Uses and Abuses of Netspeak
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v9i1p53Keywords:
Acronyms, Abbreviations, Emoticons, Netspeak, Net-SpeakersAbstract
In today’s digital world, Netspeak has become an exigent that educators and net-speakers cannot ignore. It is a way of speaking or writing on the Internet. It is recognized by acronyms, abbreviations, emoticons and textism as well. It is a language pattern used in Media and the global Internet users are called Net-speakers. The English language is the most preferred language on the Internet. We come across new words and terminologies by using different apps for different purposes in social media. Netspeak has many uses and abuses as well. It has contributed a lot to English vocabulary. Every now and then we get to know new words like selfie, techy, techno, yup, yo, bravo, fab, hip-hop, non-veg, and so on. Oxford dictionary adds around 500 new words in each quarter. This contribution comprises of the words used in Netspeak and other terms are formed lexicographically. Different slangs like lol (lots of laughter or laughing out land), brw (be right way), idk (I do not know), etc. are in vogue. These slangs are popular. However, everyone is not familiar with these expressions and ultimately leading to confusion and frustrations for some people. In addition to this, it has affected mainly language skills largely among children under 12 years of age. Their writing and speaking consists of Netspeak and they seem to consider it a part of their language. This piece of work has focused on the terms used in Netspeak and how these language patterns affect media positively as well as negatively.
References
Abraham, L. B. & Lawrence, W. (2009). Electronic discourse in language learning and language teaching. Amsterdam: Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Baihui, S. & Fengjie, L. (2017). The analysis of anti-language from the perspective of current situation of Netspeak. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 5 (2), 50-56. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20170502.14
Chen J, Huang S. & Luo R. (2020). Does Netspeak experience interfere with the processing of standard words? Evidence from Netspeak word recognition and semantic decisions. Frontiers in Psycholology,11,1932. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01932
Crystal, David (2006). Language and the Internet (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Head, J., Neumann, E., Russell, P., Helton, W. S. & Shears, C. (2013). New Zealand text-speak word norms and masked priming effects. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 42(2), 5-16.
Lee, J. (2002). I think, therefore IM: Text shortcuts invade schoolwork, and teachers are not amused. New York Times, September 19, E1.
Thangaraj, S. & Maniam, M. (2015). The influence of Netspeak on students’ writing. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(1), 45-52. https://dx.doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i1.963
Verheijen, L. (2013). The effects of text messaging and instant messaging on literacy. English Studies, 94(5), 582–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838X.2013.795737
Waldron S., Kemp N., Plester B. & Wood C. (2015). Texting behavior and language skills in children and adults. In
Rosen L. D., Cheever N. A. & Carrier L. M. (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of psychology, technology, and society. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies
International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies applies the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic Licence (CC BY-NC 2.0)
