Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction: Social Media
Concluding Remarks and Future Projections
References
All Topics
Languages and Linguistics
Pragmatics

Social media and computer-mediated communication

Profile image of Francisco YusFrancisco Yus

2024, The Cambridge Handbook of Language in Context

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108989275.022
visibility

…

description

18 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Within a cyberpragmatic framework rooted in cognitive pragmatics (Yus 2011), context is basically information that is brought to bear in turning the schematic coded input (e.g. spoken, written or typed words) into interpretations. Although it is undeniable that contextual information may stem from different sources, eventually what is at stake in contextualisation is to mentally assess and select the appropriate quality and quantity of information that allows us to reach meaningful interpretations. Regarding the specificity of social media and internet communication overall, several challenges for pragmatic analysis arise, some of which will be addressed in this chapter. Specifically, what interests most in an analysis of context online are: (a) the role of the interfaces in favouring/limiting the contextualisation of utterances; (b) the role of the physical-virtual interface in today's internetmediated communication; and specially (c) the differentiation of the user's personal, interactive and social contexts managed in everyday virtual communication.

Figures (2)
Figure 1. Discourse and contexts across the online/offline divide. communicative needs. Richer means of interaction include recorded audio files and phone/video calls through messaging apps. Multimodal discourses (e.g. memes) also abound in online communication, and the aforementioned community- and individual-based linguistic features are also found online (Yus 2015).
Figure 1. Discourse and contexts across the online/offline divide. communicative needs. Richer means of interaction include recorded audio files and phone/video calls through messaging apps. Multimodal discourses (e.g. memes) also abound in online communication, and the aforementioned community- and individual-based linguistic features are also found online (Yus 2015).
Figure 2. Personal, interactive and social contexts on a Facebook profile. ocial media are a good example of the contexts briefly mentioned above. On these sites at atforms, thousands of textual, visual and multimodal discourses are exchanged among users, ¢ f them demanding contextualisation. Similarly, users hold a personal array of information bei janifest to them and making up their personal cognitive environment (personal context). Tk anifest information becomes mutually manifest through the whole array of interactions that c: ke place on social media, ranging from synchronous messaging chats to asynchrono ymmenting-replying on users’ posts (interactive context). Finally, as proposed in Yus (2007 formation of social or communal assumptions is typically intended, but may also leak from the teractions, especially if these entail particular uses of language, jargons, vocabulary or registe1 aking up a store of group-specific information (social context).
Figure 2. Personal, interactive and social contexts on a Facebook profile. ocial media are a good example of the contexts briefly mentioned above. On these sites at atforms, thousands of textual, visual and multimodal discourses are exchanged among users, ¢ f them demanding contextualisation. Similarly, users hold a personal array of information bei janifest to them and making up their personal cognitive environment (personal context). Tk anifest information becomes mutually manifest through the whole array of interactions that c: ke place on social media, ranging from synchronous messaging chats to asynchrono ymmenting-replying on users’ posts (interactive context). Finally, as proposed in Yus (2007 formation of social or communal assumptions is typically intended, but may also leak from the teractions, especially if these entail particular uses of language, jargons, vocabulary or registe1 aking up a store of group-specific information (social context).

Related papers

Social Media- A pragmatic Approach: Contexts & Implicatures
Gabriel Barbulet

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2013

The present paper aims at approaching Social Media from a Pragmatic point of view. Implicatures and contexts in social media are also taken into account as linguistic tools that may facilitate such an approach. Communication-the sharing of information, ideas, and thoughts-is a vital part of life for all of us. The different methods that allow us to communicate are called media. A postcard to a friend, a telephone call, and a computer disk holding homework are all types of media. Some of these have developed beyond simple methods of communication to become sophisticated tools, capable of persuading and influencing large numbers of people. It seems that nowadays the techniques for building a Social Media presence have acquired an outmost importance. Our analysis will centre on Social Media sites with a special focus on British newspaper blogs. WCETR2012 2.1. Social media Social Media refers to issues such as blogging, photo-sharing, video-sharing and social networks such as LinkedIn, Facebook, Cyworld and they improve and expand the ways people interact both publicly and privately. This implies that the cultural element that is present in these environments is utterly important for decoding and understanding what is going on. Moreover, the Internet environment has its own rules and etiquette where there are accepted ways of behavior that have deep cultural markers which are totally different from the legal markers or from

