The Impact of Social Media on Linguistic Practices and Cultural Norms
This study aimed to analyze the impact of social media on linguistic practices and cultural norms. The objectives were to examine the linguistic features found on social media, influence on language evolution, impacts on language ideologies and community norms, effects on sociocultural practices, and role in empowering marginalized voices. A quantitative survey was conducted with 69 regular WhatsApp users using a 14-item Likert scale questionnaire distributed online. Descriptive statistics analyzed the response patterns. Previous research highlighted linguistic conventions emerging on social media platforms, such as hashtags. Studies also explored how words and memes diffuse across platforms and how communication styles can vary. Research further examined the impacts on linguistic diversity and convergence with the consensus that shared practices cultivate tight-knit online groups. The findings corroborated social media's diverse sociolinguistic influences and added a new perspective while illuminating broad consensus. Recommendations included integrating emerging online forms into education, considering language changes facilitated by platforms and reviewing policies that impede diversity. It also suggested training on digital sociolinguistics to guide navigating online language issues and recognizing social media's role in contemporary youth language use. Overall, the study advanced the understanding of social media's complex relationship with language use, attitudes and sociocultural dynamics. The insights shed light on technology's transformative impacts and implications for communication, language evolution, policies, education, and linguistic diversity.
2. Androutsopoulos, J. (2014). Mediatization and sociolinguistic change: Key concepts, research approaches, and analytical tools. Journal of sociolinguistics, 18(4), 478-515.
3. Androutsopoulos, J., & Juffermans, K. (Eds.). (2014). Digital language practices in superdiverse worlds: Migration and communication in multilingual, multimedia contexts. Walter de Gruyter.
4. Bonilla, Y., & Rosa, J. (2015). # Ferguson: Digital protest, hashtag ethnography, and the racial politics of social media in the United States. American Ethnologist, 42(1), 4-17.
5. Boyd, d. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Networked self (pp. 39-58). Routledge.
6. Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the internet. Cambridge University Press.
7. Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student guide. Routledge.
8. Danet, B., Dikkers, S., & Rosenbaum-Tamari, Y. (2017). TextSpeak® in the classroom: Cultural innovation in digitally mediated instruction. Digital Education Review, (31), 151-166.
9. Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice. Blackwell.
10. Fineman, S. (2008). Feminism, psychology, and the work-life boundary. Women & Therapy, 31(1-2), 47-63.
11. García-Gavilanes, R., Mollgaard, A., Tsvetkova, M., & Yasseri, T. (2017). The memory remains: Understanding collective memory in the digital age. Science advances, 3(4), e1602368.
12. Gillani, N., Yuan, A., Saveski, M., Vosoughi, S., & Roy, D. (2018, April). Me, my echo chamber, and I: introspection on social media polarization. In Twelfth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.
13. Herring, S. C. (1996). Posting in a different voice: Gender and ethics in computer-mediated communication. Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication, 11, 115-145.
14. Herring, S. C., & Paolillo, J. C. (2006). Gender and genre variation in weblogs. Journal of sociolinguistics, 10(4), 439-459.
15. Jansen, B. J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., & Chowdury, A. (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 60(11), 2169-2188.
16. Ling, R. S. (2011). Code-switching, language ideologies, and linguistic accommodation in Singapore. Language in Society, 40(4), 455-476.
17. Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, d. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New media & society, 13(1), 114-133.
18. Naab, T. K., & Korfft-Jonathed, A. (2019). Between intimacy and new impersonal norms: Linguistic politeness on Facebook. International Journal of Communication, 13, 20.
19. Pavalanathan, U., & Eisenstein, J. (2015, February). Confounds and consequences in geotagged twitter data. In Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
20. Puschmann, C., & Burgess, J. (2014). Metaphors of big data. International Journal of Communication, 8, 20.
21. Tangherlini, T. R., & Petersen, R. (2018). "There's more than one spring": analyzing digital folk culture and discourse around #metoo on Twitter. The Journal of American Folklore, 131(522), 423-450.
22. Vii, M. (2012). LOLing at grammar: Language, culture, and humor meet in Internet memes. In The Acceptability of Nice/Nasty Speech (pp. 243-262). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
23. Walker, J. (2016). Web memes as genre. Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine, 23(1-2), 1-13.
24. Zappavigna, M. (2011). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New media & society, 13(5), 788-806.
الحقوق الفكرية (c) 2023 Dr. Safaa Mohamed Siddig Hag Hamed
هذا العمل مرخص حسب الرخصة Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.