Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai

LAIMA NEVINSKAITĖ Institute of the Lithuanian Language SPELLING FEATURES OF TEXT MESSAGES Short (SMS) messages, conceived as an additional service at the advent of mobile phones, have in recent years become no less popular than ordinary phone calls. This is due to various reasons, such as cost, the possibility of contacting someone without disturbing them, and so on. According to data from Statistics Lithuania, the number of messages sent in 2006 slightly exceeded 9 billion per year and has remained similar to this day, amounting to about 25 million text messages per day (Statistics Lithuania 2010). Since messages are a means of verbal communication, they can be an object of linguistic analysis. However, interest in the language of text messages is prompted less by simple scholarly curiosity than by their distinctive spelling, which is noticeable at first glance, and its potential impact on correct spelling. Public discussions are dominated by concern about the language of text messages and its impact on language use in general—an issue relevant both abroad and in Lithuania (see the overview of discussions in Thurlow 2006; Lithuanian discussions: Rotautaitė 2007; Jackevičius 2010). The aim of this article is to examine the spelling features of the Lithuanian language in text messages and discuss their functions. The goal is not only to determine how the spelling of Lithuanian text messages (the writing of words, capital letters, and punctuation marks) differs from standard spelling, but also to attempt (drawing on studies by foreign authors and the author’s own insights) to determine why such approaches to writing messages and entering text are chosen. This article examines spelling only and does not delve into vocabulary or other linguistic matters; moreover, to narrow the scope of the study, it does not analyze the use of textual emoticons (the so-called smileys). For the study, 2,060 text messages were collected from 75 people of different ages and from various service providers. This sample makes it possible to compile a fairly comprehensive list of spelling features in text messages. The article identifies L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 275 some quantitative tendencies as well, indicating how prevalent the spelling features are in the messages collected. Since the sample is not representative, the tendencies mentioned should be considered exploratory and used to formulate further hypotheses rather than to draw definitive conclusions. For this reason, detailed quantitative analysis results are not presented either. The study data1 are examined in greater detail in the second section of the article. 1. FEATURES OF TEXT MESSAGE LANGUAGE: A REVIEW OF RESEARCH Text messaging became available in the mid-1990s. It took some time for language researchers to turn their attention to text messages as an object of study, but the number of studies began to grow from 2000 onward (Thurlow, Poff 2010). Researchers examine not only linguistic features but also pragmatic aspects: the sequence of dialogue, its opening and closing, code-switching, and the purpose of communication. They also study the pragmatics of message length, text complexity, grammar and punctuation, spelling, and the use of emoticons. Research has focused primarily on the text-message language of younger people, although they are not the only (but are the most dedicated) text-message writers. Researchers also compare the text-message language of men and women, while very few studies have examined other demographic characteristics (Thurlow, Poff 2010). Unlike the earliest scholarly articles on text-message language, which merely identified distinctive linguistic features that had been observed, researchers now also seek statistical evidence of how widespread these features are. Studies of mobile-phone users are being conducted to find out why people write messages in the way they do, and the first studies have appeared on the effects of text messaging on literacy and on the quality of writing in other texts (Thurlow 2006). Of course, a considerable amount of broader research into text-message communication is also being conducted, and this too is important for explaining the characteristics of text-message language. This article draws mainly on the work of authors from other countries. No published studies of text messages in Lithuanian could be found, only information about student theses that had been undertaken. Text messages in Lithuania have been studied from other perspectives; for example, “messages of affection” have been examined (Skabeikytė-Kazlauskienė 2007), and the negative effects of text messaging on language learning have been mentioned 1The article uses empirical data from Viktorija Steponavičiūtė’s master’s thesis (supervisor L. Nevinskaitė) (Steponavičiūtė 2010). 276 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 (though without providing evidence based on research) (Salienė 2007); young people’s attitudes toward linguistic correctness across various domains of language use, including text messages, have been studied (Grigonienė, Spūdytė 2010). The characteristics of electronic discourse have been studied in detail, but at the time text messages had not yet been included in its scope (Ryklienė 2000 et al.). Research into text-message language faces considerable difficulties in gathering material: text messages are a means of private communication and are not published publicly, making it difficult to collect large, representative datasets. However, initial efforts to collect messages systematically have already been made in other countries. The largest known project of this kind, entitled “Donate your SMS to science” (Faites don de vos SMS à la science), was carried out in 2004 in the