Oh as discourse marker: CMC

Oral Strategies in Online User Feedback
Monika Eller
Modelling Non-Standardized Writing
Overview
• The notion of standard language
• Comparative approach
• Oral strategies employed in online user feedback: two types
(1) Features directly adapted from spoken conversation
•
Discourse markers (well, oh)
•
Incomplete sentence structures
(2) Features with no direct equivalent in spoken language (used to mimic face-toface conversation in written interaction)
•
Representation of auditory information (graphic indicators of paralinguistic features)
•
Representation of visual information (emoticons, action words)
• Why do comment writers use oral strategies?
• What effect does this have on the overall interaction?
2
The notion of standard language
• Standard language: codified and legitimized written standard variety of a
language
• Spoken standard: “a description of the recurrent spoken usage of adult
native speakers” (Carter & McCarthy 2006)
• Written vs. spoken standard language
3
Comparative approach
• „Nicht gesprochene und geschriebene Sprache können verglichen werden,
sondern nur einzelne Textsorten.“ (Hennig 2000: 108)
• Discourse type: user feedback (The Times and The Guardian)
•
User comments left on the newspaper website (CMC corpus)
•
Letters to the editor (written reference corpus)
 Qualitative approach using Maxqda (limited corpus size; 1081 online user
comments; 1089 letters to the editor)
4
Oral strategies
Type 1: Features directly adapted from spoken conversation
5
Discourse markers
•
•
•




Well
Oh
(you know, I mean, now, so, yes/yeah/yep, ok/o.k./okay)
Relatively independent from syntactical structure
No particular grammatical function
Do not change the propositional meaning of an utterance
Semantically bleached (Lee 2004: 117)
6
Well as discourse marker: General use
• Quite common in spoken conversation
• Often in turn-initial position
• Can be used to
•
open/close a topic/speech event
•
indicate thinking process
•
mark contrast
•
signal surprise
•
signal resignation (oh well)
• In evasive/indirect answers
(cf. Carter & McCarthy 2006, Biber et al. 2007)
7
Well as discourse marker: CMC
•
Second most frequently used discourse marker in user comments (32 comments)
•
Used in quotes or pseudo-quotes to mimic direct speech
(…) Two years later she returned to the NHS to have two hip replacements; once again
saying,'if I had been asked to pay for my new hips, well, I wouldn't have been able to affod
them.‘ (…) (CMC T06-18.3)
•
The vast majority of occurrences in comment-initial position (indicate thinking
process, open speech event, mark contrast)
Well if we were to have Primaries instead (…) then I would consider giving the person a pay
rise. (…) (CMC T06-30.1)
@pointythings. Well you know what they say, "forbidden fruit tastes sweetest". (…) (CMC
G06-69)
8
Well as discourse marker: CMC
•
If not in comment-initial position: Sentence-initial position
•
After quote: direct reaction
(…) [quote from another comment:] But economists will tell you that free markets in insurance will never
be efficient (…)
Well no I don't think that is what economists will tell you. (…) (CMC G06-15)
•
After rhetorical question: answer
(…) A rent cut?? Sounds great doesn't it? Well, not if you're a Lambeth Council tenant. (…) (CMC T6-48)
•
After rephrase/summary/naming the topic: comment
(…) and finally, this uphill task for politicians. well yes, i suppose it will be a tad uphill. like, how does
vertical sound? (…) (CMC G6-M13)
 Same function as in comment-initial position; topic-comment structure
 Communicative situation framed as interactive speech situation (direct
reply/reaction, asking/answering questions, commenting on topic raised); adjacency
pairs
9
Well as discourse marker: Written
•
Only four occurrences in written corpus (1089 letters to the editor)
(…) How interesting that it's only now, as an election approaches, that first the Tories, then the
Lib Dems and now the Greens try to present themselves as the true champions of co-operation.
