Jump to content

Internet slang: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverted edits by 70.82.65.137 to last revision by Vicenarian (HG)
Line 31: Line 31:


Victoria Clarke, in her analysis of telnet talkers,<ref>{{cite web|title=Internet English: an analysis of the variety of language used on Telnet talkers|author=Victoria Clarke|date=January 30, 2002|url=http://www.american.edu/lfs/tesol/2003%20Paper--Lg%20of%20the%20Internet.pdf|format=PDF}}</ref> states that capitalization is important when people write "LOL", and that "a user who types ''LOL'' may well be laughing louder than one who types ''lol''", and opines that "these standard expressions of laughter are losing force through overuse". Egan<ref name=Egan>{{cite book|title=Email Etiquette|author=Michael Egan|publisher=Cool Publications Ltd|isbn=1844811182|pages=32,57&ndash;58}}</ref> describes ''LOL'', ''ROTFL''<!-- "ROTFL" really is what the cited source says. Do not "correct" it to "ROFL", which is not what the cited source says.-->, and other initialisms as helpful as long as they are not overused. He recommends against their use in business correspondence because the recipient may not be aware of their meanings, and because in general neither they nor emoticons are (in his view) appropriate in such correspondence. June Hines Moore<ref>{{cite book|title=Manners Made Easy for Teens|author=June Hines Moore|pages=54|publisher=B&amp;H Publishing Group|date=2007|isbn=0805444599|isbn13=9780805444599}}</ref> shares that view. So, too, does Lindsell-Roberts<ref>{{cite book|title=Strategic Business Letters and E-Mail|author=Sheryl Lindsell-Roberts|pages=289|publisher=Houghton Mifflin|isbn=0618448330}}</ref>, who gives the same advice of not using them in business correspondence, "or you won't be LOL".
Victoria Clarke, in her analysis of telnet talkers,<ref>{{cite web|title=Internet English: an analysis of the variety of language used on Telnet talkers|author=Victoria Clarke|date=January 30, 2002|url=http://www.american.edu/lfs/tesol/2003%20Paper--Lg%20of%20the%20Internet.pdf|format=PDF}}</ref> states that capitalization is important when people write "LOL", and that "a user who types ''LOL'' may well be laughing louder than one who types ''lol''", and opines that "these standard expressions of laughter are losing force through overuse". Egan<ref name=Egan>{{cite book|title=Email Etiquette|author=Michael Egan|publisher=Cool Publications Ltd|isbn=1844811182|pages=32,57&ndash;58}}</ref> describes ''LOL'', ''ROTFL''<!-- "ROTFL" really is what the cited source says. Do not "correct" it to "ROFL", which is not what the cited source says.-->, and other initialisms as helpful as long as they are not overused. He recommends against their use in business correspondence because the recipient may not be aware of their meanings, and because in general neither they nor emoticons are (in his view) appropriate in such correspondence. June Hines Moore<ref>{{cite book|title=Manners Made Easy for Teens|author=June Hines Moore|pages=54|publisher=B&amp;H Publishing Group|date=2007|isbn=0805444599|isbn13=9780805444599}}</ref> shares that view. So, too, does Lindsell-Roberts<ref>{{cite book|title=Strategic Business Letters and E-Mail|author=Sheryl Lindsell-Roberts|pages=289|publisher=Houghton Mifflin|isbn=0618448330}}</ref>, who gives the same advice of not using them in business correspondence, "or you won't be LOL".

Currently rising in underground computer culture is a new use of the now-common chat phrase "lol" to "loll". The new so-called "jargon" means "lick old ladies legs". Derived from the same intention as "pwn", "loll" is a snide remark, indicating that the user is able to use the internet about as well as the offender's gradma's (or old nasty back-fat english teacher's) leg, but also has an undertone to the original phrase "lol" meaning laugh out loud, laughing both at the phrase and the incompetence of the user. The offended may get upset, and could consequently respond with "gtg" meaning "go taste grandpa", therefore completing the smack-down. Pwn3d.


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 19:07, 22 May 2009

Internet slang (Internet language, netspeak, or chatspeak) is slang that Internet users have popularized and, in many cases, coined. Such terms often originate with the purpose of saving keystrokes, and many people use the same abbreviations in text messages, instant messaging, and Twitter, or Facebook . Acronyms, keyboard symbols, and shortened words are often methods of abbreviation in Internet slang.

In other cases, new dialects of Internet slang such as leet or Lolspeak develop as ingroup memes rather than time savers. In leet speak, letters may be replaced by characters of similar appearance. For this reason, leet is often written as l33t or 1337.