View PDFchevron_right
Towards a cyberpragmatics of mobile instant messaging [In: Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2016: Global Implications for Culture and Society in the Networked Age. Ed. Jesús Romero-Trillo. Berlin: Springer]
Francisco Yus

Cyberpragmatics analyses Internet-mediated communication from a cognitive pragmatics, relevancetheoretic perspective. It focuses on the inferential strategies that “addressee users” engage in while processing information located on the Net or the one exchanged with other users through this virtual medium. In this sense, the theory underlines the role that the interfaces play in the eventual (ir)relevant outcome of the acts of communication that take place on the Net. In this chapter, I will sketch the main research issues that cyberpragmatics should address when studying mobile instant messaging applications (WhatsApp, WeChat, Snapchat...). As a theory grounded in cognitive pragmatics, cyberpragmatics aims at explaining how users make sense of messages when transmitted on the Net. However, in order to achieve that, an extension of analysis is proposed as necessary for this kind of mobile phone-mediated interaction, so as to cover not only propositional aspects of communication (i.e. the relevance of the information exchanged), but also non-propositional constraints and effects associated with this kind of communication and which play a major role in the eventual (dis)satisfaction. New terminology will be added to the general relevance-theoretic formula of positive cognitive effects vs. mental effort, opening up interesting paths for future research on why mobile-mediated interactions end up (ir)relevant to the users.

View PDFchevron_right
Review of "Cyberpragmatics. Internet-mediated Communication in Context
José Luis Berbeira Gardón

Ibérica, 2012

View PDFchevron_right
Ciberpragmática 2.0: Nuevos usos del lenguaje en Internet [Cyberpragmatics 2.0: New Uses of Language on the Internet]
Jorge Anaya

Fuel and Energy Abstracts, 2011

View PDFchevron_right
[PRE-PUBL] Social Media
Francisco Yus
View PDFchevron_right
TPCS 201: "Does context really collapse in social media interaction?" by Malgorzata Szabla & Jan Blommaert
TPCS Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies

'Context collapse' (CC) refers to the phenomenon widely debated in social media research, where various audiences convene around single communicative acts in new networked publics, causing confusion and anxiety among social media users. The notion of CC is a key one in the reimagination of social life as a consequence of the mediation technologies we associate with the Web 2.0. CC is undertheorized, and in this paper we intend not to rebuke it but to explore its limits. We do so by shifting the analytical focus from "online communication" in general to specific forms of social action performed, not by predefined "group" members, but by actors engaging in emerging kinds of sharedness based on existing norms of interaction. This approach is a radical choice for action rather than actor, reaching back to symbolic interactionism and beyond to Mead, Strauss and other interactionist sociologists, and inspired by contemporary linguistic ethnography and interactional sociolinguistics, notably the work of Rampton and the Goodwins. We apply this approach to an extraordinarily complex Facebook discussion among Polish people residing in The Netherlands-a set of data that could instantly be selected as a likely site for context collapse. We shall analyze fragments in detail, showing how, in spite of the complications intrinsic to such online, profoundly mediated and oddly 'placed' interaction events, participants appear capable of extraordinarily 'normal' modes of interaction and participant selection. In fact, the 'networked publics' rarely seem to occur in practice, and contexts do not collapse but expand continuously without causing major issues for contextualization. The analysis will offer a vocabulary and methodology for addressing the complexities of the largest new social space on earth: the virtual space of online culture.

View PDFchevron_right
Does context really collapse in social media interaction?
Malgorzata Szabla, Jan Blommaert

'Context collapse' (CC) refers to the phenomenon widely debated in social media research, where various audiences convene around single communicative acts in new networked publics, causing confusion and anxiety among social media users. The notion of CC is a key one in the reimagination of social life as a consequence of the mediation technologies we associate with the Web 2.0. CC is undertheorized, and in this paper we intend not to rebuke it but to explore its limits. We do so by shifting the analytical focus from "online communication" in general to specific forms of social action performed, not by predefined "group" members, but by actors engaging in emerging kinds of sharedness based on existing norms of interaction. This approach is a radical choice for action rather than actor, reaching back to symbolic interactionism and beyond to Mead, Strauss and other interactionist sociologists, and inspired by contemporary linguistic ethnography and interactional sociolinguistics, notably the work of Rampton and the Goodwins. We apply this approach to an extraordinarily complex Facebook discussion among Polish people residing in The Netherlands-a set of data that could instantly be selected as a likely site for context collapse. We shall analyze fragments in detail, showing how, in spite of the complications intrinsic to such online, profoundly mediated and oddly 'placed' interaction events, participants appear capable of extraordinarily 'normal' modes of interaction and participant selection. In fact, the 'networked publics' rarely seem to occur in practice, and contexts do not collapse but expand continuously without causing major issues for contextualization. The analysis will offer a vocabulary and methodology for addressing the complexities of the largest new social space on earth: the virtual space of online culture.

