![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
matt_doyleI just decided to cycle through 'em all and show them off, and this one's first alphabetically.
And speaking of cycling through things, before I moved blogs I made a gigantic linkspam of every post I thought I wanted to bring with me and refer to here. Looking at it now, I doubt most of those posts will ever see the light of day here - I was thinking as a pack-rat and not as a writer.
One of the few essays I posted on the old journal was about the usage of netspeak as a low-prestige dialect on the Internet. I actually wrote this paper twice - once for Sociology and once for English - and this is the shorter version, written for Sociology. I'm struck by how quickly the trends I discussed and what they imply about the user have changed - this was before cat macros were as prevalent as they are now, and I think that they've really altered the linguistic landscape. Still, I'd be interested in hearing what people think about how accurate or inaccurate the essay is now.
As acronyms, clipping, and other transmutations of language occur with increasing frequency in on-line media such as email, instant messenger programs, message boards, and etc., trends in the way that such language is used by those who spend much of their time online become more and more pronounced. Specifically, ‘netspeak’ dialects in many online communities have divided the speakers into two distinct factions or social classes: the plebes and the elites. The elites, as the upper class, are marked by higher, more prescriptive standards of English and a tendency to join online communities with more intellectual than casual conversation as their intent.
An important feature in distinguishing these classes lies in the fact that the distinction is primarily made from one side: that of the elites. Plebeians are often left unaware that their speech effects how they are viewed in a negative way, perhaps similarly to the way the nouveau riche are often disdained by those who are ‘old money.’ This analogy is important specifically because, while age is a distinction that matters much less in many portions of these online communities, it is true that the plebeians are, as a whole, younger than the elites, and that two people of the same age who speak differently will be judged differently- the age of the person using elite dialect will be largely ignored, while the plebeian will be considered immature and even foolish. It is an intellectual class divide, though the actual intelligence of the two groups is probably not statistically different, it is perceived that way by many of the elites.
Plebeian speech has several plain markers- most obviously, the number of typos in their printed speech. The most common example of this would be ‘teh’ when one is attempting to write ‘the.’ Second, the degree of abbreviation that occurs in their speech. Some few abbreviations and acronyms- ‘lol’ for laugh out loud, ‘brb’ for be right back, btw, fyi, and similar, more commonly found abbreviations, are acceptable in elite speech. ‘OMG’ for “Oh My God!” is a frequently cited example of plebian speech, however, as are most of the longer abbreviations or acronyms listed. Third, condensing words to their phonetic acronym equivalent is generally unacceptable to elites: u for you, r for are, gr8 for great- all of these are certain to attract disdain from elites and see their user labeled as a plebe. Fourth, overuse of emoticons- text sequences meant to simulate images, usually facial expressions, is a plebeian trait, though this distinction is less clear- it is not the use of emoticons but the frequency of use and the use of more obscure symbols that characterizes plebeian dialect.
Fifth, and finally, use of the phrase “a/s/l?” to begin a conversation with a stranger is a tremendous social gaffe among the elites, and while the other determinations are primarily maters of degree, this is a more serious infraction. “A/S/L?” started as an abbreviation in messenger programs as a way to quickly acquaint yourself with who you were speaking with: their age, sex, and location. However, among the elite community, as I have said, age is considered largely unimportant. The inquiry was also commonly used specifically when someone was looking for a partner in online flirtation or cybersex, and location is considered to be something only a stalker-type would instantly enquire about, so the elite community has rejected use of what used to be an almost universal introductory phrase online. Plebeians, however, due either to the fact that they are new online, that they are in fact looking for targets for flirtatious behavior, or simply due to the social circles in which they travel, remain entirely unaware as a general rule that use of this phrase is taboo and will lead to social sanctions against them, even if they show some awareness that their other speech habits are undesirable and low prestige in some company. “A/s/l?” is the shibboleth of the elite/plebeian social divide.
Finally, one last, and much less clear, distinction must be made: the elites, with their exclusivist tendencies and insistence on proper English in open discussions, do use the low-prestige plebeian dialect in some circumstances: namely, the mockery by imitation of plebes. Thus, occasionally in conversations, one member will revert to the plebeian dialect despite their status as an elite, but it is done with ironic intentions, as people speaking to one another in person might imitate a Southern drawl or other spoken low-prestige dialect for the purpose of sarcasm, irony, mockery, or similar.
To me, it seems probable that these distinctions will remain for the foreseeable future, simply because the plebeians are largely unaware that theirs is a low-prestige dialect, and thus generally make no effort unless exposed to an ‘elite’ social circle to change their habits of speech. Whether these habits of abbreviating speech actually affect the thought processes of the plebeians detrimentally or not (as many elites seem to believe) is unclear and questionable, however, and likely to remain that way.
And speaking of cycling through things, before I moved blogs I made a gigantic linkspam of every post I thought I wanted to bring with me and refer to here. Looking at it now, I doubt most of those posts will ever see the light of day here - I was thinking as a pack-rat and not as a writer.
One of the few essays I posted on the old journal was about the usage of netspeak as a low-prestige dialect on the Internet. I actually wrote this paper twice - once for Sociology and once for English - and this is the shorter version, written for Sociology. I'm struck by how quickly the trends I discussed and what they imply about the user have changed - this was before cat macros were as prevalent as they are now, and I think that they've really altered the linguistic landscape. Still, I'd be interested in hearing what people think about how accurate or inaccurate the essay is now.
As acronyms, clipping, and other transmutations of language occur with increasing frequency in on-line media such as email, instant messenger programs, message boards, and etc., trends in the way that such language is used by those who spend much of their time online become more and more pronounced. Specifically, ‘netspeak’ dialects in many online communities have divided the speakers into two distinct factions or social classes: the plebes and the elites. The elites, as the upper class, are marked by higher, more prescriptive standards of English and a tendency to join online communities with more intellectual than casual conversation as their intent.
An important feature in distinguishing these classes lies in the fact that the distinction is primarily made from one side: that of the elites. Plebeians are often left unaware that their speech effects how they are viewed in a negative way, perhaps similarly to the way the nouveau riche are often disdained by those who are ‘old money.’ This analogy is important specifically because, while age is a distinction that matters much less in many portions of these online communities, it is true that the plebeians are, as a whole, younger than the elites, and that two people of the same age who speak differently will be judged differently- the age of the person using elite dialect will be largely ignored, while the plebeian will be considered immature and even foolish. It is an intellectual class divide, though the actual intelligence of the two groups is probably not statistically different, it is perceived that way by many of the elites.
Plebeian speech has several plain markers- most obviously, the number of typos in their printed speech. The most common example of this would be ‘teh’ when one is attempting to write ‘the.’ Second, the degree of abbreviation that occurs in their speech. Some few abbreviations and acronyms- ‘lol’ for laugh out loud, ‘brb’ for be right back, btw, fyi, and similar, more commonly found abbreviations, are acceptable in elite speech. ‘OMG’ for “Oh My God!” is a frequently cited example of plebian speech, however, as are most of the longer abbreviations or acronyms listed. Third, condensing words to their phonetic acronym equivalent is generally unacceptable to elites: u for you, r for are, gr8 for great- all of these are certain to attract disdain from elites and see their user labeled as a plebe. Fourth, overuse of emoticons- text sequences meant to simulate images, usually facial expressions, is a plebeian trait, though this distinction is less clear- it is not the use of emoticons but the frequency of use and the use of more obscure symbols that characterizes plebeian dialect.
Fifth, and finally, use of the phrase “a/s/l?” to begin a conversation with a stranger is a tremendous social gaffe among the elites, and while the other determinations are primarily maters of degree, this is a more serious infraction. “A/S/L?” started as an abbreviation in messenger programs as a way to quickly acquaint yourself with who you were speaking with: their age, sex, and location. However, among the elite community, as I have said, age is considered largely unimportant. The inquiry was also commonly used specifically when someone was looking for a partner in online flirtation or cybersex, and location is considered to be something only a stalker-type would instantly enquire about, so the elite community has rejected use of what used to be an almost universal introductory phrase online. Plebeians, however, due either to the fact that they are new online, that they are in fact looking for targets for flirtatious behavior, or simply due to the social circles in which they travel, remain entirely unaware as a general rule that use of this phrase is taboo and will lead to social sanctions against them, even if they show some awareness that their other speech habits are undesirable and low prestige in some company. “A/s/l?” is the shibboleth of the elite/plebeian social divide.
Finally, one last, and much less clear, distinction must be made: the elites, with their exclusivist tendencies and insistence on proper English in open discussions, do use the low-prestige plebeian dialect in some circumstances: namely, the mockery by imitation of plebes. Thus, occasionally in conversations, one member will revert to the plebeian dialect despite their status as an elite, but it is done with ironic intentions, as people speaking to one another in person might imitate a Southern drawl or other spoken low-prestige dialect for the purpose of sarcasm, irony, mockery, or similar.
To me, it seems probable that these distinctions will remain for the foreseeable future, simply because the plebeians are largely unaware that theirs is a low-prestige dialect, and thus generally make no effort unless exposed to an ‘elite’ social circle to change their habits of speech. Whether these habits of abbreviating speech actually affect the thought processes of the plebeians detrimentally or not (as many elites seem to believe) is unclear and questionable, however, and likely to remain that way.