French-speaking region of Belgium. A corpus of 30,000 messages was compiled, containing messages from a wide range of social groups. A toll-free telephone number was set up for collecting messages, and people could send messages to it; they were also asked online to complete a short form providing essential sociodemographic information about themselves. To collect as much material as possible, the project was widely advertised in the media. The messages in the corpus were processed (personal information and the like were removed) and transcribed into standard French, since otherwise some of their content would have been difficult to understand. Thus, a fundamentally bilingual corpus of text messages was created (Fairon, Paumier 2006). Most researchers agree that text-message language differs considerably from everyday language (although this depends on language users—youth language is especially distinctive in this respect). Some consider it an emerging, independent language register (Vosloo 2009). In English, this variety of language already has an established name, texting language, while its individual elements are called textisms. In Lithuanian, it was termed “žinutinimas” (Miliūnaitė 2008), but this designation has not yet become widely used. 1.1. Functions of text messages and their influence on the language of text messages When examining the language of text messages, it is necessary to take into account their communicative functions, since these determine the features of the language used in messages and may also explain the reasons for those features. The literature identifies the following main functions of text messages: affective (expression of feelings); phatic (maintaining contact), e.g., greetings, invitations, jokes, etc.; and social-coordinative (e.g., reporting what one is doing at the time, where one is, what to buy, where to wait, etc.) (Segerstad 2002; Thurlow, Poff 2010). L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 277 Although text messages can also be used in some professional and business contexts (primarily in advertising, as well as in medicine, education, political communication, the media, etc.), their predominant field of use is informal personal communication between individuals. The language of text messages therefore belongs to the informal register, which is particularly influential in determining the character of the language (Segerstad 2002). The functions of text messages and the specific ways in which they are used are also related to the reasons that led to the emergence of a distinctive text-message language and its use today. Four groups of reasons can be distinguished. First of all, of course, there is the technology, which requires fitting a message into a relatively small number of characters (160 characters). For some time, this was a very restrictive factor, since phones simply did not allow this number to be exceeded—to send a longer text, it was necessary to send another, separate message. Although many phones now allow users to type longer messages continuously, their cost is a limiting factor (longer messages cost proportionally more), as may be a habit that has persisted. Another technological factor is also at work: text is typed relatively slowly on a standard phone keypad (entering one character requires pressing a key between one and four times). This encourages the use of abbreviations and the search for other ways to type text more quickly, for example, by choosing letters that are more quickly “accessible” (Segerstad 2002; Rivière 2002; Crystal 2008). The desire to write a message more quickly can sometimes also explain why errors are left uncorrected: if entering the desired letter takes longer, a quicker, albeit incorrect, version is left in place, since it is assumed that the recipient will understand the text anyway (Rivière 2002). Moreover, abbreviation is achieved not only through spelling, but also through economy of thought, a telegraphic style, and the use of shorter English words (ibid.). On the other hand, the brevity of messages and their other features are also determined by the communicative functions of text messages mentioned above. Studies show that message authors rarely use the permitted number of characters (for example, one study found that the average message length was 65 characters); brevity and the desire to type text quickly therefore depend not only on message length but also on pragmatic reasons, first and foremost the dialogic nature of communication, since a message often replies to one received without repeating information already known (Thurlow, Poff 2010). As noted, messages are most often used for informal personal communication, which gives their language an informal style and leads to nonstandard spelling. A third reason for the differences between the language of text messages and the language normally used in other contexts is the pleasure of playing with language (Crystal 2008), of breaking rules. This is also confirmed by a study of users—when 278 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 some say that it is fun to create ambiguities in text messages and to play with language, and that such play is understood in terms of expression as well as content. Students may also find it interesting to break rules, to a greater or lesser extent deliberately. It is emphasized that it is enjoyable not only to create such messages, but also to read (decipher) them (Rivière 2002). Finally, differences in the language of text messages are also related to the expression of identity (this motive is most strongly associated with young people’s text-message language), since abbreviations and specific writing practices require knowledge not only of the standard language but also of certain insider information, or a code, and are incomprehensible to others (Segerstad 2002). J. K. Androutsopoulas (2000) argues that “nonstandard spelling can be an excellent and playful means for text creators (especially young people) to express their social identity by deviating from conventional norms; in this way they distinguish themselves from others (e.g., adults) and create a bond with one another” (cited in Thurlow, Poff 2010: 9). Other researchers also acknowledge that text messages do indeed use a kind of secret youth code, which is partly international (based on English) and partly local (Mante-Meijer, Pires 2002). Two people can also develop a language of their own for text messages, which then becomes an expression of their shared identity (Rivière 2002). Individuality should also be mentioned here: text messages allow people to express individual creativity (Crystal 2008), which is why it is sometimes difficult to say which spelling examples are systematic and which are isolated. 1.2. Spelling Features of Messages The language of text messages is examined as a variety of the broader language of the electronic medium, sharing many features with the language of other varieties of this medium (blogs, instant messages, chat rooms, forums, and other forms of online communication). However, these varieties also differ from one another in terms of formality and other aspects. The language of the electronic medium has features of both written and spoken language. Some web texts (portals, advertisements, etc.) are closer to written language and do not differ, or differ very little, from conventional written language. However, there are also writing situations in which language, although written down, has more features of spoken language (instant messages, personal email messages, etc.). In such cases, the time factor is very important, since a quick response is usually expected; such messages are ephemeral, because messages can be deleted immediately or pushed further up (as in an instant messaging window); the language is urgent and energetic, reminiscent of face-to-face conversation (Crystal 2008). L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 279 Dažnai cituojamame straipsnyje (Thurlow 2003) skiriami trys žinučių kalbos sociolingvistiniai principai, kurie paaiškina žinutėse vartojamos kalbos bruožus: trumpumas ir greitis; parakalbinė restitucija, t. y. neverbalinės išraiškos priemonių, kurių trūksta rašytinei komunikacijai žinutėmis, kompensavimas; fonologinė aproksimacija, t. y. apytikslė rašyba. Šie principai pasireiškia tam tikrais konkrečiais nestandartinės žinučių rašybos bruožais – dauguma iš jų būdingi ir kitoms elektroninės komunikacijos priemonėms, tik nevienodai plačiai paplitę (Thurlow 2003; Crystal 2008; Tagg, Baron, Rayson 2010). Tai: 1) various types of abbreviations: several medial or final letters are omitted, or the final letter is not written; 2) acronyms and initialisms; 3) letter homophones (e.g., u = you), and homophones composed of letters and numbers (e.g., 2night = tonight); 4) “incorrect” (deliberate) spelling and typographical errors; 5) unconventional spelling (e.g., cuz = because); 6) stylized accents, dialectal spelling, and colloquial spelling; 7) merged words (e.g., thankyou, ohdear); 8) writing without capital letters; 9) typographic emphasis (e.g., writing individual words entirely in capital letters, using an asterisk to emphasize a word); 10) using multiple punctuation marks to express emotions (e.g., several exclamation marks). Messages written in different languages share similar spelling features, although some languages make greater use of certain devices and others of different ones, because, owing to the particular characteristics of each language, some devices are better suited to certain languages than to others (see overviews in Crystal 2008: 123–148; Thurlow, Poff 2010: 5). As noted, there is a growing body of empirical research that quantitatively examines the prevalence of the aforementioned spelling features in text messages and provides a firmer basis for views on widespread stereotypes. Many researchers observe that messages examined statistically contain relatively few abbreviations and other nonstandard spelling features, fewer than one might think from reading the fear-inducing articles in the popular media. Moreover, the abbreviations used in messages are not particularly “exotic.” Thus, the language of text messages is not some distinctive language: the messages studied contain very few abbreviations or other spelling forms that are new or incomprehensible without the context in which they were written, even to an outside observer (Segerstad 280 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 2002; Thurlow 2003). Most such messages could be written on a note stuck to the refrigerator door or left on a table—where the same rule of brevity applies. It is therefore concluded that claims by the popular media and some language researchers about the incomprehensibility and distinctiveness of text-message language are greatly exaggerated, because they fail to take into account the significance of language use in specific situations and discourse (Thurlow, Poff 2010). 