View PDFchevron_right
Editorial. The pragmatics of textual participation in the social media. Journal of Pragmatics, 2014
Patricia Bou-Franch
View PDFchevron_right
An outline of some future research issues for internet pragmatics
Francisco Yus

Internet Pragmatics 2(1): 1-33, 2019

Internet communication has evolved a lot since it first became popular in the early nineties of the last century. Pragmatics has also evolved and has tried to come to terms with the non-stop changes that internet is constantly producing in our lives and especially in how we communicate and interact. We are probably now at a stage of internet development in which we can make some sound predictions regarding certain challenges that a pragmatics of internet communication will have to face in the next few years to deal with the radical changes that are taking place in today's internet use. This article will be devoted to listing some of these research issues and to discussing what pragmatics can do to address them accurately, ranging from those issues centred upon the interpretation of online discourses to those involving interfaces and their options for contextualisation.

View PDFchevron_right
The pragmatics of textual participation in the social media
Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich

Journal of Pragmatics, 2014

The pragmatics of textual participation in the social media This special issue presents a collection of papers exploring textual participation in the social media from different pragmatic perspectives. The rationale for this volume is twofold. On the one hand, social media are extremely popular and part of the everyday practices of large numbers of people, corporations, and institutions. Statistical studies of the world population vis-à-vis use of social media reveal that, in 2013, over 1.5 billion people used social networks and that the number of users is increasing so rapidly that an estimated population of plus 2.3 billion people will participate in new media by 2017. 1 On the other hand, although there is a growing body of research on social media, a specialized handbook on the pragmatics of computer-mediated communication, also published in 2013, signalled a gap in research regarding Web 2.0 phenomena, about which ''significant bodies of language-focused research have yet to accumulate'' (Herring et al., 2013: 4-5). This special issue aims to contribute to this body of research on social media by analyzing its textual realization from various pragmatic perspectives. Known also as social networking sites, Web 2.0 systems or participatory websites, social media are communication platforms which combine a number of technological affordances which support the sharing of textual, visual, and/or audio information as well as different frameworks for interaction (Ellison et al., 2014; Herring, 2013; Walther and Jang, 2012). Although it is difficult to come up with a comprehensive definition, the feature of sociability-in the sense of supporting social interaction and reconfiguring on-line communities (boyd and Ellison, 2008)-seems to be at the heart of social media (but see Thurlow, 2013). As users position themselves alongside different social media, complex communication systems, social spaces for debate and interaction, and new and evolving social practices for dyadic/polylogal, interpersonal/intergroup communication emerge, making vibrant objects of research. The multiplicity of these new communication practices, i.e. genres, poses a series of questions and challenges that are at the heart of current scholarly debates. Of special interest to pragmatics are the forms of participating, relating, and negotiating activities and identities in the social media, and how language is used alongside other semiotic means of communication in ideologically loaded ways (Bou-Franch, 2013). Central to contemporary discussions is the methodological reflection on ways of examining communication in social media, as traditional divisions between private and public, personal and institutional, and corporate and social are vanishing (Thurlow, 2013). The methodological debate further questions the validity of adapting and applying research methods designed for the study of, mainly, face-toface, oral communication, to the analysis of digital discourse and it underlines the need to design natively digital methods which will explain the challenges posed by communication in the social media (

View PDFchevron_right

References (59)

