (2014) The effects of narrative perspectives and gender similarity to a victim on sympathy and support for aid to people in need. Studies in Media and Communication, 2(1).   10.11114/smc.v2i1.329
    https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v2i1.329 [Google Scholar]
  18. Chan, C. H.
    (2011) The Europeanization of modern written Chinese: a case study of the changing third person pronouns in the twentieth century and beyond. Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Chang, Y., Li, Y., Yan, J., & Kumar, V.
    (2019) Getting more likes: the impact of narrative person and brand image on customer–brand interactions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(6), 1027–1045. 10.1007/s11747‑019‑00632‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00632-2 [Google Scholar]
  20. Clark, H. H.
    (1992) Arenas of language use. University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cohen, J.
    (2001) Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media character. Mass Communication & Society, 41, 245–264. 10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01 [Google Scholar]
  22. Coulmas, F.
    (1996) The Blackwell encyclopedia of writing systems. Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Dailey-O’Cain, J.
    (2017) Trans-National English in social media communities. Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑50615‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50615-3 [Google Scholar]
  24. Dayter, D.
    (2015) Small stories and extended narratives on Twitter. Discourse, Context & Media, 101, 19–26. 10.1016/j.dcm.2015.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2015.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  25. De Fina, A., & Georgakopoulou, A.
    (2012) Analyzing narrative : discourse and sociolinguistic perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. de Graaf, A., Hoeken, H., Sanders, J., & Beentjes, J.
    (2012) Identification as a mechanism of narrative persuasion. Communication Research, 391, 802–823. 10.1177/0093650211408594
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211408594 [Google Scholar]
  27. Deringer, L., Gast, V., Haas, F., & Rudolf, O.
    (2015) Impersonal uses of the second person singular and generalized empathy: An exploratory corpus study of English, German and Russian. InL. Gardellle & S. Sorlin (Eds.), The Pragmatics of Personal Pronouns (pp.311–334). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/slcs.171.15der
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.171.15der [Google Scholar]
  28. Deumert, A.
    (2014) Sociolinguistics and mobile communication. Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Eberl, M.
    (2020) Double trouble. InS. Rüdiger & D. Dayter (Eds.), Corpus approaches to social media: Studies in corpus linguistics (pp.131–146). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/scl.98.06ebe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.98.06ebe [Google Scholar]
  30. Esquivel, O. J. D.
    (2019) Exploring the Filipinization of the English language in a digital age: An identity apart from other world Englishes. Journal of English as an International Language, 14(1), 58–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Gibbons, A., & Macrae, A.
    (Eds.) (2018) Pronouns in literature: Positions and perspectives in language. Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑349‑95317‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95317-2 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gottlieb, N.
    (2010) Playing with language in e-Japan: Old wine in new bottles. Japanese Studies, 30(3), 393–407. 10.1080/10371397.2010.518600
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10371397.2010.518600 [Google Scholar]
  33. Harrison, M.
    (2008) The Paradox of fiction and the ethics of empathy: Reconceiving Dickens’s realism. Narrative, 16(3), 256–278. www.jstor.org/stable/30219607
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Hartung, F., Burke, M., Hagoort, P., & Willems, R. M.
    (2016) Taking Perspective: Personal Pronouns Affect Experiential Aspects of Literary Reading. PLOS ONE, 11(5).   10.1371/journal.pone.0154732
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154732 [Google Scholar]
  35. Harvey, K. J., Brown, B., Crawford, P., MacFarlane, A., & McPherson, A.
    (2007) “Am I normal?” Teenagers, sexual health and the Internet. Social Science and Medicine, 651, 771–781. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.04.005 [Google Scholar]
  36. Herring, S. C.
    (2004) Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis. In Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning (pp.338–376). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016 [Google Scholar]
  37. Horie, K., & Shimura, M.
    (2003) Overt anaphoric expressions, empathy, and the uchi-soto distinction in Japanese. Proceedings of the 2nd Seoul International Conference on Discourse and Cognitive Linguistics, 297–310.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Hu, S. S. 胡心馨
    (2015) 公益敘事廣告中不同人稱情境對同理心影響之效果研究. “gongyixushi guanggaozhong butong renchengqingjing dui tonglixin yingxiang zhi xiaoguo yanjiu” [The effect of different personal pronouns in narrative advertisement on empathy, attitudes and behavioral intention.]. (Unpublished Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University, Taiwan, National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan). https://hdl.handle.net/11296/zr5f4b
  39. Khuman, B., & Madhumita, G.
    (2018) Ungendered narrative: A new genre in the making. Concentric: Literary and Cultural Studies, 44(2), 271–293.  10.6240/concentric.lit.201809.44(2).0011
    https://doi.org/10.6240/concentric.lit.201809.44(2).0011 [Google Scholar]
  40. Keen, S.
    (2006) A theory of narrative empathy. Narrative, 14(3), 207–236. 10.1353/nar.2006.0015
    https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2006.0015 [Google Scholar]
  41. Koopman, E. M.
    (2015) Empathic reactions after reading: The role of genre, personal factors and affective responses. Poetics, 501, 62–79. 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008 [Google Scholar]
  42. Lange, P.
    (2008) Publicly private and privately public: Social networking on YouTube, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 361–380. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2007.00400.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00400.x [Google Scholar]
  43. Lee, C. K.-M.
    (2007) Affordances and text-making practices in online instant messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223–249. 10.1177/0741088307303215
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307303215 [Google Scholar]
  44. Litt, E.
    (2012) Knock, knock. Who’s there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 330–345. 10.1080/08838151.2012.705195
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.705195 [Google Scholar]
  45. Majors, K.
    (2013) Children’s perceptions of their imaginary companions and the purposes they serve: An exploratory study in the United Kingdom. Childhood, 20(4), 550–565. 10.1177/0907568213476899
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568213476899 [Google Scholar]
  46. Norman, J.
    (1988) Chinese. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Page, R., Barton, D., Unger, J. W., & Zappavigna, M.
    (2014) Researching Language and Social Media. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315771786
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315771786 [Google Scholar]
  48. Richardson, B.
    (2006) Unnatural voices: extreme narration in modern and contemporary fiction. Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Robertson, W. C.
    (2019) Why can’t I speak in kanji?: Indexing social identities through marked script use in Japanese manga. Discourse, Context & Media, 301. 10.1016/j.dcm.2019.04.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2019.04.003 [Google Scholar]
  50. Seale, C.
    (2006) Gender accommodation in online cancer support groups. Health, 10(3), 345–360. 10.1177/1363459306064495
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459306064495 [Google Scholar]
  51. Seale, C., Charteris-Black, J., MacFarlane, A., & McPherson, A.
    (2013) Interviews and Internet Forums: A Comparison of Two Sources of Qualitative Data. InC. Hine (Ed.), Virtual Research Methods (Vol.31). 41–60. SAGE Publications, Ltd.  10.4135/9781446286142
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446286142 [Google Scholar]
  52. Seale, C., Charteris-Black, J., & Ziebland, S.
    (2006) Gender, cancer experience and Internet use: A comparative keyword analysis of interviews and online cancer support groups. Social Science and Medicine, 62(10), 2577–2590. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.016 [Google Scholar]
  53. Seargeant, P., Tagg, C., & Ngampramuan, W.
    (2012) Language choice and addressivity strategies in Thai-English social network interactions. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(4), 510–531. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2012.00540.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2012.00540.x [Google Scholar]
  54. Sebba, M.
    (2011) Spelling and society : The culture and politics of orthography around the world. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Seiffge-Krenke, I.
    (1997) Imaginary companions in adolescence: A sign of a deficient or positive development?Journal of Adolescence, 20(2), 137–154. 10.1006/jado.1996.0072
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.1996.0072 [Google Scholar]
  56. Sluchinski, K.
    (forthcoming) Ta as a Facilitator of Empathy in Chinese CMC Narratives. Chinese Language and Discourse.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. (2020) A Discursive Pragmatic Approach to the Third Person Pronoun ta in Chinese Computer Mediated Communication. East Asian Pragmatics, 5 (2), 247–277. 10.1558/eap.39165
    https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.39165 [Google Scholar]
  58. (2019) Genderless Narratives: The Pragmatics of ta in Chinese Social Media. InK. Martin (Ed.), The 2019 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association: 2019 Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences. cla-acl.ca/actes-2019-proceedings/;   10.6084/m9.figshare.11362526
    https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11362526 [Google Scholar]