Well, thanks, but no thanks. While there is always more to do, (…) (NEWS G11-015-017)
I also tried joining a credit union where I was promised I would never be charged more than 26%
interest. Well, that's a comfort with even my highest-charging credit card levying far less. (NEWS
G06-88)
Julian Glover says "The fells are open today". Well, not every day. On Saturday we took the bus to
Bolton Abbey, intending (…) (NEWS G08-56-58)
Stephen Haddrill defends the insurance industry against the charge of being "socially useless"
(Letters, 28 August), as indeed he is paid to do. Well, up to a point. Insurance (...) (NEWS G08-22-27)
 Used to mimic speech situation (conversational style, direct reaction to/comment
on quote, marking contrast)
10
Oh as discourse marker: General use
• Most frequent interjection in spoken conversation (cf. Biber et al. 2002: 450)
• As interjection used to express surprise, disappointment and pain
• As discourse marker used to react to new information, to express surprise
(Carter & McCarthy 2006)
11
Oh as discourse marker: CMC
• Third most frequent discourse marker in the comments (27 occurrences)
• Used in pseudo-quotes to mimic direct speech
(…) I really don't think wifey is going to appreciate that, quite apart from having to learn
Russian. "Oh And the kids!" (…) (CMC G6-M13)
• Three main functions
•
To introduce answer to a rhetorical question (mimicking surprise/irony)
(…) put it this way - who caused this crisis? Oh - the very people who would be part of this
"brain drain"! (…) (CMC G6-46)
(…) Yes it is important and the population need to be made aware of the situation, but why
does it always have to be negative? Oh yes, that's right, it's because the media are
untouchable. (…) (CMC G6-M1)
12
Oh as discourse marker: CMC
•
To add final thought
(…) Oh, and a final point RE media studies. (…) (CMC G6-11-12)
(…) oh, and yeah, golf is fairly boring... (CMC G6-77)
•
To directly address other comment writer
(…) Oh, and 'Nettleton' if these bankers are so "high powered" how come they led the global
economy into disaster? (…) (CMC G6-M13)
 Simulating a dialogic speech situation
 more immediate, more involved
13
Oh as discourse marker: Written
•
Only four occurrences in two letters to the editor
(…) Oh, for a Clement Attlee or Aneurin Bevan. Oh, for some leadership. (NEWS G9-13a15a)
 Wish constructions (used in formal contexts) (cf. Carter & McCarthy 2006)
(…) However, there is something holding me back, now what is it? Oh yes, I have to go to
work every day and find swimming for three or four hours not very convenient. I think there
is something else but can't seem to think of it... Oh, I know. I don't live in France next to a
lake. Thanks Phil anyway, most useful. (NEWS G9-7-12)
 Simulating interactive speech situation (as found in CMC corpus)
14
Discourse markers
•
•
•
•
used to create a spoken context in CMC
heighten involvement
simulate dialogue in a monologic speech/writing situation
“play a major role in our judgement of the degree of spokenness present
in the text” (McCarthy 1993: 170)
15
Incomplete sentence structures: CMC
• Subject omission
Don't know how many times I have to say this. (…) (CMC G6-35)
Sounds like it should be interesting, but strangely, it isn't.
Sorry. (CMC G6-42)
• Subject omission and auxiliary verb omission
(…) Thank you Stephen. Still smiling! (CMC G-42)
Clearly written by someone with no interest in or knowledge of golf, nor of what is described
as Asia. (CMC G6-77)
• Interrogatives without subject or auxiliary verb
Liz Miller; been seriosuly ill recently? I thought not. (…) (CMC T6-18.1)
(…) Been south of the river lately? (…) (CMC T6-35)
 Conversational, relaxed style, more immediate/involved
16
Incomplete sentence structures: Written
• Written corpus: extremely rare
I took a friend to the Ellesmere Port Boat Museum, and we rowed all afternoon. Never again
(Letters, 18 August). (NEWS G6-38-44)
Must buy a heritage gift "with soul" (Museum stores booming, 19 August). Love the oh-soEnglish V&A garden trowels with William Morris designs. (…) (NEWS G6-96-102)
 Short letters with clear colloquial style; language of immediacy
17
Oral strategies
Type 2: Features with no direct equivalent in spoken language
 Used to mimic face-to-face interaction
(compensation strategies)
18
Graphic indicators of paralinguistic features
• Prominence indicated via CAPITALS, italics, bold print, underlining or
*asterisks*
•
Capitals most frequently found (no html code required)
•
Function
•
Represent stress
(…) The central banks know that there is still colossal toxic debts within the financial
system, which is why there HAD to be bailouts. (…) (CMC G6-46)
(…) Though of course you had a grade A in English at A-level, right? (CMC G6-11-12)
•
Replace modifying adverb (e.g. absolutely)
This is why elected government MUST regulate the excesses of the casino culture that
capitalism has become. (CMC G6-46)
•
Highlight most important word
I'd love him to explain his 'rations' of £400 a month of FOOD alone, to a pensioner!
