A Study of Lexical Features and Ideograms in SMS Language: A Gender Based Study
Keywords:
SMS messages, Gender differences, lexical and typographical features, lexical reductionAbstract
The purpose of the research is to highlight the language of youth which has been generally debated in face to face communication and in computer mediated communication. This research attempts to investigate the linguistic attitude of young students in SMS text messaging. Gender differentiation in the linguistic aspects of SMS text messaging is an important factor. The methodology of current research is mixed method which is descriptive and quantitative in its nature. Data shows that this informal and abbreviated language which is used by young learners while texting, students often shorten their words and sentences as much as possible. However, text messaging for male and female students differs in lexical reduction and attenuation. Males use more initials, clippings, and subtitles for their messages than females. Females, on the other hand, have a tendency to use letter and number homophones rather than males. This indicates that females use more messaging users than males. It also indicates that men are more experienced in texting, which requires speed and economy. A new way in which texters express and show their feelings and emotions is Semiotic. They often express their feelings through signs instead of words. Male authors embed icons much lower than women's text. Differences are generally higher in the usage of emojis, contraction and letter and number homophones though peripheral to the extent the usage of clipping, punctuation, phonetic spellings, are concerned in both genders. Yet at the same time contrasts are there. This study shows that gender differences have a very important role to play on a regular basis and that there is a noticeable break in the performance of linguistic features (lexical and typographical features) in SMS text messages.
Downloads
References
Al-Khateeb, M. & Sabbah, E. H. (2008). Language Choice in mobile text messages among Jordanian university students. Sky Journal of Linguistics, 21, 37-65.
Amir, Z., Abidin, H., Darus, S., & Ismail, K. (2012). Gender differences in the language use of malaysian teen bloggers. GEMA: Online Journal of Language Studies, 12(1), 105-124.
Anis, J. (2007). Neography: Unconventional spelling in french SMS text messages. The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, 87-115.
Baron, N. S. (1998). Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of email. Language & Communication, 18(2), 133-170.
Baron, N. S. (2003). Language of the internet. The Stanford Handbook for Language Engineers, 59-127. Retrieved March 21, 2020 from http://nl.ijs.si/janes/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/baron2003.pdf
Baron, N. S. (2004). See you online gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 397-423.
Baron, N. S. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. Madison Avenue, NY: Oxford University Press.
Baron. N. S. (2005). Instant messaging by American college students: A case study in CMC. American Association for the Advancement of Science Annual Meeting. Feb, 17-21. Washington, DC.
Baron, N. S., & Ling, R. (2011). Necessary smileys and useless periods: Redefining punctuation in electronically-mediated communication. Visible Language, 45(1), 45-67.
Bodomo, A. B. (2010). Computer-mediated communication for linguistics and literacy: Technology and natural language education: Technology and natural language education IGI Global.
Brinton, L. J., & Brinton, D. (2010). The linguistic structure of modern english John Benjamins Publishing.
Bubas, G. (2002). Computer Mediated Communication, Theories and Phenomena: Factors that influence collaboration over the Internet.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Culwin & Faulkner (2006). Assessing the nigerianness of SMS text messages in English. . English Today, 24(1), 51-56.
Cho, S. H. (2007). Effects of motivations and gender on adolescents' self-disclosure in online chatting. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(3), 339-345.
Coates, J. (1993). Women, Men, and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in Language: Longman.
Crystal, D. (2004). Language and the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (2008). Txtng: The gr8 db8. OUP Oxford.
Crystal, D. (2011). Dictionary of linguistics and phonetics John Wiley & Sons.
Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20(3), 249-268.
Dunn, H, and Dunn, L. (2007). Gender standing Mobile Telephony: Women, Men and their Use of Cellular Phones in Jamaica. A Working Paper.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1991). Explaining sex differences in social behavior: A meta-analytic perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 306-315.
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and gender. Cambridge University Press.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2011). An introduction to language(9th ed). New York: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Fishman, P. M. (1983). Interaction: The work women do. In B. Thorne, C. Kamarae & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, Gender and Society (pp. 88-101). London: Newbury House.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design & evaluate research in education (4th ed). New York: McGraw High School.
Georgakopoulou, A. (2006). Postscript in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (4): 548-557.
Grinter, R. E., & Eldridge, M. A. (2001). y do tngrs luv 2 txt msg? Ecscw 2001, 219-238. Retrieved April 18, 2020, from http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~beki/c14.pdf.
Haggan, M. et.al. (2007). Text messaging in Kuwait. Is the medium the message? Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 26(4), pp. 427-449.
Herring, S. C. (1992). Gender and participation in computer-mediated linguistic discourse. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics. Retrieved May 13, 2020 from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/participation.1992.pdf
Herring, S. C. (1994). Politeness in computer culture: Why women thank and men flame. In Cultural Performances: Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 278-294). Berkeley Women and Language Group. Retrieved.May 3, 2020, from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/politeness.1994.pdf
Herring, S. C. (1995). Men’s language on the Internet. Nordlyd, 23. Proceedings of the 2nd Nordic Language and Gender Conference (pp. 1-20).
