Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-12T10:41:11.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2016

Sali A. Tagliamonte  and
In collaboration with Dylan Uscher, Lawrence Kwok, and students from HUM199Y 2009 and 2010
Sali A. Tagliamonte
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canadasali.tagliamonte@utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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)*

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 1 - 32
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Androutsopolous, Jannis (ed.) (2014). Mediatization and sociolinguistic change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. (1998). Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of email. Language and Communication 18:133–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. (2003). Language of the internet. In Farghali, Ali (ed.), The Stanford handbook for language engineers, 1–63. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. (2004). See you online: Gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 23:397–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Naomi S., & Ling, Rich (2003). IM and SMS: A linguistic comparison. Fourth International Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers, Toronto, October 16–19.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, & Finnegan, Edward (1994). Sociolinguistic perspectives on register. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David (2006). Language and the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danchev, Andrei, & Kytö, Merja (1994). The construction be going to + infinitive in Early Modern English. In Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 59–77. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Diane (2005). Varieties of Modern English: An introduction. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. (1977). Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language 1:19–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobson, Roger (2003). Text messaging is spoiling teenagers’ sleep. British Medical Journal 327:582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope (1988). Adolescent social structure and the spread of linguistic change. Language in Society 17:183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. (1994). Dialect, register, and genre: Working assumptions about conventionalization. In Biber & Finegan, 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Kathleen; Brunner, Hans; & Whittemore, Greg (1991). Interactive written discouse as an emergent grammar. Written Communication 8:8–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard, Daniel (2006). Nvm about the lolls; Instant messaging could actually be strengthening teenagers’ English. The Toronto Star Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C. (2003). Gender and power in on-line communication. In Holmes, Janet & Meyerhoff, Miriam (eds.), The handbook of language and gender, 202–28. Malden: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan C. (2004). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media and Society 6:26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@internet 4. Online: www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2007/761.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, Lars (2010). How to spell the vernacular: A multivariate study of Jamaican e-mails and blogs. In Jaffe, Alexandra & Sebba, Mark (eds.), Orthography as social action: Scripts, spelling, identity, and power, 325–28. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ito, Rika, & Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2003). Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32:257–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Graham M., & Schieffelin, Bambi B. (2009). Enquoting voices, accomplishing talk: Uses of be + like in instant messaging. Language and Communication 29:77–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesler, Sara; Siegel, Jane; & McGuire, Timothy W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist 39:1123–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Ling, Rich (2005). The sociolinguistics of SMS: An analysis of SMS use by a random sample of Norwegians. In Ling, Rich & Pedersen, Per E. (eds.), Mobile communications: Re-negotiation of the social sphere, 335–49. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nesselhauf, Nadja (2006). The decline of be to and the rise of be going to in Late Modern English: Connection or coincidence? In Houswitschka, Christoph, Knappe, Gabriele, & Müller, Anja (ed.), Anglistentag 2005 Bamberg Proceedings, 515–29. Trier: WVT.Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, Nadja (2007a). Diachronic analysis with the internet? Will and shall in ARCHER and in a corpus of e-texts from the web. In Hundt, Marianne, Nesselhauf, Nadja, & Biewer, Carolin (eds.), Corpus linguistics and the web, 287–305. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, Nadja (2007b). The spread of the progressive and its ‘future’ use. English Language and Linguistics 11:193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Partington, Alan (1993). Corpus evidence of language change: The case of intensifiers. In Baker, Mona, Francis, Gill, & Tognini-Bonelli, Elena (eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair, 177–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana, & Tagliamonte, Sali A. (1999). The grammaticalization of going to in (African American) English. Language Variation and Change 11:315–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne (1994). On the creation and expansion of registers: Sports reporting in Tok Pisin. In Biber, Douglas (ed.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register, 59–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segerstad, Ylva af Hård (2005). Language in SMS: A socio-linguistic view. In Harper, Richard, Palen, Leysia, & Taylor, Alex (eds.), The inside text: Social, cultural and design perspectives on SMS, 33–51. The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squires, Lauren (2007). Whats the use of apostrophes? Gender difference and linguistic variation in instant messaging. American University TESOL Working Papers 4. Online: http://www1.american.edu/tesol?CMCSquiresFinal.pdf.Google Scholar
Stenström, Anna-Brita (2000). It's enough funny, man: Intensifiers in teenage talk. In Kirk, John (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English. Papers from the Nineteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerised Corpora (ICAME 1998), 177–90. Amsterdam: Rodopi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt (2003). Be going to versus will/shall: Does syntax matter? Journal of English Linguistics 31:295–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2002). Comparative sociolinguistics. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, Peter, & Schilling-Estes, Natalie (eds.), Handbook of language variation and change, 729–63. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2008). So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Canadian English. Special issue of English Language and Linguistics, Intensifiers 12:361–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., & D'Arcy, Alexandra (2009). Peaks beyond phonology: Adolescence, incrementation, and language change. Language 85:58–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Denis, Derek (2008). Linguistic ruin? LOL! Instant messaging, teen language and linguistic change. American Speech 83:3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A.; Durham;, Mercedes & Smith, Jennifer (2014). Grammaticalization at an early stage: Future be going to in conservative British dialects. English Language and Linguistics 18:75–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Roberts, Chris (2005). So cool, so weird, so innovative! The use of intensifiers in the television series Friends. American Speech 80:280–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Uscher, Dylan (2009). Queer youth in the speech community: A comparative analysis of variation and change. Presented at NWAV 38 (New Ways of Analyzing Variation), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. October 22–25, 2009.Google Scholar
Thurlow, Crispin (2003). Generation txt? Exposing the sociolinguistics of young people's text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online 1. Online: extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/v1/n1/a3/thurlow2002003.html.Google Scholar
Thurlow, Crispin (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 11:667–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres-Cacoullos, Rena, & Walker, James A. (2009a). On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: A variaionist study of that. Linguistics 47:1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres-Cacoullos, Rena, & Walker, James A. (2009b). The present of the English future: Grammatical variation and collocations in discourse. Language 85:321–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uscher, Dylan (2009). Understanding the linguistic centaur: Language variation and change in computer-mediated communication. Toronto: University of Toronto MA forum paper.Google Scholar
Uscher, Dylan (2010). Language change or just a phase? A real-time study of intensifiers in teenage blogs. Paper presented at Change and Variation in Canada 4, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador.Google Scholar
van Herk, Gerard (2009). That's so tween: Intensifier use in on-line subcultures. Paper presented at NWAV 35, November 9-12, 2006, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
Williams, Christopher (2013). Changes in the verb phrase in legislative language in English. In Aarts, Bas, Close, Joanne, Leech, Geoffrey, & Wallis, Sean A. (eds.), The verb phrase in English: Investigating recent language change with corpora, 353–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, Simeon J. (1996). Oral and written linguistic aspects of computer conterencing: A corpus based study. In Herring, Susan C. (ed.), Computer-mediated communication, 29–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar