1887
Volume 21, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6732
  • E-ISSN: 1570-6001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Online messages often diverge from the standard language orthography: so-called textisms have become an indispensable part of youths’ written computer-mediated communication (CMC). This paper presents an in-depth corpus study of texts from four new media produced by Dutch youths: MSN chats, text messages, tweets, and WhatsApp messages. It is demonstrated that Dutch informal written CMC, as in other languages, is implicitly governed by orthographic principles. Relative frequencies of textism types in the corpus show how textisms are effectively used by Dutch youths. Textism types are classified here in terms of forms, operations, and, crucially, functions – the ‘SUPER-functions’: textisms can make orthography more Speechlike, Understandable, Playful, Expressive, or Reduced. Moreover, this study proves that preferences for textism types greatly depend on age group and medium. New media have their own combination of characteristics and constraints, while adolescents and young adults appear to have different perceptions on language use and spelling.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00012.ver
2018-11-02
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amaghlobeli, Natia
    (2012) Linguistic features of typographic emoticons in SMS discourse. Theory and Practice in Language Studies2(2): 348–354.10.4304/tpls.2.2.348‑354
    https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.2.348-354 [Google Scholar]
  2. Androutsopoulos, Jannis
    (2011) Language change and digital media: A review of conceptions and evidence. InTore Kristiansen & Nikolas Coupland (eds.), Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe, 145–161. Oslo: Novus.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anis, Jacques
    (2007) Neography: Unconventional spelling in French SMS text messages. InBrenda Danet & Susan C. Herring (eds.), The multilingual internet: Language, culture, and communication online, 87–115. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195304794.003.0004
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195304794.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baars, Renske
    (2016, April25). Gelukkig maar! Jeugd spelt expres fout op WhatsApp. AD.nl. www.ad.nl/bizar/gelukkig-maar-jeugd-spelt-expres-fout-op-whatsapp~afae2d13.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baron, Naomi S.
    (1984) Computer mediated communication as a force in language change. Visible Language18(2): 118–141.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (2004) See you online: Gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology23(4): 397–423.10.1177/0261927X04269585
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X04269585 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bennis, Hans
    (2015) Korterlands: Anarchie in de schrijftaal. Amsterdam: Promotheus Bert Bakker.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bergs, Alexander T.
    (2009) Just the same old story? The linguistics of text messaging and its cultural repercussions. InCharley Rowe & Eva L. Wyss (eds.), Language and new media: Linguistic, cultural, and technological evolutions, 55–73. Cresskill: Hampton Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Combes, Céline, Olga Volckaert-Legrier & Pierre Largy
    (2014) Automatic or controlled writing? The effect of a dual task on SMS writing in novice and expert adolescents. InLouise-Amélie Cougnon & Cédrick Fairon (eds.), SMS communication: A linguistic approach, 47–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Craig, David
    (2003) Instant messaging: The language of youth literacy. The Boothe Prize Essays 2003: 116–133.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Crystal, David
    (2006) Language and the internet, second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511487002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487002 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2008) Txtng: The gr8 db8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Danesi, Marcel
    (2017) The semiotics of emoji: The rise of visual language in the age of the internet. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. De Decker, Benny
    (2015) Prototypische chatspeakkenmerken in Vlaamse tienerchattaal: De invloed van gender, leeftijd en medium. Taal en Tongval67(1): 1–41.10.5117/TET2015.1.DECK
