The Digital Vernacular: A Linguistic Analysis Of Evolving Communicative Norms In Online Discourse

Authors

  • Prof. Lena S. Petrova Faculty of Media and Communication, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Keywords:

Internet Linguistics, Digital Discourse Analysis, Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC), Sociolinguistics

Abstract

Purpose: The proliferation of internet-mediated communication has catalyzed profound shifts in language use, creating novel linguistic paradigms. This article investigates the evolution of English-language discourse in the digital sphere, aiming to move beyond the prescriptive debate of "degradation vs. evolution." It seeks to systematically analyze the lexico-grammatical, pragmatic, and multimodal features of contemporary online communication to map the contours of an emerging "digital vernacular."

Methods: This study employs a qualitative discourse analysis of a multi-platform digital corpus compiled from public interactions on Twitter, Reddit, and TikTok. The analytical framework integrates principles from sociolinguistics, cognitive-communicative theory, and semiotics to provide a holistic interpretation of language in its digital context. The analysis focuses on identifying patterns of linguistic innovation, pragmatic function, and platform-specific norms.

Findings: The results reveal a multifaceted linguistic evolution characterized by three core developments: (1) significant lexico-grammatical innovations, including the conventionalization of abbreviations and neologisms driven by economy and identity-marking; (2) a reconfiguration of pragmatic norms governing politeness, confrontation, and social etiquette online; and (3) the ascendancy of multimodality, where emojis, GIFs, and memes function as integral, meaning-making components of discourse rather than mere embellishments. Findings also confirm the existence of distinct "platform vernaculars," where technological affordances and community culture shape unique linguistic ecosystems.

Conclusion: The study concludes that the linguistic changes observed in online environments represent a sophisticated and creative adaptation of language to a new medium. These evolving paradigms reflect a shift towards a more efficient, visually integrated, and socially indexed mode of communication. The findings challenge deficit-oriented views of internet language and underscore the need for revised frameworks in digital literacy, education, and communication theory to account for these new realities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

4Ever Young Anti-Aging Solutions. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://surl.li/gyncav

AbuSa’aleek, A. (2015). Internet linguistics: A linguistic analysis of electronic discourse as a new variety of language. International Journal of English Linguistics, 5(1), 135–145. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v5n1p135

Baron, N. (2003). Language of the Internet. In The Stanford handbook for language engineers (pp. 59–127). CSLI Publications. https://doi.org/10.57912/23845377.v1

Baron, N. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195313055.001.0001

Bob’s short English lessons. Meaning of IMHO. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://surl.li/dndybq

Böhmer, A., & Schwab, G. (2024). Digital teaching and learning in higher education: Culture, language, social issues. Bielefeld. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:28429

Bongers, B. (2021). Understanding interaction: The relationships between people, technology, culture, and the environment. Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315373386

Chernysh, O. (2022). Modern English-language Internet discourse. Scientific Bulletin of PNPU after K.D. Ushynsky, 34, 118–129.

Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487002

Dosenko, A. (2021). Mobile discourse of communication platforms. State and Regions. Series: Social Communications, 2(46), 112–116. https://doi.org/10.32840/cpu2219-8741/2021.2(46

Frolova, I. (2009). The strategy of confrontation in English-language discourse. Karazin Kharkiv National University.

Giannoulis, E., & Wilde, L. (2019). Emoticons, “Kaomoji”, and emoji: The transformation of communication in the digital. Routledge.

Halynska, Yu. (2022). International business communications: Lecture notes. Sumy State University.

Hudz, N. (2015). Internet discourse as a new type of communication: Structure, language design, genre formats. In Modern linguistic studies: Study guide (pp. 61–87). Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University Publishing House.

Izotova, N., Polishchuk, M., & Taranik-Tkachuk, K. (2021). Discourse analysis and digital technologies: (TikTok, hashtags, Instagram, YouTube): Universal and specific aspects in international practice. Amazonia Investiga, 10(44), 198–206. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.44.08.19

McWhorter, J. (n.d.). Txtng is killing language. JK!!!. Retrieved from http://surl.li/qirqbl

Rupprecht, W. (2014). Introduction to the theory of cognitive communication. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05498-4

Serazhim, K. (2002). Discourse as a socio-linguistic phenomenon: Methodology, architecture, variability. Institute of Journalism.

Stolyarova, M. (2005). Etiquette in virtual English-language communication (based on chatline sessions) [Doctoral dissertation, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv].

Downloads

Published

2025-11-01

How to Cite

Prof. Lena S. Petrova. (2025). The Digital Vernacular: A Linguistic Analysis Of Evolving Communicative Norms In Online Discourse. European International Journal of Philological Sciences, 5(11), 1–10. Retrieved from https://www.eipublication.com/index.php/eijps/article/view/3470