Running Head: EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 1 The Evolution of Internet Linguistics: How Netspeak is Saving the English Language Salem Frias University of North Georgia EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 2 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to examine and discuss the concept of “internet linguistics” and how it impacts written Standard English. Because this field is new, the available data and scholarly articles on this topic are extremely limited, which caused me to compile my own research and draw from my own experiences with internet linguistics. By studying the writing styles of blogs, tweets, and other social media posts, I found underlying rules and self- imposed regulations regarding the usage of certain syntactic styles, which are presented in the paper. The results declared that, within internet linguistics, there are multiple different facets which affect the tone and emotion of written conversation. These styles of writing can be considered entire registers of speech, and follow universally accepted rules of usage. Furthermore, I have found correlations between the different understandings of internet linguistics and generational exposure, which furthers my hypothesis that the idea of written English dying out may be caused by a misunderstanding of its evolutionary steps towards more emotional and conversational writing. My findings support my beliefs that the evolution of internet linguistics is a positive sign of the livelihood of written English, and that the commonly held belief by grammarians that this new style of discourse signals the fall of written language is a fallacy with no scientific data to back up such claims. Overall, I believe that that my research has supported my initial observations, and offers up a new perspective for linguistic research into the evolution of English usage in virtual space. EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 3 There are approximately 392 million blogs on microblogging website Tumblr.com. Known as the birthplace of what is being referred to as “internet linguistics,” the website is filled with virtual conversations and self-reflective commentary written in a style that many prescriptive grammarians claim is the “perversion and degradation of the written English language.” With different styles of rhetoric appearing and evolving in what seems on almost a monthly basis, “netspeak” is constantly creating new avenues to allow for different emotions and tones in written speech. Comparatively to traditional writing, which allowed for vast amounts of misinterpretation, netspeak creates specific tones to accurately depict the speaker’s feelings. These styles of writing, however, are attacked for bending and playing with the prescriptive rules of grammar; English professor Eleanor Johnson blames the internet for the increase of informality and grammar/syntax errors in scholarly writing ("Experts Divided Over Internet Changes to Language", 2010). While there is no scientific data to back this claim up, many grammarians denounce the “updates” to written English as a bastardization of grammar rules and regulations. However, in 2008 rhetoric and composition professors Andrea A. Lunsford and Karen J. Lunsford published a study that evaluated 50 student papers to determine whether this change in the usage of written language was actually affecting student literacy. The result showed that students made the same amount of errors in 2006 as there was in 1917, and the essays written were significantly longer – an average of 1,038 words comparatively to the meager 162 nearly ninety years prior (Mistakes Are a Fact of Life: A National Comparative Study, College Composition and Communication, 2008, 792). Students are more comfortable with expressing themselves through written word because of their exposure to social media, and have become adept at code-switching from the informal registers used during conversations with friends to the more formal and academic registers required for scholarly work; if EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 4 anything, the rapid changes to internet linguistics show how written forms of communication are being updated to fit the needs of the conversers; this evolution of language is a core characteristic of how English itself functions and should not be condemned for its appearance. While the Millennial generation is credited with the initial creation of internet linguistics, it is Gen Z, or iGen, that has grown/is growing up with this constantly updating style of conversation, and we are fluent in this way of communication. We have grown up with instant messaging and online discourse, and therefore grew up with netspeak. Leading expert on internet linguistics David Crystal, in an essay, stated that netspeak differs from traditional writing in that it “displays dynamic change…it is primarily non-linear in character…and its technology permits unprecedented graphic behaviour” (Sarangi & Crystal, "Final frontiers in applied linguistics?", 2003); this claim holds true – iGens are constantly developing new ways of expressing emotion and tone through written conversation and ideas. And because of our innate relationship with technology, as the rules of internet linguistics change and update, we update with them. To quote Crystal (2005): The language’s resources for the expression of informality in writing have hugely increased – something which was largely lost…rather than condemning it, therefore, we should be exulting in the fact that the Internet is allowing us to once more explore the power of the written language in a creative way. (The Scope of Internet Linguistics, pg. 2) Linguist Gretchen McCulloch has devoted her work to the study of internet linguistics and keeps a running blog documenting how netspeak is evolving. By looking through and reading her blog, I have confirmed my own suspicions; within the realm of internet linguistics there are new syntactical styles that mimic speaking patterns, allowing for more accurate EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 5 depictions of emotion and tone. For example, the question mark in parentheses. By placing these three characters next to a word, it is possible for the writer to express doubt and uncertainty in a way that can only be done using full-body language (Prokopetz, 2017). There are also different styles of emoting via word choice and grammar usage. One of these styles is the rhetorical statement – by not using grammar, netizens have created a new form of syntax to create the self-rhetorical comment, something that has been missing from English grammar since proto-English (prismatic-bell, "Vienna Waits", 2015). The lack of punctuation in posts creates rhetorical speech; in traditional writing, there are no specific punctuation styles that mark a comment as rhetorical. The creation of this rule (which is, in fact, a rule; it is universally agreed upon as a standard form of speech) has satisfied a deficit over 1600 years old, and it was created by Millennials and iGens to fill their linguistic needs. This is not the first time these two generations have bent the rules of prescriptive grammar, either. In English, there is no formal or informal “you” when speaking. Whilst there was originally a formal/informal “you” in early modern English, it phased out of use a few hundred years ago (Pressley, "Thou Pesky "Thou""). However, the internet has allowed for a revival of the formal/informal second-person; the difference between “u” as an informal, impolite second- person pronoun and “you” as the formal, polite pronoun is generally accepted as a grammatical rule. When using “you,” there tends to be more of a serious tone to the message (figure 1). There is also the case of written emotives, such as the keysmash. Because of its potential to be accidental and hold no real meaning, there are rules attached to the creation and implementation of a deliberate keysmash. Keysmashes are the written equivalent of slamming on a desk or throwing something in a fit, and must only be used in situations that EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 6 call for such a reaction. The jumble generally uses the home row keys, and in a deliberate order to ensure that the smash isn’t seen as a purely accidental one. They are used in moments of incomprehensible rage or other strong emotions. Furthermore, there are assigned rules for different types of punctuation and their usages. Periods are used for emphasizing, especially negative emphasis. Exclamations, alternatively, are positive emphasis; a single question mark is simply a question, but three or more becomes the expression of disbelief or uncertainty (Dove, 2017). The lack of punctuation in a sentence, as discussed earlier, also has its own rules of usage. Coupled with the use of emoticons and emojis, traversing online conversations becomes quite complex, as tone and emotion change depending on which icon is used with which variation of a word. Emojis can add emphasis or clarification when coupled with words or used as pauses between words (see the clapping emoji used as a spacing mechanism laced with sarcasm/bitterness). Emoticons, depending on their genre, can change the entire context or meaning of a sentence. A prime example of this is the use of the “Lenny” face ( ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ), which changes the meaning of a once-innocent, plainly stated sentence to an innuendo/reference, as seen in figures 2 and 3. In addition, the different variations of words hold different meanings and tones. A notable example of this is the difference between the word “small” and the word “smol.” “Small” refers to size; “smol” is used as a diminutive marker and refers to something that is small and precious/beloved. Another distinct example of this phenomenon (which McCulloch refers to as typographical nuance) is the varied usage of the word “no.” The tone of “no” changes based on capitalization and punctuation usage, as well as the addition of extra vowels (McCulloch, 2016). The baseline tone of “no” is uncapitalized and without punctuation; adding a period creates the tone of aggravation, and capitalizing the “n” EVOLUTION OF INTERNET LINGUISTICS 7 [“No”] alludes to a determined/resolute meaning.