    https://doi.org/10.5117/TET2015.1.DECK [Google Scholar]
  15. De Jonge, Sarah & Nenagh Kemp
    (2012) Text-message abbreviations and language skills in high school and university students. Journal of Research in Reading35(1): 49–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dings, René
    (2010) Weg om legging: Onjuist spatiegebruik in het Nederlands. Onze Taal 2010(4): 94–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Drouin, Michelle A. & Claire Davis
    (2009) R u txting? Is the use of text speak hurting your literacy?Journal of Literacy Research41(1): 46–67.10.1080/10862960802695131
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10862960802695131 [Google Scholar]
  18. Durkin, Kevin, Gina Conti-Ramsden & Allan J. Walker
    (2011) Txt lang: Texting, textism use and literacy abilities in adolescents with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning27(1): 49–57.10.1111/j.1365‑2729.2010.00397.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00397.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Dürscheid, Christa & Elisabeth Stark
    (2013) Anything goes? SMS, phonographisches Schreiben und Morphemkonstanz. InMartin Neef & Carmen Scherer (eds.), Die Schnittstelle von Morphologie und geschriebener Sprache, 189–210. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110336665.189
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110336665.189 [Google Scholar]
  20. Evans, Vyvyan
    (2017) The emoji code: How smiley faces, love hearts and thumbs up are changing the way we communicate. London: Michael O’Mara.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Frehner, Carmen
    (2008) Email – SMS – MMS: The linguistic creativity of asynchronous discourse in the new media age. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Geertsema, Salomé, Charene Hyman & Chantelle van Deventer
    (2011) Short message service (SMS) language and written language skills: Educators’ perspectives. South African Journal of Education31(4): 475–487.10.15700/saje.v31n4a370
    https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v31n4a370 [Google Scholar]
  23. Grace, Abbie
    (2013) Mobile phone text messaging language: How and why undergraduates use textisms. PhD thesis, University of Tasmania.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hilte, Lisa, Reinhild Vandekerckhove & Walter Daelemans
    (2016) Expressiveness in Flemish online teenage talk: A corpus-based analysis of social and medium-related linguistic variation. InDarja Fišer & Martin Beißwenger (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th conference on CMC and social media corpora for the humanities, 30–33. Ljubljana: Academic Publishing Division of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Ljubljana.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (2017) Modeling non-standard language use in adolescents’ CMC: The impact and interaction of age, gender and education. InEgon W. Stemle & Ciara R. Wigham (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th conference on CMC and social media corpora for the humanities, 611–615. Bolzano: Eurac Research.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Holmes, Janet
    (1992) An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Instagram, Inc.
    (2018) What is Instagram?Instagram. https://help.instagram.com/424737657584573
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kemp, Nenagh
    (2010) Texting versus txting: Reading and writing text messages, and links with other linguistic skills. Writing Systems Research2(1): 53–71.10.1093/wsr/wsq002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/wsr/wsq002 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kirsten Torrado, Úrsula
    (2014) Development of SMS language from 2000 to 2010: A comparison of two corpora. InLouise-Amélie Cougnon & Cédrick Fairon (eds.), SMS communication: A linguistic approach, 67–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Koopmans, Aloys, Hedwich Steneker & Arjen Spoelstra
    (2017) Whatsapp taal. whatsapp-taal.jouwweb.nl
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Labov, William
    (1966) The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Lanchantin, Tonia, Aurélie Simoës-Perlant & Pierre Largy
    (2015) The amount of French text messaging related to spelling level: why some letters are produced and others are not?PsychNology Journal13(1): 7–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Levenshtein, Vladimir I.
