FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2522619492> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2522619492 abstract "Linguistic research on computer-mediated communication has frequently addressed the supposed or actual orality (broadly, ‘spoken-likeness’ or ‘conversationality’) of written language in online contexts, and tends to construe orality in ‘discourse-external’ terms – e.g., in terms of theoretically or computationally motivated formal categories. This study presents an approach toward complementing extant research by focusing on ‘discourse-internal’ construals, or participant orientations (Schegloff 1997). The aim is to examine how Twitter users construe talk, on their own terms, when explicitly describing Twitter discourse as ‘talk-like’. The material comprises manually collected retrievals (via Twitter’s web-based search interface) of tweets containing the string “tweet/s like [pronoun] talk/s”, for the pronouns I, you, he, she, and they (N=300). Two research questions are addressed:i. When Twitter users refer to their own or their peers’ Twitter discourse as being talk-like, how, if at all, do they substantiate notions of talk-likeness?ii. What attitudes or values are attached to the notions talk-likeness expressed?The results show that construals are often left implicit, but sometimes elaborated either in the body of a single tweet or over the course of a conversational exchange between multiple users. When elaborated, the construals are very diverse, but sometimes directly pertinent to categories common in both popular debate and scholarly work, such as mode, register, correctness, and appropriateness (see e.g. Baron 2008; Crystal 2006, 2008; Hard af Segerstad 2003; Jonsson 2013; Meredith & Stokoe 2014; Wikstrom 2014). For instance, some users associate talk-likeness with grammatical or orthographic (in-) correctness (Example 1), and others associate it with orthographic or lexical representation of dialect or accent (2), or less tangible notions of voice or tone (3).I tweet like I talk so if I spell some wrong it was on purpose. ... shiiid I passed all my English classes.......Hate it when scots tweet like they talk, you're not even writing real words@username oh my. He tweets like he talks. I can literally hear his overly preachy tone in those tweets…The reason I know it's not really [Jennifer] is because she's too grammatically correct. [Jen] tweets like she talks.The expressed attitudes and values concern, inter alia, perceived problems of comprehensibility or appropriateness, both amusement and annoyance at the novelty of talk-like written language, and affiliation with identity categories or notions of authentic identity (Example 4; cf. Benwell & Stokoe 2006:245; Deumert 2014). Overall, the results suggest that a focus on users’ construals of their own computer-mediated discourse offers a window on how issues of theoretical interest to linguists, such as mode and register, are not only instantiated but also actively negotiated in online language use.ReferencesBaron, N. S. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Benwell, B., & Stokoe, E. (2006). Discourse and identity Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet (2 ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Crystal, D. (2008). Txtng: The gr8 deb8. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Deumert, A. (2014). The performance of a ludic self on social network(ing) sites. In P. Seargeant & C. Tagg (Eds.), The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet (pp. 23-45). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Hard af Segerstad, Y. (2003). Use and adaptation of written language to the conditions of computer-mediated communication (2 ed.). Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.Jonsson, E. (2013). Conversational writing: A multidimensional study of synchronous and supersynchronous computer-mediated communication. Uppsala University: Engelska institutionen.Meredith, J., & Stokoe, E. (2014). Repair: Comparing Facebook ‘chat’ with spoken interaction. Discourse & Communication, 8(2), 181-207. doi: 10.1177/1750481313510815Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Whose text? Whose context? Discourse & Society, 8(2), 165-187. doi: 10.1177/0957926597008002002Wikstrom, P. (2014). & she was like O_O: Animation of reported speech on Twitter. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 13(3), 83-111." @default.
• W2522619492 created "2016-09-30" @default.
• W2522619492 creator A5016772219 @default.
• W2522619492 date "2015-01-01" @default.
• W2522619492 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2522619492 title "Not even real words : User construals of Twitter discourse as ‘talk-like’" @default.
• W2522619492 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2522619492 type Work @default.
• W2522619492 sameAs 2522619492 @default.
• W2522619492 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2522619492 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2522619492 hasAuthorship W2522619492A5016772219 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C153349607 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C24184978 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C26326936 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C2778962823 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C2779332521 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C2780110242 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C547764534 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C138885662 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C142362112 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C153349607 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C15744967 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C19417346 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C24184978 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C26326936 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C2778962823 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C2779332521 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C2780110242 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C41008148 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C41895202 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C547764534 @default.
• W2522619492 hasConceptScore W2522619492C77805123 @default.
• W2522619492 hasLocation W25226194921 @default.
• W2522619492 hasOpenAccess W2522619492 @default.
• W2522619492 hasPrimaryLocation W25226194921 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W133294314 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1566808522 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1591410603 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1603929876 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1604538932 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1755834889 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2044694237 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2082502972 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2602993203 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2891885391 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W3035377201 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W3107315214 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W3148311719 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W338584692 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W747971503 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W979812882 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W1808386676 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2493793423 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W2607840938 @default.
• W2522619492 hasRelatedWork W3089897303 @default.
• W2522619492 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2522619492 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2522619492 magId "2522619492" @default.
• W2522619492 workType "article" @default.