(CMC TG-09)
19
Graphic indicators of paralinguistic features
• Trailing dots to indicate hesitation/pauses (in 191 comments) (Maynor 1994)
•
Used fairly frequently at the end of a comment  air of open-endedness
(…) Funny, before 1986 we had a system like that.... (CMC G6-47)
We really should have been tougher on terrorism back in 1776... (CMC T6-42)
•
Symbolize thinking process or hesitation
(…) Somewhat makes your bleating on about your neighbours' daughter being 'thick' kind
of... well, thick, don't you think? (…) (CMC G6-11-12)
(…) So luxury goods firms become rich, and spend their money on... luxury goods. (…) (CMC
G6-46)
(…) That's pretty big of you ... unless of course you were the young lady he raped. (…) (CMC
G6-60)
20
Graphic indicators of paralinguistic features
•
Loose sentence structure
...the spies who came in from the closet...pitiful and vulnerable.. (CMC T6-4-1)
(…)They would prefer to see people struggle than help those in need...seems a rather selfish
argument to me! (CMC G6-15)
I alway thought toll roads in US were privately owned. As such they are not a tax but a user
fee....Simple solution....sell entry ways to city to private company and charge user fee to
enter...problem solved (CMC T6-42)
 Guide through the text
 Glue text fragments together
21
Graphic indicators of paralinguistic features
• Trailing dots in newspaper corpus: 17 occurrences
•
7 in the title of the article referred to
•
5 indicating omission in direct quote
•
2 pseudo-quotes
"Kathy, I said, as we boarded a Greyhound in Portsmouth, Maida Vale seems like a dream to me
now …" (NEWS G6-77-83)
"We've all come to look for a chimera ..." (NEWS G6-96-102)
•
3 occurrences comparable to CMC data
(…) I think there is something else but can't seem to think of it... Oh, I know. I don't live in France
next to a lake. Thanks Phil anyway, most useful. (NEWS G9-7-12)
The Dr Foster unit (Report, 23 September) ... That would be the one on Gloucester Road, would it?
(NEWS G 11-100-105)
Taxes on socially useless banks (Editorial, 28 August), cancellation of Big Brother, the state
rebuilding the railways, football violence ... are we at last entering the first stage of a postThatcherite renaissance? (NEWS G8-10-16)
22
Representation of visual information
Emoticons: extremely rare
:-)
:)
:(
:P
;-)
;)
N
0
1
0
1
1
0
1081
3
5
1
1
8
7
3856
(…) BTW I hate it how all women generalise about men. You're all the same! ;-) (G06-70)
23
Representation of visual information
• *action words*/verbal glosses (Werry 1996)
•
Extremely rare (4 occurrences)
troyka: Weeping wankers?
*ducks* (CMC G6-60)
Oh please! So we should end up never giving our child anything that might be
unhealthy for fear that they'll get into the habit of consuming excessive amounts
of it in later life??? And then when they leave home they'll never touch anything
unhealthy because they'll always resist temptation? **picks self up off floor after
fit of wild laughter** (…) (CMC G6-69)
*unpacks deckchair and gets out the popcorn* (CMC G6-70)
•
Frequently used in synchronous CMC to simulate multimodal aspects, create
common interactive space (cf. Beißwenger 2000)  does not seem to be
necessary here
24
Summing it up
• Many comments do not adhere to the norms of standard written English
•
Features taken over directly from face-to-face communication in widespread
use in CMC corpus with some instances in the written corpus
•
Compensation strategies used less frequently in CMC corpus (compared to
synchronous communication forms for instance); no occurrences in the
written corpus
• Features of standard spoken English integrated into CMC
 General tendency: “Steady progression towards more oral styles” (Biber &
Finegan 1989: 514)
 new forms of written language emerging (change in repertoire cf.