1.3. The impact of text messaging on literacy As already mentioned, the prevalence of text messaging is often viewed negatively. There are concerns that writing text messages damages language and that young people’s literacy skills are deteriorating. The main concern is that text-messaging habits may carry over into other texts where correct writing is required: “complaints are pouring in from all over the world that text-message spelling features are finding their way into the formal register of school writing” (Vosloo 2009). There are relatively few empirical studies in this field. Until now, research has mainly examined the spelling features or functions of text messages, while only the first studies linking text messaging with literacy are now being conducted. Moreover, the results of existing studies are inconclusive. Reviewing research on the impact of text messaging on English spelling, the researchers (Thurlow, Poff 2010) state that only a few scholars have found a negative effect of text messaging, while many other empirical studies show that text messaging does not pose a threat to the teaching and learning of standard English. According to the results of a survey of US schoolchildren, most respondents said that text messaging did not negatively affect their writing abilities; nevertheless, 64 percent admitted that some informal spelling features occasionally appeared in their schoolwork (Lenhart 2008). However, given the research method (how reliable is the schoolchildren’s own assessment of their abilities?), this study should be viewed critically. The group of English researchers most often cited in this regard has produced more positive evidence concerning the effects of text messaging. One of their studies found no association between text messaging and spelling grades (cited in Vosloo 2009), while another confirmed that text messaging may even positively affect reading skills and phonological awareness. The authors tested the direction of the relationship (i.e. which factor influences which) and argued that text messaging promotes better reading skills, rather than the other way around (Plester, Wood, Bell 2008). L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 281 The positive impact of text messaging is explained by the fact that writing and understanding abbreviations requires phonological awareness, which enhances both writing and reading skills. Frequent texting and reading text messages can help children learn to write and read because the character limit requires concise, creative, and playful writing—and this is good practice. In general, by sending text messages, children spend more time writing and have more opportunities to experiment and learn (Crystal 2008). Moreover, D. Crystal argues that text messages affect writing in other genres only in isolated cases: he cites comments from representatives of educational institutions in Scotland and England that text-message abbreviations appear in students’ exam scripts, but only in a “very small” proportion of them. Furthermore, the decline in young people’s writing (here he cites the same kinds of complaints from the 1920s) is influenced not only by text messages but also by other factors—television, time spent at the computer, and less reading of books—that is, causes that existed even before text messaging became widespread. Thus, although there are cases in which the style of text messaging also appears in other contexts, people who text generally acknowledge that language use depends on the particular text. In the aforementioned study of US teenagers, a large proportion of respondents did not consider text messaging to be “writing” at all. Isolated evidence suggests that text-message authors distinguish well between contexts of language use: according to their own accounts, they do not use abbreviations when writing to their parents or to television (Crystal 2008). This is also indirectly confirmed by data from a study conducted in Lithuania on young people’s attitudes toward correct language use: 91 percent of students said it was very important to them to write their assignments correctly (6 percent said it was fairly important), whereas only 9 percent of students considered it very important to write text messages correctly (41 percent said it was fairly important) (Grigonienė, Spūdytė 2010). Text-message spelling could therefore be regarded as a case of code-switching: when writing text messages, people shift to a different mode of spelling and return to conventional spelling when necessary. D. Crystal argues that writing instruction should focus not only on spelling accuracy but also on the ability to recognize different contexts of language use—when each mode of writing is appropriate (Crystal 2008). It is important to note that only studies conducted in English-speaking countries have been reviewed here. No studies on this topic published in English from other countries could be found; nor are there currently any comparable studies in Lithuania. Therefore, the results of such studies can be applied to the Lithuanian language only in part. On the one hand, text messaging could also have a positive effect on users of Lithuanian, encourag 282 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 … youth’s linguistic creativity, providing more opportunities to write. However, other spelling features—irrelevant to English—are likely to have the greatest impact on Lithuanian: writing letters without diacritical marks, which can make it harder to distinguish short and long vowels, and forgetting spelling rules. To answer the question of the impact of text messages on the Lithuanian language, research on them needs to be conducted. 