  1. Androutsopoulos, J. (2014). Languaging when contexts collapse: Audience design in social networking. Discourse, Context and Media, 4-5, 62-73.
  2. Beam, M.A., Child, J.T., Hutchens, M.J. and Hmielowski, J.D. (2018). Context collapse and privacy management: Diversity in Facebook friends increases online news reading and sharing. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2296-2314.
  3. Blommaert, J., Smits, L. and Yacoubi, N. (2020). Context and its complications. In A. De Fina and A. Georgakopoulou, eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Discourse Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52-69.
  4. Bolander, B. (2019). Social Media Research. In Handbook of Pragmatics, volume 22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 31-48.
  5. Bolander, B. and Locher, M.A. (2020). Beyond the online offline distinction: Entry points to digital discourse. Discourse, Context & Media 35.
  6. Bou-Franch P. and Garces-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2014). Conflict management in massive polylogues: A case study from YouTube. Journal of Pragmatics, 73, 19-36.
  7. Bou-Franch P. and Garces-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2018). Relational work in multimodal networked interactions on Facebook. Internet Pragmatics, 1(1), 134-160.
  8. Bou-Franch P., Lorenzo-Dus, N. and Garces-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2012). Social interaction in YouTube text-based polylogues: A study of coherence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17, 501-521.
  9. boyd, D. (2010). Social Network Sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi, ed., A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge, pp. 39-58.
  10. Costa, E. (2018). Affordances-in-practice: An ethnographic critique of social media logic and context collapse. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3641-3656.
  11. Chen, Y. and He, W. (2015). Interpretation of the compositional meaning of movie posters from the perspective of multimodal discourse analysis. Paper delivered at International Symposium on College Foreign Languages Education Reform and Innovation. Wuhan (China).
  12. Davidson, B.I. and Joinson, A.N. (2021). Shape shifting across social media. Social Media + Society 7(1).
  13. Davis J.L. and Jurgenson, N. (2014). Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 476-85.
  14. Dayter, D. (2016). Discursive Self in Microblogging: Speech Acts, Stories and Self-Praise. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  15. Duguay, S. (2016). "He has a way gayer Facebook than I do": Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society, 18(6), 891-907.
  16. Eisenlauer, V. (2014). Facebook as a third author -(Semi-)automated participation framework in social network sites. Journal of Pragmatics, 72, 73-85.
  17. Eisenlauer, V. (2017). Social network sites/Facebook. In: C.R. Hoffmann and W. Bublitz, eds., Pragmatics of Social Media. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 225-42.
  18. Erickson, T. (1997). Social interaction on the Net: Virtual community as participatory genre. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE.
  19. Gil-Lopez, T., Shen, C., Benefield, G.A., Palomares, N.A., Kosinski, M. and Stillwell, D. (2018). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23, 127-45.
  20. Gruber, H. (2019). Genres, media, and recontextualization practices. Re-considering basic concepts of genre theory in the age of social media. Internet Pragmatics, 2(1), 54-82.
  21. Hassan, H. and van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Semiotic analysis: Compositional meaning of corporate web pages. In H. Habil and H. Hassan, eds., New Perspectives in Language and Communication Research. Skudai: UTM, pp. 39-52.
  22. Jewitt, C. (2004). Multimodality and new communication technologies. In Philip LeVine and Ron Scollon, eds., Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press, pp. 184-195.
  23. Jones, R. (2004). The problem of context in computer-mediated communication. In P. LeVine and R. Scollon, eds., Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. Washington: Georgetown University Press, pp. 20-33.
  24. Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images. The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.
  25. Lomborg, S. (2014). Social Media, Social Genres: Making Sense of the Ordinary. Abingdon: Routledge.
  26. Marwick, A. and boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114-33.
  27. Miltner, K.M. (2014). 'There's no place for lulz on LOLCats': The role of genre, gender, and group identity in the interpretation and enjoyment of an Internet meme. First Monday, 19(8).
  28. Murphy, K. (2020). Why Zoom is terrible. The New York Times, 29-4-2020.
  29. Pano Alamán, A. and Mancera Rueda, A. (2014). La "conversación" en Twitter: Las unidades discursivas y el uso de marcadores interactivos en los intercambios con parlamentarios españoles en esta red social [The "conversation" on Twitter: The discursive units and the use of discourse markers in exchanges with Spanish members of parliament in this social networking site]. Estudios de Lingüística del Español, 35, 243-77.
