Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

So sick or so cool? The language of youth on the internet

  • Sali A. Tagliamonte (a1) and In collaboration with Dylan Uscher, Lawrence Kwok, and students from HUM199Y 2009 and 2010
Abstract
Abstract

This article presents the results of a two-year study of North American youth which produced a 179,000 word corpus of internet language from the same writers across three registers: email, instant messaging, and phone texting. Analysis of three linguistic phenomena—(i) acronyms, short forms, and initialisms; (ii) intensifiers; and (iii) future temporal reference—reveals that despite variation in form and contrasting frequencies across registers, the patterns of variant use are stable. This offers linguistic evidence that there is no degeneration of grammar in internet language use. Instead, the young people are fluidly navigating a complex set of new written registers, and they command them all. (Internet, language change, youth)*

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Naomi S. Baron (1998). Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of email. Language and Communication 18:133–79.

Naomi S. Baron (2004). See you online: Gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 23:397423.

David Crystal (2006). Language and the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

R. M. W. Dixon (1977). Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language 1:1980.

Roger Dobson (2003). Text messaging is spoiling teenagers’ sleep. British Medical Journal 327:582.

Kathleen Ferrara ; Hans Brunner ; & Greg Whittemore (1991). Interactive written discouse as an emergent grammar. Written Communication 8:834.

Susan C. Herring (2003). Gender and power in on-line communication. In Janet Holmes & Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.), The handbook of language and gender, 202–28. Malden: Blackwell.

Susan C. Herring (2004). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media and Society 6:2636.

Rika Ito , & Sali A. Tagliamonte (2003). Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32:257–79.

Graham M. Jones , & Bambi B. Schieffelin (2009). Enquoting voices, accomplishing talk: Uses of be+like in instant messaging. Language and Communication 29:77113.

Sara Kiesler ; Jane Siegel ; & Timothy W. McGuire (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist 39:1123–34.

Rich Ling (2005). The sociolinguistics of SMS: An analysis of SMS use by a random sample of Norwegians. In Rich Ling & Per E. Pedersen (eds.), Mobile communications: Re-negotiation of the social sphere, 335–49. London: Springer.

Nadja Nesselhauf (2007a). Diachronic analysis with the internet? Will and shall in ARCHER and in a corpus of e-texts from the web. In Marianne Hundt , Nadja Nesselhauf , & Carolin Biewer (eds.), Corpus linguistics and the web, 287305. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Nadja Nesselhauf (2007b). The spread of the progressive and its ‘future’ use. English Language and Linguistics 11:193209.

Alan Partington (1993). Corpus evidence of language change: The case of intensifiers. In Mona Baker , Gill Francis , & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 177–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Shana Poplack , & Sali A. Tagliamonte (1999). The grammaticalization of going to in (African American) English. Language Variation and Change 11:315–42.

Ylva af Hård Segerstad (2005). Language in SMS: A socio-linguistic view. In Richard Harper , Leysia Palen , & Alex Taylor (eds.), The inside text: Social, cultural and design perspectives on SMS, 3351. The Netherlands: Springer.

Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (2003). Be going to versus will/shall: Does syntax matter? Journal of English Linguistics 31:295323.

Sali A. Tagliamonte (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sali A. Tagliamonte , & Alexandra D'Arcy (2009). Peaks beyond phonology: Adolescence, incrementation, and language change. Language 85:58108.

Sali A. Tagliamonte , & Derek Denis (2008). Linguistic ruin? LOL! Instant messaging, teen language and linguistic change. American Speech 83:334.

Sali A. Tagliamonte , & Chris Roberts (2005). So cool, so weird, so innovative! The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends. American Speech 80:280300.

Crispin Thurlow (2006). From statistical panic to moral panic: The metadiscursive construction and poplar exaggeration of new media language in the print media. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 11:667701.

Rena Torres-Cacoullos , & James A. Walker (2009a). On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variaionist study of that. Linguistics 47:143.

Rena Torres-Cacoullos , & James A. Walker (2009b). The present of the English future: Grammatical variation and collocations in discourse. Language 85:321–54.

Christopher Williams (2013). Changes in the verb phrase in legislative language in English. In Bas Aarts , Joanne Close , Geoffrey Leech , & Sean A. Wallis (eds.), The verb phrase in English: Investigating recent language change with corpora, 353–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Simeon J. Yates (1996). Oral and written linguistic aspects of computer conterencing: A corpus based study. In Susan C. Herring (ed.), Computer-mediated communication, 2946. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Language in Society
  • ISSN: 0047-4045
  • EISSN: 1469-8013
  • URL: /core/journals/language-in-society
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 107
Total number of PDF views: 681 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1538 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.