Androutsopoulos 2007)
“…there is an increasing range of forms appearing in informal written texts
which previously were only considered acceptable in speech.” (Carter & McCarthy
2006: 168)
25
Conclusion
4 strategies used in informal CMC (cf. Androutsopoulos 2007)
(1) Integration of spoken language features (Versprechsprachlichung)
(2) Compensation strategies: facial expressions, gestures, body language, actions
(mimisch-kinesische Kompensation)
(3) time-saving/keystroke-saving strategies (Ökonomisierung)
(4) Graphostylistic strategies (Graphostilistik), e.g. letter homophones, leet
 Depend on the communicative form, function and communicative situation
In online user feedback:
•
Integration of spoken language features (1) most prominent (framed as
interactive speech situation)
•
Some signs of compensation strategies (2), especially features to indicate
stress, hesitation/pauses and emotional involvement (iteration of signs,
exclamations)
•
Very few economy strategies (3) and hardly any graphostylistic features (4)
26
Conclusion
• Particularities due to the communicative form or communicative function?
•
Compensation strategies rather rare in comparison to other forms of CMC
•
Argument against technological determinism (cf. Hutchby 2001)
• Why do comment writes use oral strategies?
•
Framing the discourse as interactive speech situation/giving it more
immediacy/involvement
• What effect does this have on the overall interaction?
•
Heightened interactivity?
27
References
Androutsopoulos, Jannis (2007): Neue Medien - neue Schriftlichkeit? In: Mitteilungen des deutschen Germanistenverbandes 54
(8), S. 72–97.
Bader, Jennifer (2002): Schriftlichkeit und Mündlichkeit in der Chat-Kommunikation. In: NET:WORX - Die Online-Schriftenreihe des
Projektes Sprache@Web 27.
Baron, Naomi (1998): Letters by phone or speech by other means: the linguistics of email. In: Language and Communication 18
(2), S. 133–170.
Baron, Naomi S. (2003): Why Email Looks Like Speech: Proofreading, Pedagogy and Public Face. In: Jean Aitchison und Diana M.
Lewis (Hg.): New Media Language. London, England: Routledge, S. 85–94.
Beißwenger, Michael (2000): Kommunikation in virtuellen Welten. Sprache, Text und Wirklichkeit ; eine Untersuchung zur
Konzeptionalität von Kommunikationsvollzügen und zur textuellen Konstruktion von Welt in synchroner Internet-Kommunikation,
exemplifiziert am Beispiel eines Webchats. Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verl.
Biber, Douglas; Johansson, Stig; Leech, Geoffrey; Conrad, Susan; Finegan, Edward (2007): Longman grammar of spoken and
written English. 7. impr. Harlow: Longman.
Biber, Douglas; Finegan, Edward (1989): Drift and the Evolution of English Style: A History of Three Genres. In: Language 65 (3), S.
487–517.
Carter, Ronald; McCarthy, Michael (2006): Cambridge grammar of English. A comprehensive guide ; spoken and written English;
grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge university press. Online verfügbar unter
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0665/2006279611-d.html.
Dürscheid, Christa (1999): Zwischen Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit: Die Kommunikation im Internet. In: Papiere zur Linguistik 60
(1), S. 17–30.
Dürscheid, Christa (2003): Medienkommunikation im Kontinuum von Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. Theoretische und
empirische Probleme. In: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 38, S. 37–56.
28
References
Günther, Ulla; Wyss, Eva Lia (1996): E-mail-Briefe - eine neue Textsorte zwischen Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit. In: Ernest W. B.
Hess-Lüttich, Werner Holly und Ulrich Püschel (Hg.): Textstrukturen im Medienwandel. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, S. 61–86.
Hennig, Mathilde (2000): Können gesprochene und geschriebene Sprache überhaupt verglichen werden? In: Jahrbuch der
Ungarischen Germanistik, S. 105–125, zuletzt geprüft am 26.04.12.