2. A STUDY OF THE SPELLING OF LITHUANIAN TEXT MESSAGES To determine which spelling features are characteristic of text messages written in Lithuanian, a study of Lithuanian text messages was conducted. The material was collected using personal social networks, and assistance was also sought from one school. The native language of the message authors is Lithuanian; some of them speak a dialect. The collected material, taking respondents’ age and gender into account, is summarized in Table 1. The study also included advertising messages sent by various companies and mobile network service providers. In the following text, unless otherwise indicated, the messages analyzed are those written by individuals. TABLE 1. Text message study sample Gender Age Total 9–10 yrs. 16–19 yrs. 20–30 yrs. 31–40 yrs. 41–74 yrs. women 34 82 1003 39 314 1472 men 27 0 518 5 0 550 total 61 82 1521 44 314 2022 advertising messages 38 total 2060 Compiling the text-message database proved challenging. People in different age groups do not communicate via text messages with equal frequency, so it was difficult to obtain more messages from people in some age groups. Technological difficulties were also unavoidable; it was not always possible to transfer messages to a computer. It must be acknowledged that the sample of messages collected for the study is not representative and mainly reveals the texting habits of people aged 20–30 L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 283 years. To create a different kind of sample, it would be necessary to select text-message writers according to sociodemographic characteristics and choose the same number of messages from each person. In conducting the analysis, one would need to calculate how widespread linguistic features are among message authors and even take the recipient into account2. The collected messages (about 99%) did not exceed the standard length of a single message (160 characters), despite the fact that most modern phones allow longer messages to be written continuously. The largest share—41%—consisted of the shortest messages (up to 20 characters), while the average message length was 35.6 characters. Analysis of the messages suggests that shorter messages are written by younger people and men. It may be that the authors of some longer messages did not want to hand them over to the researchers because of their personal content (presumably, longer messages reveal more personal matters). Nevertheless, given the large number of messages collected, it can be said that most messages written are fairly short. The length of message texts is important when interpreting the spelling features of text messages. Some spelling features of text messages have arisen from the need to stay within the limited character count, so such data could help answer the question of whether these features still serve the same function, i.e., helping to shorten the text. 2.1. Use of diacritical marks The most obvious difference between the spelling of Lithuanian text messages and that of other contexts, especially formal ones, is the writing of Lithuanian letters ą, č, ę, ė, į, š, ų, ū, ž. Although one might think that in other internet communication texts there is a tendency to use diacritical marks more often3, most of the messages collected were written without diacritics. A few messages with inconsistent spelling were found, as well as one case (several messages written by one person) in which an attempt was made to replace ordinary Lithuanian letters with characters that do not occur in the Lithuanian alphabet at all, but visually resemble the corresponding Lithuanian letters: This is the perfect occasion, so I’m sending a snowball of good wishes!;-) 2 However, this is quite complex, so the article presents only the most general tendencies, formulated on the basis of calculations made in the aforementioned master’s thesis (Steponavičiūtė 2010) and by the article’s author. 3 For example, according to one study, in 2010 three times as many delfi.lt comments were written using Lithuanian letters as in 2000 (More people are writing... 2010). 284 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 The choice not to use Lithuanian letters can be linked to two reasons similar to those mentioned when discussing message length. The first is the technologically limited typing speed (selecting a Lithuanian letter requires pressing the same key more times, and if the Lithuanian font function is enabled on the phone, reaching other letters also takes longer; for example, a is inserted between a and b, so some people even disable this function on their phones). The other reason is cost (Lithuanian characters are encoded as several symbols, and a message may exceed the limit for a single message). Thus, although the number of people writing with Lithuanian letters on the internet may be increasing, other reasons determine spelling in text messages. 2.2. Nonconventional and nonstandard word spelling The collected text messages also included instances of unusual (unconventional) spelling, in which not only letters with diacritical marks but also some ordinary Lithuanian letters written without diacritics were replaced with other characters. Three such spelling patterns were found: most often v is replaced by w, ks by x, and i by j. Here are examples of such text messages (letter substitutions occur even in surnames and common abbreviations): Ne,nes dar warysim prie egluciu / Geriau walinskiene butu kritus arba marius / Tau 6dieni rode be pwm turbut / Nk ziuriu tw o ka tu? / Aha, nes atsiusiu dokumenta. Reix atspausdint, ryt pasiims. / Tj veliau susirasysim The reasons for replacing letters are most closely related to message typing speed: when typing w, the key needs to be pressed once, whereas for v it must be pressed three times; the same difference applies between the letters i and j; ks consists of two characters, while x is one. One instance was found in which Lithuanian letters are replaced by forms containing h. This method lengthens the text and increases the number of characters, so it is not efficient in messages. For example: Tai 3h ten prabuwau vakar. Nuo algos nuskaiciuoja taj,ka pavagia kazhkas.taj centus gauna darbuotojos. Zhodziu,daug ispudziu parsineshiau.Kaip tu gyveni? There are few spelling and proofreading errors in the messages. One systematic spelling error was noted, also common in other electronic communication texts, in which į is written as y: Parasyk man gryzus L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 285 Several examples of non-conventional spelling were found: an English word written unusually; writing by adapting the letters