    (1966) Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady10(8): 707–710.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Marrón Fernández de Velasco, Daniel
    (2015) From texting to Internet Language: Analysis of contemporary language evolution: The case of YouTube. Master thesis, University of Valladolid.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. McWhorter, John
    (2013, April25). Is texting killing the English language?Time. ideas.time.com/2013/04/25/is-texting-killing-the-english-language
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Neef, Martin
    (2015) Writing systems as modular objects: Proposals for theory design in grapholinguistics. Open Linguistics1(1): 708–721.10.1515/opli‑2015‑0026
    https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2015-0026 [Google Scholar]
  37. Novak, Petra Kralj, Jasmina Smailovic, Borut Sluban & Igor Mozetič
    (2015) Sentiment of emojis. PloS One10(12): 1–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Oostdijk, Nelleke, Martin Reynaert, Véronique Hoste & Ineke Schuurman
    (2013) The construction of a 500-million-word reference corpus of contemporary written Dutch. InPeter Spyns & Jan Odijk (eds.), Essential speech and language technology for Dutch: Results by the STEVIN programme, 219–247. Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978‑3‑642‑30910‑6_13
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30910-6_13 [Google Scholar]
  39. Panckhurst, Rachel
    (2009) Short Message Service (SMS): typologie et problématiques futures. InTeddy Arnavielle (ed.), Polyphonies, pour Michelle Lanvin, 33–52. Université Paul-Valéry: Montpellier 3.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Peersman, Claudia, Walter Daelemans, Reinhild Vandekerckhove, Bram Vandekerckhove & Leona Van Vaerenbergh
    (2016) The effects of age, gender and region on non-standard linguistic variation in online social networksarxiv.org/abs/1001.02431
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pelkman, Martha
    (2015, March10). What’s App: taalverloedering of taalverrijking?DrsPee. https://drspee.nl/whats-app-taalverloedering-of-taalverrijking
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Pfeffer, Jürgen, Thomas Zorbach & Kathleen M. Carley
    (2014) Understanding online firestorms: Negative word-of-mouth dynamics in social media networks. Journal of Marketing Communications20(1–2): 117–128.10.1080/13527266.2013.797778
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2013.797778 [Google Scholar]
  43. Plester, Beverly, Clare Wood & Victoria Bell
    (2008) Txt msg n school literacy: Does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children’s literacy attainment?Literacy42(3): 137–144.10.1111/j.1741‑4369.2008.00489.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-4369.2008.00489.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Plester, Beverly, Clare Wood & Puja Joshi
    (2009) Exploring the relationship between children’s knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy outcomes. British Journal of Developmental Psychology27(1): 145–161.10.1348/026151008X320507
    https://doi.org/10.1348/026151008X320507 [Google Scholar]
  45. Postma, Koos
    (2011) Geen paniek! Een analyse van de beeldvorming van sms-taal in Nederland. Master thesis, VU University Amsterdam.
  46. Reinkemeyer, Anja
    (2013) Die Formenvielfalt des langage SMS im Wechselspiel zwischen Effizienz, Expertise und Expressivität: eine Untersuchung der innovativen Schreibweise in französischen SMS. Tübingen.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Rosen, Larry D., Jennifer Chang, Lynne Erwin, L. Mark Carrier & Nancy A. Cheever
    (2010) The relationship between ‘textisms’ and formal and informal writing among young adults. Communication Research37(3): 420–440.10.1177/0093650210362465
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210362465 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rutkowska, Hannah, & Paul Rössler
    (2012) Orthographic variables. InJuan Manuel Hernández-Campoy & Juan Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics, 221–244. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118257227.ch12
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118257227.ch12 [Google Scholar]
  49. Schmidt, Carl
    (2013, January8). Nederlandse taal verslechtert. 10 air. https://radio201c.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/nederlandse-taal-verslechterd
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Schwartz, H. Andrew, Johannes C. Eichstaedt, Margaret L. Kern, Lukasz Dziurzynski, Stephanie M. Ramones, Megha Agrawal … Lyle H. Ungar
    (2013) Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: The open-vocabulary approach. PLoS ONE8(9): e73791.10.1371/journal.pone.0073791
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073791 [Google Scholar]
  51. Seuren, Lucas
    (2017, March9). WhatsAppachtig taalgebruik. Neerlandistiek. www.neerlandistiek.nl/2017/03/13135
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Shortis, Tim
    (2007) Gr8 txtpectations: The creativity of text spelling. English Drama Media8: 21–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Silva, Cláudia
    (2011) Writing in Portuguese chats :). A new wrtng systm?Written Language & Literacy14(1): 143–156.10.1075/wll.14.1.07sil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.14.1.07sil [Google Scholar]