  30. Puschmann, C. (2015). The form and function of quoting in digital media. Discourse, Context and Media, 7, 28-36.
  31. Quinn, K. (2016). Contextual social capital: linking the contexts of social media use to its outcomes. Information, Communication & Society, 19(5), 582-600.
  32. Scott, K. (2015). The pragmatics of hashtags: Inference and conversational style on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics, 81, 8-20.
  33. Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
  34. Spilioti, T. (2015). Social media discourse. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie and T. Sandel, eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Chichester: Wiley & Sons.
  35. Szabla, M. and Blommaert, J. (2020). Does context really collapse in social media interaction? Applied Linguistics Review, 11(2), 251-79.
  36. Thompson, J.B. (2020). Mediated interaction in the digital age. Theory, Culture & Society, 37(1), 3-28.
  37. van Dijck, J. (2013). 'You have one identity': Performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 199-215.
  38. van Leeuwen, T. (2014). About images and multimodality: A personal account. In Sigrid Norris and Carmen Daniela Maier, eds., Interactions, Images and Texts. A Reader in Multimodality. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 19-24.
  39. van Leeuwen, T. (2015). Multimodality. In Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton and Deborah Schiffrin, eds., The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd Edition. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 447-465.
  40. van Leeuwen, T. (2020). The new visuality of writing. In H. Stöckl, H. Caple and J. Pflaeging, eds., Shifts toward Image-Centricity in Contemporary Multimodal Practices. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 64-85.
  41. Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451-70.
  42. Wikström, P. (2014). #Srynotfunny: Communicative functions of hashtags on Twitter. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 27, 127-152.
  43. Yus, F. (2007). Virtualidades reales. Nuevas formas de comunidad en la era de Internet [Real virtualities. New forms of community in the Internet age]. Alicante: University of Alicante, Servicio de Publicaciones.
  44. Yus, F. (2011). Cyberpragmatics. Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  45. Yus, F. (2014). El discurso de las identidades en línea: El caso de Facebook [The discourse of online identities: The case of Facebook].
  46. Discurso & Sociedad, 8(3), 398-426.
  47. Yus, F. (2015). Discourse and identity. In James D. Wright, ed., International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2nd edition), volume 6. Oxford: Elsevier, 498-502.
  48. Yus, F. (2016a). Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  49. Yus, F. (2016b). Discourse, contextualization and identity shaping. The case of social networking sites and virtual worlds. In M.L. Carrió-Pastor, ed., New tools, New Approaches. Technology implementation in Higher Education for Second Language Teaching and Translation Studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 71-88.
  50. Yus, F. (2016c). Towards a cyberpragmatics of mobile instant messaging. In J. Romero-Trillo, ed., Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2016: Global Implications for Culture and Society in the Networked Age. Berlin: Springer, 7-26.
  51. Yus, F. (2017a). Social media. In A. Barron, Y. Gu and G. Steen, eds., The Routledge Handbook of Pragmatics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 550-62.
  52. Yus, F. (2017b). Putting relevance at centre stage in research on human activity on the Internet. In A. Piskorska and E. Wałaszewska, eds., From Discourse to Morphemes. Applications of Relevance Theory. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 86-102.
  53. Yus, F. (2017c). Contextual constraints and non-propositional effects in WhatsApp communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 114, 66-86.
  54. Yus, F. (2018). Identity-related issues in meme communication. Internet Pragmatics, 1(1), 113-133.
  55. Yus, F. (2019). An outline of some future research issues for internet Pragmatics. Internet Pragmatics, 2(1), 1-33.
  56. Yus, F. (2021). Cyberpragmatics in the age of locative media. In C. Xie, F. Yus and H. Haberland, eds., Approaches to Internet Pragmatics: Theory and Practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 75-105.
  57. Yus, F. (2022). Smartphone Communication: Interactions in the App Ecosystem. Abingdon: Routledge.
  58. Yus, F. (forthcoming). Irony and the Internet. In R.W Gibbs and H.L Colston, eds., The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  59. Zappavigna, M. (2017). Evaluation. In C.R. Hoffmann and W. Bublitz, eds., Pragmatics of Social Media. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 435-58.