of the English alphabet and their pronunciation to Lithuanian; and phonetic spelling, in which words are written as they sound. These examples are most likely attempts to play with language: We’ll go there and sit for a while,please, let’s go, we’ll act according to the situation / Ok! Let’s go, I’m going [=sure] / We’ll go at about half past eleven to Prospect, if the music is good, for a couple of hours; if not, we’ll come back quickly / Oh, I’ve already stopped watching [=stopped watching] toward the end In this example, it is unclear whether the word is misspelled for fun (as it sounds) or because the writer does not know how to spell it: Well, write to me tomorrow then precisely, okay? [=sure] Another case of interesting spelling is the use of colloquial or dialectal language. However, it is difficult to say how many dialectal elements there are here, and how much is deliberate stylization, play, or simply colloquial speech. A few examples: There was no cat before the word gray / Tried it another way:-D:-* / But there’ll be a lot of fun since we haven’t seen each other / Great, so when shall we meet up then:-* / Around 12–1, maybe. We can call each other; if another time suits you, we’ll work it out / Well, but if you happen to come right when you need to sleep! 2.3. Word shortening Graphic word abbreviations. Messages contain a great many abbreviations, both common ones and ones unusual in Lithuanian. Not all abbreviations found in messages are formed according to Lithuanian word-shortening conventions (cf. Sližienė, Valeckienė 1992). Most are graphic abbreviations, in which only a certain part of the word is written: one or two initial syllables followed by the consonants of the next syllable up to its vowel, one or more initial consonants, or the first vowel. Compared with other texts, abbreviations used in messages differ in content (which words are abbreviated) and punctuation (a period is usually not placed after an abbreviation). Messages contain quite a few more or less conventional, clear abbreviations: tel. (telephone), etc. (other, something else), L. (Lithuania), lang. (language), etc. (and so on), p. (page), e.g. (for example), temp. (temperature), etc. However, it has been observed that a new category of abbreviated words is emerging in them: everyday words that recur frequently in messages, which in other written texts 286 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 words in texts are generally not shortened: to know (the most common form is I don’t know), very, hello, today, to call, to work, now, to go, nothing, well, the names of the days of the week, and others. The fact that such words are beginning to be shortened confirms the communicative functions of messages as dialogic, informal, rapid communication used for coordination. Here are examples of the use of such abbreviations (the abbreviations occur in more than one message): Well, nzn [=I don't know] that it's enough to turn the little wheel, blow on it and that's it / Thanks 1.l.!:-) [=very, very] / La, when you wake up, paskamb [=hello..., call] / Hi there, how wk [=are you] / Let's go, just to sit somewhere; I won't dance anymore sian [=today]. / Db [=now] I've already arrived:-* / But it's nice that you atvaz:-) [=would come] / Nk [=nothing] I'm watching TV, what about you? / That's gr [=fine] then:-) / Sestad [=Saturday] or sekmd [=Sunday] I'll return. Abbreviations do not always follow shortening rules (e.g., the word hello shortened to la, and so on), and the same words are also shortened differently by different authors—this only confirms that the abbreviations are not established forms, and that these are not words that are usually shortened. For example, today is shortened in messages to sian, siand and snd; I don’t know—to nzn and nez; well—to gr and ge; very—to l and lb. Finally, to write a message more quickly, other words that are not usually shortened are sometimes abbreviated as well. Some abbreviations seem arbitrary—when writing a message, a word may be shortened because of limited space or haste, if the abbreviation is clear from the context. Even names that are clear from the context are shortened. For example: I don’t have credit on my account ntr. [=I don’t have] I’ll go top it up later in about half an hour. / Hi, did you call wkr? [=yesterday] / 28–29. It really prkl [=depends] on the company:) / We’ve already eaten cep [=cepelinai] / Are you in wln? [=Vilnius] / Dov [Dovydas] said that it wasn’t him who changed the profile anymore:-) I said I wouldn’t fix it until there was a final var:-) [=version] When many abbreviations are used, some messages may come to resemble specially encoded text that is difficult for an outsider to understand, for example: La. What are you wk. Atr [=Hello. What are you doing? Reply] There were only a few abbreviations in the messages that were harder to decipher. Of course, such messages are understood by the people who send and receive them, who know the content of the correspondence and the usual abbreviations. One marked difference between abbreviations used in messages and standard spelling is that a period is usually not placed after such shortened forms. Quic- L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 287 …probably, this is driven by the desire to write a message more quickly, save characters, and avoid the situation where, after a period, the next word is automatically written with a capital letter (in which case the lowercase function would have to be re-enabled); and, apparently, this is not considered particularly important. Shortening is also done by using slang short forms of words, for example: bible (library), univeras (university), mikras (minibus), and so on; however, this already falls within the scope of lexical analysis. Incidentally, messages also contain abbreviations borrowed from English that are typical of youth speech and could be replaced by a Lithuanian word or its abbreviation (although the English form is shorter), for example: Next to the pc. [=personal computer] and you?:) Abbreviations, measurement symbols, non-letter graphic signs. Other conventional shortenings are also used, although there were few of them in the messages studied. Abbreviations, sometimes with unconventional spelling, e.g.: lnk, tw3, pwm and others; measurement symbols, e.g.: h (hr), kg, Lt; special symbols, e.g., the percent sign%. Use was also found of the symbol &, customary in English-language texts and meaning “and” (although this symbol is already quite widespread in online discourse, it is not used in other Lithuanian-language texts). For example: Be a friend&don’t leave me alone in this matter.. / Happy upcoming holidays. M&G Combinations of numbers and letters. Abbreviations entirely unfamiliar in Lithuanian spelling, found in the messages studied (though there were few, they were not isolated cases), consist of combinations of numbers and letters. Although more varied combinations of digits and letters occur in online texts (cf. Ryklienė 2000), in this collection of messages such formations were used only to indicate the days of the week. Thus, numbers in messages written in Lithuanian are used quite differently from English, where they function as phonetic homophones (cf.: deb8 = debate). For example: 4dieni I can’t, maybe then 5dieni for a little while;) / Nzn, I’ll tell you 5dieni or 1dieni, when I get my salary. Or should I tell you now?:_* The use of abbreviations is encouraged by the desire to save space and write a message more quickly. The latter reason, which is related to the communicative intentions of messages, should be even more important, since many messages are very short, yet still use abbreviations. 288 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 2.4. Use of capital letters Capital letters in written text are most commonly used in two cases: when writing proper nouns and at the beginning of sentences. However, in text messages, people often do without them. Spelling of proper nouns and names. A variety of proper nouns and names are found in text messages. Most of these are personal names (first and last names) and place names; the other proper names used include the names of cafés, shops and other commercial establishments, television channels, books, films, products, etc. When writing proper names, the usual spelling rules are often not followed: that is, they are not written with an initial capital letter, let alone set off in quotation marks. This spelling is not always consistent: even in the text messages of the same person, a name may be found written with a capital letter once and with a lowercase letter another time, and so on; it may even be written differently within the same message. Here are a few examples of such messages: Well guste then I might go too, and what time are you going / Nope, I didn’t go. My feet got terribly cold at stundze, but to be honest I was too lazy:-D / Hard to say, we’ll have guests from amerikos from Wednesday, so I can’t promise anything;) / Great:-) I’m leaving home now, heading to the aprangos sale / And what’s that good one? I’m waiting for the pilnaties [...] [= film title] / It’s snowing in the south of Lithuania, but still Easter.. / Aistė’s SMS: Hi! Tickets are 10 litas on Wednesday. Shall we go to “viskas ore“? At Vingis at 18:45. The technological features of mobile phones affect the use of capital letters: when starting to write a sentence, the first letter is automatically capitalized; after a period and a space, a capital letter is also typed automatically. In such cases, proper nouns are written with an initial capital letter. A different way of writing proper nouns and names is found in messages sent by companies, institutions, shops, and other organizations to provide information, announce current promotions, and so on. In such news and informational text messages, proper nouns and names are always distinguished in one of three ways: the entire word is written in capital letters, only the first letter of the word is capitalized, or the name is placed in quotation marks: 15% discount on all items for KOSMADA CLUB MEMBERS only Dec. 15–17. Thank you for your loyalty and we wish you a Merry Christmas! Yours, KOSMADA. L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 289 Hurry! Pay up to 50% in CILI litas until January 31 at CILI locations in Vilnius, Kaunas, Klaipėda, Palanga, Druskininkai. More at draugukortele.lt Informuojame, kad Jums galime suteikti 1700,00 Lt. dydžio vartojimo kredita pavedimu. Detalesne informacija – UAB “General financing” skyriuose PC “Akropolis”, PC “BIG” ir PC “PARKAS” arba tel. 870033123. Kreditas 123 – Skaidrios finansines paslaugos. Capital letters at the beginning of a sentence. Capital letters are also not used at the beginning of a sentence when no space is left after a punctuation mark—the phone automatically switches to a capital letter only after a punctuation mark and a space. If no space is left, the text-entry mode does not switch, and message writers generally do not try to mark the beginning of a sentence. The reasons for avoiding capital letters are likely the same as those mentioned for other features of text entry: the speed of writing a message is technologically constrained, since switching on the capital-letter function in the middle of a sentence requires pressing additional buttons. It is worth noting, however, that although most messages are written without capital letters, some message writers may pay attention to this. One example was found (a considerable number of messages written by one person) in which the pronoun “you” is capitalized, apparently to emphasize a respectful attitude toward the