Origins of internet slang

In 1975, Raphael Finkel at Stanford compiled a collection, the Jargon File, of hacker slang from technical cultures such as the MIT AI Lab, the Stanford AI Lab (SAIL), and others of the old ARPANET AI/LISP/PDP-10 communities. Two items on this list in current use as internet slang are "flame" and "loser". By 1990 the Jargon File had been enriched with examples of shorthand used in talk mode between two terminals (for example, "BTW", "FYI", and "TNX") as well as some slang expressions in use on Usenet and new commercial networks like Compuserve (for example, "LOL", "ROTF", and "AFK".) [1]

A Computerworld article discussing the origin of some current web slang terms cites a still-online Fidonet article from 1989, [2] which displays emoticons in addition to all-caps shortcuts like "LOL" and "BRB".[3]

Spread of internet slang beyond computer-mediated communication

This article contains phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA. For the distinction between [ ], / / and ⟨ ⟩, see IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters.

Many items of internet jargon cross from computer-mediated communication to face-to-face communication. For example, The New York Times collected "buzzwords of 2008" include "FAIL", "longphoto" (a term coined by Flickr for videos less than 90 seconds long), and various terms starting with "tw-" inspired by the web service Twitter.[4]

Teenagers now sometimes use internet acronyms in spoken communication as well as in written, for example, ROFL (Template:Pron-en or /ˈrɒfəl/) and LOL (pronounced /ˈloʊl/, /ˈlɒl/, or /ˌɛloʊˈɛl/). David Crystal says that the crossover from written slang to speech is "a brand new variety of language evolving, invented really by young people, within five years". [5]

Other commentators disagree, saying that these new words, being abbreviations for existing, long-used, phrases, don't "enrich" anything; they just shorten it.[6][7] Furthermore, linguist Geoffrey K. Pullum of the University of Edinburgh states that even if interjections such as LOL and ROTFL were to become very common in spoken English, their "total effect on language" would be "utterly trivial".[8]

Laccetti (professor of humanities at Stevens Institute of Technology) and Molsk, in their essay entitled The Lost Art of Writing,[9][10] are critical of the acronyms, predicting reduced chances of employment for students who use such acronyms, stating that, "Unfortunately for these students, their bosses will not be 'lol' when they read a report that lacks proper punctuation and grammar, has numerous misspellings, various made-up words, and silly acronyms." Fondiller and Nerone[11] in their style manual assert that "professional or business communication should never be careless or poorly constructed" whether one is writing an electronic mail message or an article for publication, and warn against the use of smileys and these abbreviations, stating that they are "no more than e-mail slang and have no place in business communication".

Yunker and Barry[12] in a study of online courses and how they can be improved through podcasting have found that these acronyms, and emoticons as well, are "often misunderstood" by students and are "difficult to decipher" unless their meanings are explained in advance. They single out the example of "ROFL" as not obviously being the abbreviation of "rolling on the floor laughing" (emphasis added). Haig[13] singles out LOL as one of the three most popular initialisms in Internet slang, alongside BFN ("bye for now") and IMHO ("in my humble opinion"). He describes these acronyms, and the various initialisms of Internet slang in general, as convenient, but warns that "as ever more obscure acronyms emerge they can also be rather confusing". Bidgoli[14] likewise states that these initialisms "save keystrokes for the sender but [...] might make comprehension of the message more difficult for the receiver" and that "[s]lang may hold different meanings and lead to misunderstandings especially in international settings"; he advises that they be used "only when you are sure that the other person knows the meaning".

A 2003 study of college students by Naomi Baron found that the use of initialisms even in computer-mediated communication (CMC), specifically in instant messaging, was actually lower than she had expected. The students "used few abbreviations, acronyms, and emoticons". The spelling was "reasonably good" and contractions were "not ubiquitous". Out of 2,185 transmissions, there were 90 initialisms in total, only 31 CMC-style abbreviations, and 49 emoticons. [7] Out of the 90 initialisms, 76 were occurrences of "lol".[15]

Linguistic analysis

Shortis[16] observes that ROTFL is a means of "annotating text with stage directions". Hueng, [17] in discussing these acronyms in the context of performative utterances, points out the difference between telling someone that one is laughing out loud and actually laughing out loud: "The latter response is a straightforward action. The former is a self-reflexive representation of an action: I not only do something but also show you that I am doing it. Or indeed, I may not actually laugh out loud but may use the locution 'LOL' to communicate my appreciation of your attempt at humor."

David Crystal[18] notes that use of LOL is not necessarily genuine, just as the use of smiley faces or grins is not necessarily genuine, posing the rhetorical question "How many people are actually 'laughing out loud' when they send LOL?". Franzini[19] concurs, stating that there is as yet no research that has determined the percentage of people who are actually laughing out loud when they write "LOL".

Bonnie Ruberg, in an article concerning internet linguistics shares the following insight, "In a world of text communication where real-life facial expressions and vocal intonations are impossible, abbreviations like "lol" sacrifice their real meaning in order to articulate our nuanced intentions. They, in and of themselves, become glib, cliche -- while at the same time almost necessary for expression online."[20]

Victoria Clarke, in her analysis of telnet talkers,[21] states that capitalization is important when people write "LOL", and that "a user who types LOL may well be laughing louder than one who types lol", and opines that "these standard expressions of laughter are losing force through overuse". Egan[22] describes LOL, ROTFL, and other initialisms as helpful as long as they are not overused. He recommends against their use in business correspondence because the recipient may not be aware of their meanings, and because in general neither they nor emoticons are (in his view) appropriate in such correspondence. June Hines Moore[23] shares that view. So, too, does Lindsell-Roberts[24], who gives the same advice of not using them in business correspondence, "or you won't be LOL".

Currently rising in underground computer culture is a new use of the now-common chat phrase "lol" to "loll". The new so-called "jargon" means "lick old ladies legs". Derived from the same intention as "pwn", "loll" is a snide remark, indicating that the user is able to use the internet about as well as the offender's gradma's (or old nasty back-fat english teacher's) leg, but also has an undertone to the original phrase "lol" meaning laugh out loud, laughing both at the phrase and the incompetence of the user. The offended may get upset, and could consequently respond with "gtg" meaning "go taste grandpa", therefore completing the smack-down. Pwn3d.

See also

References

  1. ^ Jargon file, version 2.1.1 (draft) 12 JUN 1990
  2. ^ FidoNews (May 8, 1989)
  3. ^ Computerworld (November 7, 2008) "FWIW -- The origins of 'Net shorthand"
  4. ^ Mark Leibovich and Grant Barrett (December 21, 2008). "The Buzzwords of 2008". The New York Times.
  5. ^ NPR "OMG: IM Slang Is Invading Everyday English" by Neda Ulaby (February 18, 2006
  6. ^ Neda Ulaby (February 18, 2006). "OMG: IM Slang Is Invading Everyday English". Digital Culture. National Public Radio.
  7. ^ a b Kristen Philipkoski (February 22, 2005). "The Web Not the Death of Language". Wired News.
  8. ^ Geoffrey K. Pullum (January 23, 2005). "English in Deep Trouble?". Language Log. Retrieved 2007-05-03.
  9. ^ Silvio Laccetti and Scott Molsk (September 6, 2003). "Cost of poor writing no laughing matter". Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
  10. ^ "Article co-authored by Stevens professor and student garners nationwide attention from business, academia" (Press release). Stevens Institute of Technology. October 22, 2003.
  11. ^ Shirley H. Fondiller and Barbara J. Nerone (2007). Health Professionals Style Manual. Springer Publishing Company. p. 98. ISBN 0826102077.
  12. ^ Frank Yunker and Stephen Barry. "Threaded Podcasting: The Evolution of On-Line Learning". In Dan Remenyi (ed.). Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, Université du Québec à Montréal, 22-23 June 2006. Academic Conferences Limited. p. 516. ISBN 1905305222. {{cite conference}}: Unknown parameter |booktitle= ignored (|book-title= suggested) (help)
  13. ^ Matt Haig (2001). E-Mail Essentials: How to Make the Most of E-Communications. Kogan Page. p. 89. ISBN 0749435763.
  14. ^ Hossein Bidgoli (2004). The Internet Encyclopedia. John Wiley and Sons. p. 277. ISBN 0471222011.
  15. ^ Naomi Baron (February 18, 200r). "Instant Messaging by American College Students: A Case Study in Computer-Mediated Communication" (PDF). American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  16. ^ Tim Shortis (2001). The Language of ICT. Routledge. p. 60. ISBN 0415222753. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |isbn13= ignored (help)
  17. ^ Jiuan Hueng (2003). "The emergence of pure consciousness: The Theatre of Virtual Selves in the age of the Internet". In Peter D. Hershock, M. T. Stepaniants, and Roger T. Ames (ed.). Technology and Cultural Values: On the Edge of the Third Millennium. University of Hawaii Press. p. 561. ISBN 0824826477.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
  18. ^ David Crystal (September 20, 2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge University Press. p. 34. ISBN 0-521-80212-1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  19. ^ Louis R. Franzini (2002). Kids Who Laugh: How to Develop Your Child's Sense of Humor. Square One Publishers, Inc. pp. 145–146. ISBN 0757000088.
  20. ^ Ruberg, Bonnie, "Naked in a Lawn Chair, LOL"
  21. ^ Victoria Clarke (January 30, 2002). "Internet English: an analysis of the variety of language used on Telnet talkers" (PDF).
  22. ^ Michael Egan. Email Etiquette. Cool Publications Ltd. pp. 32, 57–58. ISBN 1844811182.
  23. ^ June Hines Moore (2007). Manners Made Easy for Teens. B&H Publishing Group. p. 54. ISBN 0805444599. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |isbn13= ignored (help)
  24. ^ Sheryl Lindsell-Roberts. Strategic Business Letters and E-Mail. Houghton Mifflin. p. 289. ISBN 0618448330.

External links

Stub icon

This article related to telecommunications is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_slang&oldid=291670365"