  59. Sluchinski, K., & Gallant, J.
    (2020) Abstract: One-size-fits-all: Psycholinguistic self-paced reading experiment supporting discourse analysis of the non-standard, gender-neutral mandarin pronoun ‘TA.’ DisCorX 2021: Discourse in corpus and experimental data: bridging the methodological gap.  10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.12299015.V1
    https://doi.org/10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.12299015.V1 [Google Scholar]
  60. Spolsky, B.
    (2004) Language policy. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Squire et al.
    Squire et al. (2014) What is narrative research?Bloomsbury Academic. 10.5040/9781472545220
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472545220 [Google Scholar]
  62. Strange, J. J.
    (2002) How fictional tales wag real-world beliefs: Models and mechanisms of narrative influence. InM. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp.263–286). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Tagg, C., & Seargeant, P.
    (2012) Writing systems at play in Thai-English online interactions. Writing Systems Research, 4(2), 195–213. 10.1080/17586801.2011.628583
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2011.628583 [Google Scholar]
  64. Taylor, M., Hulette, A. C., & Dishion, T. J.
    (2010) Longitudinal outcomes of young high-risk adolescents with imaginary companions. Developmental Psychology, 46(6), 1632–1636. 10.1037/a0019815
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019815 [Google Scholar]
  65. Unseth, P.
    (2005) Sociolinguistic parallels between choosing scripts and languages. Written Language and Literacy, 8(1), 19–42. 10.1075/wll.8.1.02uns
    https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.8.1.02uns [Google Scholar]
  66. Utell, J.
    (2016) Engagements with narrative. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. van Lissa, C., Caracciolo, M., van Leuveren, B., & van Durren, T.
    (2016) Difficult empathy. The effect of narrative perspective on readers’ engagement with a first-person narrator. Diegesis: Interdisziplinäres E-Journal Für Erzählforschung, 5(1), 43–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Wardle, E., & Downs, D.
    (2014) Writing about writing: a college reader. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Whiteman, N.
    (2012) Undoing ethics: rethinking practice in online research. Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4614‑1827‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1827-6 [Google Scholar]
  70. Wilkinson, D., & Thelwall, M.
    (2013) Researching Personal Information on the Public Web: Methods and Ethics. InC. Hine (Ed.), Virtual Research Methods (Vol.41). 139–156. SAGE Publications, Ltd.   10.4135/9781446286142
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446286142 [Google Scholar]
  71. Yang, C.
    (2007) Chinese Internet language: A sociolinguistic analysis of adaptations of the Chinese writing system. Language@Internet4(2), 1–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Yuan, E. J.
    (2012) Language as social practice on the Chinese Internet. InK. St. Amant, & S. Kelsey (Eds.), Computer-Mediated communication across cultures: International interactions in online environments (pp.266–281). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑60960‑833‑0.ch018
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-833-0.ch018 [Google Scholar]
  73. Zhan, X. H. 詹秀华
    (2013) 说“TA”. “shuo ‘TA’” [Let’s talk about “TA”] 廊坊师范学院学报 (社会科学版) “Langfangshifanxueyuanxuebao (shehuikexue ban)” [Journal of Langfang Teachers College (Social Sciences Edition)], 29(6), 36–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Zhong, Z. J. 钟之静
    (2015) 网络新词汇ta 的第三人称代词三分法意义的分析. “Wanglouxincihui ta de di san renchengdaici san fenfayiyi de fenxi”. [Analysis of the three meanings of the third person pronoun new Internet word ta] 湖北科技学院学报 “hubeijiaoxuexueyuanxuebao” [Journal of Hubei University of Science and Technology], 35(5), 77–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Zimmer, M.
    (2010) But the data is already public: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Moral Luck, Social Networking Sites, and Trust on the Web, (4), 313. 10.1007/s10676‑010‑9227‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9227-5 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): audience design; context collapse; empathy; Mandarin Chinese; person; pragmatics; pronouns
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