• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
An Examination of the Online Dialect
Observing the Effects of Instant Messaging on Language
Linguistics 55ACDecember 2, 2003
Michael HoisieMatthew Jurka Nalini PadmanabhanGrace YiMichelle Yong
1
 
Introduction
In recent years, online communication has become increasingly widespread,overtaking some of the most traditional forms of communication in an amazingly shortspan of time. Its new popularity can be attributed to the increasing demand for convenience and flexibility in communication. In fact, it has brought up numerouschanges in how people communicate and interact socially.There is not simply one form of online communication. Established forms such asemail and newsgroups, primarily conducted through a series of delayed responses, arestill in use today, although they are becoming associated with more formal contexts. Withthe advent of real-time online communication such as instant messenger services and chatrooms, and the explosive popularity of this method, the way we communicate online haschanged. In 2002, over 139 million instant-message accounts operated in North America,according to the research firm IDC.While online communication has obvious benefits, it is limited by the fact that itmust be purely conducted through text. Talking through an online medium may never beas expressive or efficient as direct conversation. Online communication is “… repletewith its own linguistic conventions. It’s not exactly a language of its own, but it iscertainly a dialect,” according to Marshall Breeding, a library technology officer atVanderbilt University. However, with this new online dialect comes a new host of  problems, many of which will be addressed in the upcoming sections.
Methodology
Our primary source of data was a survey that we administered online. The surveyconsisted of twenty-one questions designed to give us detailed information about the2
 
linguistic characteristics of the online conversations people have. The first ten questionsof the survey related to online communication in general, while the remaining elevenwere geared toward instant messaging. The survey was available to the general publicand was advertised through a variety of methods including but not limited to e-mail lists,newsgroups, and instant messenger profiles. The results of the survey were statisticallyanalyzed to include both our overall conclusions as well as considerations of theinfluence of age and gender on the overall results of the survey. Refer to Appendix A for acopy of the original survey and complete results. No single survey, no matter how well designed, can completely eliminate the problems of statistical bias, and our survey is no exception. Although we had a relativelylarge sample size of over 240 respondents, the sample population was not representativeof the general population. Specifically, we had a disproportionately large response fromthose aged 18-21. Also, there was somewhat of a bias in regards to gender becauseapproximately 55% of the respondents were female. However, our statistical analysis wasable to take into consideration the gender bias. Also, the survey was conducted online, soour results were biased toward those who use the Internet more frequently. Since thesurvey was optional, there was also a voluntary response bias among the respondents;those who responded were more likely to have something to say. Finally, due to thedetachment and lack of accountability among our response pool, it is possible that somerespondents may have inaccurately portrayed their experience with online conversation.Our secondary source of information was a collection of authentic onlineconversations. Only those conversations containing specific linguistic characteristicswere used, with the express consent of its participants.3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...