Herring, S. C. (1996). Two variants of an electronic message schema. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives (pp. 81-108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Retrieved. July 2, 2020 from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/2variants.1996.pdf
Herring, S. C. (Ed.). (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (Vol. 39). John Benjamins Publishing. (p,1)
Herring, S. C. (2000). Gender differences in CMC: Findings and implications. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Journal, 18(1). Retrieved July 4, 2020 from http://www.cpsr.org/issues/womenintech/herring/
Herring, S. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse. In Tannen, D. Schiffrin, D.& Hamilton, H. (Ed.), The handbook of discourse analysis. (pp. 612-634) Oxford: Blackwell. Retrieved May 3, 2020, from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/cmd.pdf
Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 109-168.
Herring, S. C. (2003). Gender and power in on-line communication. The Handbook of Language and Gender, 202-228. Retrieved June 12, 2020 from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/gender.power.pdf
Herring, S. C. (2003). Gender and power in online communication. In J. Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The Handbook of Language and Gender (pp. 202-228). Oxford:Blackwell.Publishers. Retrieved 2nd Feb, 2020 from, http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/cmda.pdf
Herring, S. C., & Martinson, A. (2004). Assessing gender authenticity in computermediated language use: Evidence from an identity game. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,23(4), 424-446. Retrieved May 4, 2020, from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/herring.martinson.2004.pdf
Herring, S. C., & Paolillo, J. C. (2006). Gender and genre variation in weblogs. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10 (4), 439-459. Retrieved August 28, 2020, from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/jslx.pdf
Herring, S. C., & Zelenkauskaite, A. (2008). Gendered typography: Abbreviation and insertion in Italian iTV SMS. In J. F. Siegel, T. C. Nagel, A. LaurenteLapole, & J. Auger (Eds.), IUWPL7: Gender in language: Classic questions, new contexts (pp. 73-92). Bloomington, IN: IULC Publications.
Holmes, J. (2008). An introduction to sociolinguistics (3rd ed.). London and New York: Pearson Education Limited.
Jones, S. G. (Ed.) (1995). CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Julianne Cheek. (2008). Research design. In Lisa M.Given (Ed.), The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 761-763). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Kapidzic, S., & Herring, S. C. (2011). Gender, communication, and Self‐Presentation in teen chatrooms revisited: Have patterns changed? Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 17(1), 39-59.
Kasesniemi, E., & Rautiainen, P. (2002). Mobile culture of children and teenagers in finland. Perpetual Contact, 170.
Kaul, A. (1998). Business Communication. New Dehli: Prentice Hall of India.
Killer & Dundrell, (2006); Herring (1992, 1993, 1995); Self & Meyer (1991); Sierbe (2002). Gender Differences and Culture in English Short Message Service Language among Malay University Students. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18(2).
Labov, W. (1990). The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change, 2(02), 205-254.
Lakoff, R. et.al. (1975). Language and woman's place. Language in Society, 2(01), 45-79.
Poynton, C. et. al. (1989). Language and gender: Making the difference Oxford University Press, USA.
Rafi, M. S. (2008). SMS text analysis: Language, gender and current practices. Paper presented at the 26th Annual TESOL France Colloquium. Retrieved june 18, 2020, from http://www.tesol-france.org/uploaded_files/files/Coll07-Shaban-Rafi.pdf
Rossetti, P. (1997). Gender issues on the information highway: An analysis of communication styles in electronic discussion groups.
Schneider-Hufschmidt, M. (2005). Usability Issues of Sending Text Messages. In: R. Harper, L. Palen, & A. Taylor (Eds.), The Inside Text: Social, Cultural and Design Perspectives on SMS. (Computer Supported Cooperative Work). 223-236. New York: Springer.
Selfe, C. L., & Meyer. P. R. (1991). Testing claims for on-line conferences. Written Communication, 8, 163-92.
Thurlow, C., & Brown, A. (2003). Generation txt? The sociolinguistics of young people’s text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online, 1(1), 30.
Thurlow, C., Lengel, L & Tomic, A.(2004). Computer Mediated Communication social interaction and the internet. London Thousand Oaks, New Dehli. Sage Publication.
Thurlow, C., & Poff, M. (2009). The language of text-messaging. In S. Herring, D. Stein & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Handbook of the Pragmatics of CMC (pp. 1-24).
Tossell, C. C., Kortum, P., Shepard, C., Barg-Walkow, L. H., Rahmati, A., & Zhong, L. (2011). A longitudinal study of emoticon use in text messaging from smartphones. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 659-663.
Webb & Wright (2011). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction a relational perspective. Communication research, 19(1), 52-90.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Competitive Linguistic Research Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
