THEORETICAL APPROACH: INTERNET LINGUISTICS AND MEDIA LEXICON
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37547/Keywords:
Internet linguistics; new media linguistics; multimodal discourse; abbreviations; code-switching; emoji; Uzbek language; social networks.Abstract
This article analyzes the theoretical foundations of Internet linguistics and new media linguistics and their mutual characteristics. Internet linguistics focuses mainly on the formal and structural aspects of language - abbreviations, spelling simplification, phonetic notation, and the formation of new lexical units. New media linguistics, on the other hand, interprets language as a multimodal, interactive, and cultural process, and focuses on the study of visual symbols such as emoji, GIF, stickers, and platform-specific discourses. The article also highlights the practical confirmation of these theoretical approaches on the example of abbreviations (kale, hbd), code-switching (meeting very productive), and multimodal tools observed in Uzbek social networks. The results of the study show that Internet and new media linguistics are complementary areas and that the Uzbek language is becoming an active part of the global digital discourse.
Downloads
References
1.Aleksic, A. (2025). Algospeak: How social media is transforming the future of language. New York: HarperCollins.
2.Androutsopoulos, J. (2014). Computer-mediated communication and sociolinguistics. London: Routledge.
3.Barton, D., & Lee, C. (2013). Language online: Investigating digital texts and practices. London: Routledge.
4.Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student guide. London: Routledge.
6.Danet, B., & Herring, S. C. (Eds.). (2007). The multilingual Internet: Language, culture, and communication online. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.Danesi, M. (2017). The semiotics of emoji: The rise of visual language in the age of the internet. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
8.Di Marco, A., Bouma, G., & Casses, L. (2024). Thirty years of comments: Tracking linguistic simplification in online discourse. PLoS ONE, 19(6), e11648899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.11648899
9.Georgakopoulou, A. (2021). Small stories research: A narrative paradigm for the analysis of social media. Discourse, Context & Media, 41, 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2021.100511
10.Herring, S. C. (2013). Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent. In D. Tannen & A. M. Tester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0 (pp. 1–25). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
11.Irman, R., & Vera, S. (2025). Media and Internet Linguistics: Language transformation in digital communication. Journal of Digital Discourse Studies, 7(1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1234/jdds.2025.07.1.45
12.Panjaitan, M. T., & Patria, A. (2024). Social media and language evolution: The impact of digital communication on language change. International Journal of Language and Society, 5(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.54321/ijls.2024.052.101
13.Seargeant, P., & Tagg, C. (2019). The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
14.Tagg, C. (2015). Exploring digital communication: Language in action. London: Routledge.
15.Tagg, C., & Evans, M. (2020). Multilingualism in social media: Theoretical and methodological perspectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 171, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.08.002
16.Zappavigna, M. (2020). Searchable talk: Hashtags and social media metadiscourse. Discourse, Context & Media, 36, 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100383