Related papers

Cyberpragmatics. Internet-Mediated Communication in Context
Francisco Yus

2011

Cyberpragmatics is an analysis of Internet-mediated communication from the perspective of cognitive pragmatics. It addresses a whole range of interactions that can be found on the Net: the web page, chat rooms, instant messaging, social networking sites, 3D virtual worlds, blogs, videoconference, e-mail, Twitter, etc. Of special interest is the role of intentions and the quality of interpretations when these Internet-mediated interactions take place, which is often affected by the textual properties of the medium. The book also analyses the pragmatic implications of transferring offline discourses (e.g. printed paper, advertisements) to the screen-framed space of the Net. And although the main framework is cognitive pragmatics, the book also draws from other theories and models in order to build up a better picture of what really happens when people communicate on the Net. This book will interest analysts doing research on computer-mediated communication, university students and researchers undergoing post-graduate courses or writing a PhD thesis.

View PDFchevron_right
The problem of context in computer-mediated communication
geradine michael

Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse …, 2004

This paper explores the inadequacies of models of context built for the study of face to face and written communication to deal with the new interactional terrain of computer mediated communication and suggests new ways of approaching the issue of context. In order to understand technologically mediated contexts, it argues, analysts need to rethink many of their basic assumptions about CMC in particular and communication in general, assumptions that rest upon a number of 'false dichotomies' which separate the 'virtual' from the 'material', the 'figure' from the 'ground', the 'sender' from the 'receiver' and the 'text' from the 'context'.

View PDFchevron_right
The interface between pragmatics and Internet-mediated communication: Applications, extensions and adjustments
Francisco Yus

Pragmatics and its Interfaces, eds. Cornelia Ilie and Neal R. Norrick. John Benjamins, 2018

Pragmatics addresses central features of human communication, specifically how interlocutors fill the gap between what is said and what is eventually communicated. The aim of this chapter is to review several applications of pragmatics to Internet-mediated communication, and to assess how the mediated, virtual nature of this communication requires analyses beyond those based on physical, face-to-face scenarios. On paper, two broad and apparently incompatible premises constitute the foundation of these distinct applications. On the one hand, Internet-mediated communication " makes no difference " for a pragmatic analysis, in the sense that we do not have specific cognitive mechanisms to interpret online discourses that differ from the ones used in face-to-face communication. On the other hand, though, Internet " makes all the difference " for pragmatics, since the inferential gap-filling made by Internet users, intended to turn online texts (e.g. typed utterances) into valid interpretations, is influenced by the interfaces used for interactions and the range of contextual support that users can access in the interpretation of these online discourses. This chapter will review several existing pragmatic analyses of Internet-mediated communication but with an emphasis on a cognitive pragmatics (cyberpragmatic) framework (Yus 2011a).

View PDFchevron_right
The Shifts of Conventional Context Element Aspects: Towards a Cyberpragmatics Perspective
R. Kunjana Rahardi

JURNAL ARBITRER

This study aims to describe the forms of shifting conventional context elements to a virtual external context in the cyberpragmatics perspective. The data of this study were manifestations of the shifts in the contexts. The substantive data source of this study was various kinds of utterances and the formulation of the context containing realizations of the shifts in the conventional external context. The locative data source was social media that published a variety of utterances and the context in which there was a shift in the context elements that could be collected by the researcher around the time of the study. The data collection method applied was the listening method, focusing on the free engaged and profound method of listening. The technique used in applying the listening method was the note-taking technique. The data were then classified and verified further. The verified data were then triangulated to experts of pragmatics, especially cyberpragmatics. Data analysis was ...

View PDFchevron_right
2011. Sykes, J. Review of Francisco Yus. 2010. Ciberpragmática 2.0: Nuevos usos del lenguaje en Internet [Cyberpragmatics 2.0: New uses of language on the Internet] 366 pp. ISBN 978-84-344-1713-7, EUR 35,00. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 10, 2664-2666.
Julie Sykes

Reflective of both changing times and transforming communicative practices, Ciberpragmática 2.0 is a timely and profound revision of Yus' original book, Ciberpragmática (Yus, 2001). Included with revised versions of the original five chapters are three additional chapters which reflect changing discursive behaviors occurring in digitally mediated spaces. These include pragmatic analyses of blogs, social networking sites (e.g., Tuenti), and microblogging (e.g., Twitter), as well as avatar-mediated communication. The book concludes with a chapter examining the future of pragmatic analysis of digitally mediated discourse. Ciberpragmática 2.0 remains the first volume of its kind written in Spanish and, as predicted by Bonilla in his 2003 review of Ciberpragmática, is ''universally recognized. . .as a classical reference work on the language of computerized communication'' (p. 639). Overall, the volume is well written, comprehensive, global, and reflective of the type of pragmatic considerations relevant to evolving human communication in both digitally mediated and non-mediated contexts. The book reflects a strong foundation in cognitive models of pragmatic analysis, specifically Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson, 1995), as well as innovative thinking related to the consideration of digitally mediated discourse.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Pragmatics
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved