Languages in the Digital Age: Evidence From SMS Language in Algeria
Keywords:
Digital, language planning, Mobile, SMS textingAbstract
Communication is an efficient tool used to create efficient contact and maintain strong sociolinguistic ties between the members of any speech community. Technology is one of the most important elements that made communication successful and reliable, and speaking using technology such as chatting and sending SMS are therefore the prominent instances of such use. Henceforth, the sociolinguistic situation in Algeria and the survival of its dialects are conditioned by both their oral and written production. For instance, Tamazight that is used in the Great Kabylia has a considerable record of written literature such as poetry and literature. And SMS is a reflection of such linguistic complexity that will be thoroughly explored, analysed and discussed in this empirical study. The latter is based on SMS analysis. The purpose is therefore to highlight the diversity of languages in Algeria, in this digital age where language overcomes speech to reach the mobile screen. The outcomes focused on the existence of a linguistic accommodation of Algerian speakers to a new technology where formal and informal varieties are mixed up in an unstable diglossic situation leading to texting messages.
References
Baldauf, R. B. Jr. (1989). Language planning: Corpus planning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 3-12.
Crystal, D. (2008). Texting: the Gr8 Db8. New York: Oxford University Press.
Do ¨ ring, N. (2002).‘Kurzm.wirdgesendet’: Abku ¨ rzungen und akronyme in der smskommunikation [abbreviations and acronyms in SMS communication]. Muttersprache.Vierteljahresschriftfu¨ r Deutsche Sprache, 112(2), 97–114.
Gergen, K. J. (2002). The challenge of absent presence. In J. E. Katz & M. A. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact. Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 227-241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grandguillaume, G. (1983). Arabisation et politique linguistique au maghreb. Paris: Editions G-P Maisonneuveet Larose. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Grinter, R. E. & Eldridge, M. A. (2001). y do tngrs luv 2 txt msg? In W. Prinz, M. Jarke, Y. Rogers, K. Schmidt, & V. Wulf (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh European conference on computer (pp. 219-238). Bonn, Germany: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kortti, H. (1999). On some similarities between discourse in the IRC and the conventions of spoken English. Retrieved from http://www.student.oulu.fi/~hkortti/proseminar-final.html
Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1996). The sounds of the world ’s languages. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Ling, R. (2000). Direct and mediated interaction in the maintenance of social relationships. In A. Sloane & F. van Rijn (Eds.), Home informatics and telematics: Information, technology and society (pp. 61-86). Boston: Kluwer.
Rafi, M. S. (2008). SMS text analysis: Language, gender and current practices. Paper presented at the 26th Annual TESOL France Colloquium.
Riesman, D., Denney, R., & Glazer, N. (1950).The lonely crowd. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Rubin, J., & Jernudd, B. H. (Eds.). (1971). Can language be planned? Sociolinguistic theory and practice for developing nations. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press
