Приложение

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |

As with much online discourse, SMS retains both written and spoken language characteristics. As Rebecca Hughes (1996: 123) states, 'speech and writing usually take place in very different contexts. These contexts can be described both in terms of the contexts of production and the influence of the context of reception'. Through developing an understanding of the properties of both written and spoken language and then applying them to the language used in text messages, we will be able to see how this new vocabulary has formed and why users make use of linguistic short-cuts. As written language is in general more prescribed than spoken language (where authors have the chance to edit the words they write), people make different word choices when writing than when speaking, as Biber states, research indicates that 'all informational discourse.. .has a high lexical variety in contrast to interactive, affective types of discourse' (1998: 112). By studying language variations and uses, much of the conventions of text messaging language, a blurring of written and spoken discourse, can be better understood. SMS is unique with regards language selection, more like a written form of speech, as Biber explains, 'in terms of its linguistic characteristics, stereotypical speech is interactive, and dependant on shared space, time, and background knowledge; stereotypical writing has the opposite characteristics' (1998: 25). Text messages however, tend to have more akin with the former. Koritti's (1999) work examines how 'reactive tokens' such as 'yeah I know', an acknowledgement that one is following what the other is saying, is very widespread in IRC (Internet Relay Chat) language (and similarly in SMS language) and also a common feature in spoken conversation. This is a further example of how SMS language conventions resemble speech in many of its prominent characteristics. Like normal speech, text messages are structurally simple, fragmented, concrete, and conditional on situation-dependant reference. Many parts of spoken speech are eliminated through the process of abbreviation (Rintel & Pittam's (1997) observation on abbreviation creation: 'use the shortest, easiest-to-type, 'phonetic' equivalent of a word'), and utterances often lack a subject or predicate for brevity's sake, brevity, as this research will show, being key to SMS.

This research is interested in defining what type of language SMS language is. Despite the various features of written language one can find in text messages, SMS cannot be considered 'written'. This dissertation will draw on the work of Goffman (1981), who listed some differences between written and spoken prose to illustrate this point: (i) 'Readers can reread a passage, whereas hearers can't rehear an utterance- except from a tape. Also, spelling [and punctuation] helps to disambiguate what in speech would be homonymous [or otherwise ambiguous]', (ii) 'Print conventions for laying out a text provide for coherence in ways unavailable to oral delivery' and (iii) 'Ordinarily, liberties that can be taken with an audience can't be taken with a readership.. .For [the speaker] can rely on people he can see getting the spirit of his remarks, not merely the literal words that carry them'. The 'written text' of text messages rarely conforms to these characteristics of written language however.