Herring, Susan (2001): Computer-mediated discourse. In: Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen und Heidi E. Hamilton (Hg.): The
Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 1. publ. Malden, Mass. [u.a.]: Blackwell (Blackwell handbooks in linguistics), S. 612–634.
Herring, Susan (2004): Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In: Sasha A. Barab,
Rob Kling und James H. Gray (Hg.): Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr
(Learning in doing), S. 338–376. Online verfügbar unter http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring//cmda.html.
Hutchby, Ian (2001): Conversation and technology. From the telephone to the Internet. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Ko, Kwang-Kyu (1996): Structural Characteristics of Computer-Mediated Language. A Comparative Analysis of InterChange
Discourse. In: Electronic Journal of Communication 6 (3). Online verfügbar unter
http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/006/3/006315.HTML, zuletzt geprüft am 28.07.09.
Koch, Peter; Oesterreicher, Wulf (1985): Sprache der Nähe - Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im
Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. In: Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36, S. 15–43.
Labov, William (2001): Principles of linguistic change. Volume 2: Social Factors. Oxford, UK ;, Cambridge [Mass.]: Blackwell.
Lee, Judith Yaross (2003): Charting the Codes of Cyberspace: A Rhetoric of Electronic Mail. In: Lance Strate, Ron Jakobson und
Stephanie Gibson (Hg.): Communication and cyberspace. Social interaction in an electronic environment. Hampton Press
communication series. 2. ed. Cresskill [u.a.]: Hampton Press, S. 307–328.
Lenke, Nils; Schmitz, Peter (1995): Geschwätz im globalen Dorf - Kommunikation im Internet. In: Ulrich Schmitz (Hg.): Neue
Medien. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie ; 50. Oldenburg: Red. OBST (50), S. 117–141.
29
References
McCarthy, Michael (1993): Spoken discourse markers in written text. In: John M. Sinclair, Michael Hoey und Gwyneth Fox (Hg.):
Techniques of Description. Spoken and written discourse. London: Routledge, S. 170–182.
Maynor, Natalie (1994): The Language of Electronic Mail: Written Speech? In: Greta D. Little und Michael Montgomery (Hg.):
Centennial Usage Studies. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P (Publication of the American Dialect Society (PADS): 78), S. 48–54.
Milroy, James (2001): Language Ideologies and the Consequences of Standardization. In: Journal of Sociolinguistics 5 (4), S. 530–
555.
Rehm, Georg (2002): Schriftliche Mündlichkeit in der Sprache des World Wide Web. In: Arne Ziegler und Christa Dürscheid (Hg.):
Kommunikationsform E-Mail. Tübingen: Stauffenburg-Verl.>, S. 263–308.
Squires, Lauren (2010): Enregistering internet language. In: Language in Society 39 (4), S. 457–492.
Storrer, Angelika (2001): Getippte Gespräche oder dialogische Texte? Zur Kommunikationstheoretischen Einordnung der ChatKommunikation. In: Andrea Lehr, Matthias Kammerer und Klaus-Peter Konerding (Hg.): Sprache im Alltag. Beiträge zu neuen
Perspektiven in der Linguistik. Herbert Ernst Wiegand zum 65. Geburtstag gewidmet. Berlin, New York: W. de Gruyter, S. 439–465.
Thurlow, Crispin (2006): From Statistical Panic to Moral Panic: The Metadiscursive Construction and Popular Exaggeration of New
Media Language in the Print Media. In: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (3). Online verfügbar unter
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue3/thurlow.html.
Werry, Christopher C. (1996): Linguistic and interactional features of Internet Relay Chat. In: Susan C. Herring (Hg.): ComputerMediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Amsterdam: Benjamins (Pragmatics & Beyond: New
Series (P&B): 39), S. 47–63.
Yates, Simeon J. (1996): Oral and Written Linguistic Aspects of Computer Conferencing: A Corpus Based Study. In: Susan C. Herring
(Hg.): Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Amsterdam: Benjamins (Pragmatics
& Beyond: New Series (P&B): 39), S. 29–46.
30