  54. Snap Inc.
    Snap Inc. (2018) When does Snapchat delete Snaps and Chats?Snapchat Support. https://support.snapchat.com/en-GB/a/when-are-snaps-chats-deleted
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Stoffelen, Anneke
    (2016, January21). Docenten: ‘Vak Nederlands moet op de schop’. De Volkskrant. www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/docenten-vak-nederlands-moet-op-de-schop~a4229820
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Tagg, Caroline
    (2015) Exploring digital communication: Language in action. London / New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315727165
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315727165 [Google Scholar]
  57. Tagg, Caroline, Alistair Baron & Paul Rayson
    (2014) “i didn’t spel that wrong did i. Oops”: Analysis and normalisation of SMS spelling variation. InLouise-Amélie Cougnon & Cédrick Fairon (eds.), SMS communication: A linguistic approach, 217–237. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Thurlow, Crispin & Alex Brown
    (2003) Generation txt? The sociolinguistics of young people’s text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online1. Retrieved fromhttps://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/v1/n1/a3/thurlow2002003-paper.html
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Thurlow, Crispin & Michele Poff
    (2013) Text messaging. InSusan Herring, Dieter Stein & Tuija Virtanen (eds.), Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication, 163–190. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110214468.163
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214468.163 [Google Scholar]
  60. Ting-Toomey, Stella & Atsuko Kurogi
    (1998) Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations22(2): 187–225.10.1016/S0147‑1767(98)00004‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00004-2 [Google Scholar]
  61. Urban Dictionary. “1337 speak.”
    Urban Dictionary. “1337 speak.” (cited13 March 2017). Retrieved fromwww.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=1337%20speak
  62. Vandekerckhove, Reinhild & Dominiek Sandra
    (2016) De potentiële impact van informele online communicatie op de spellingpraktijk van Vlaamse tieners in schoolcontext. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing38(3): 201–234.10.5117/TVT2016.3.VAND
    https://doi.org/10.5117/TVT2016.3.VAND [Google Scholar]
  63. Varnhagen, Connie K., G. Peggy McFall, Nicole Pugh, Lisa Routledge, Heather Sumida-MacDonald & Trudy E. Kwong
    (2010) lol: New language and spelling in instant messaging. Reading and Writing23(6): 719–733.10.1007/s11145‑009‑9181‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9181-y [Google Scholar]
  64. Veer, Neil van der, Steven Boekee, Hans Hoekstra & Oscar Peters
    (2018, January29). Nationale Social Media Onderzoek 2018. Newcom Research & Consultancy. https://www.bindinc.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Newcom-Nationale-Social-Media-Onderzoek-2018-3.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Verheijen, Lieke
    (2013) The effects of text messaging and instant messaging on literacy. English Studies94(5): 582–602.10.1080/0013838X.2013.795737
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2013.795737 [Google Scholar]
  66. (2015) Out-of-the-ordinary orthography: the use of textisms in Dutch youngsters’ written computer-mediated communication. York Papers in Linguistics, special issue, PARLAY Proceedings2: 127–142.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Verheijen, Lieke, & Wessel Stoop
    (2016) Collecting Facebook posts and WhatsApp chats: corpus compilation of private social media messages. InP. Sojka et al. (eds.), Text, Speech and Dialogue: 19th International Conference, TSD 2016, LNAI 9924, 249–258. Springer.10.1007/978‑3‑319‑45510‑5_29
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45510-5_29 [Google Scholar]
  68. Werry, Christopher C.
    (1996) Linguistic and interactional features of Internet Relay Chat. InSusan C. Herring (ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives, 47–63. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.39.06wer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.39.06wer [Google Scholar]
  69. Winzker, Kristy, Frenette Southwood & Kate Huddlestone
    (2009) Investigating the impact of SMS speak on the written work of English first language and English second language high school learners. Per Linguam25(2): 1–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Zappavigna, Michele
    (ed.) (2012) Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the Web. New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00012.ver
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/wll.00012.ver
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month

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