recipient (although even in that same message the name is written in lowercase): Sure, with Tavim:) already at school? / So at dovile Tu?:) 2.5. Text punctuation Written text is usually divided by punctuation marks, making it easier for the reader to read and understand. Senders of text messages can likewise divide their text into separate elements and distinguish one utterance from another using punctuation marks customary in written language. However, different usage tendencies and new ways of segmenting text can be observed in the punctuation of text messages. Punctuation between sentence constituents. In most messages, sentence elements are separated by punctuation marks, but there are also some in which the written flow of speech is not divided by punctuation marks: So I wrote an email, but they were vague and suggested I come to the bank. I’ll go to SEB on Monday near work, and drive to Swedbank, maybe to Akropolis. 290 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 Sentence-final punctuation. When separating not clauses of the same sentence but separate sentences, several different ways of (not) marking sentence endings emerged in text messages. It is very common for no punctuation mark to be written at the end of a sentence, even though in ordinary written language a full stop or ellipsis would always be used: Well, I ate honey, so I didn’t cough at night / Aha, good, only the email has changed, everything else is the same Punctuation marks are omitted not only at the end of statements but also at the end of questions: What for / How are you / So when will you get ready Of course, there are messages, though relatively fewer, in which sentences are punctuated in the usual way: with a full stop, exclamation mark, question mark, or ellipsis. Inconsistent punctuation also occurs—if a message consists of several sentences, the first ones may be marked with punctuation (apparently to make the text easier to read), while the last ends without any mark. For example: I’m fine! without the car today / Well, seriously now. But at least sometimes you have work A completely distinctive, yet very common, way of writing messages is to end sentences with text-based emoticons that express emotions. Thus, text-based emoticons not only express emotions but also inform the recipient how the utterance is divided into segments: Good;-) but the only untruth was that I didn’t invite you to the wedding:-D Hi. How are you? Did you go anywhere yesterday?:-) I’m listening to his theories and laughing;-):-D about teenagers and how they get sick:-D:-D 2.6. Spaces between words and punctuation marks Another immediately noticeable feature of text-message spelling is that in many of them no space is left after a punctuation mark: Hi.Tw.What are you doing?How are you?When are you going to Šiauliai? Aha,good,only the mail has changed,everything else is the same L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 291 Examples of inconsistent spelling were also found, that is, cases where a space is left in one place but not in another (most often, spaces are left between sentences but omitted between clauses): I was tidying up at home,now I’m watching TV too. What did you do today?:) The omission of punctuation marks and typing without spaces should be explained by the desire to save characters. On the other hand, there are many short messages that would still fit within the character limit for a single message even if spaces were left in. Apparently, in this case, the habit of writing messages comes into play: accustomed to typing text this way, mobile phone users type it this way all the time, regardless of the message length. It is worth noting that this way of typing text is used not only in personal messages but also in forwarded greeting messages: Let us learn to forgive, let us learn to love, let us rise to heaven on an angel’s wing. Light a little Christmas flame in our hearts; may it illuminate the path of the coming year.. Happy holidays! Another feature of typing is that spaces are omitted and words are run together. Although foreign-language literature presents this as one of the spelling features characteristic of messages, few such instances occurred in the Lithuanian material. The only cases of words being run together in the messages studied were company names or other names: So you’re going to cilikaima?:-* / A lot, I wrote an article for cvbanko, and they’re tough:-* A more common case of unusual typing is omitting the space between a number and the word that follows or precedes it—apparently because the text is still easy to read (easier than it would be if two words written entirely in letters were joined together)—but only a few such examples were found: Don’t compare someone who’s been driving for 10 years with someone who’s been driving for half a year:-* / I made a 300 transfer to your Hansa account / Why didn’t he sing for 4 years? / So I got home at about half past 11:-) Thus, the most common differences between the spelling and typing of messages and ordinary texts have been reviewed. The messages analyzed also contained other features discussed in the literature, but only isolated examples. Only a couple of cases of emphasis (highlighting text) occurred in personal messages; since there are so few, it is difficult to determine whether they are merely incidental or are used more often as well (this type of emphasis is quite common in advertising messages). Emphasis is conveyed using capital letters: Tomorrow, i.e. June 18, I’ll be turning +1 year old.. Be a friend&don’t leave me alone in this matter.. According to Palmira: the best time to comfort someone is from 7.. So I’LL BE WAITING!!;-) 292 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 A couple of examples were found that can be called pronunciation stylization, in which written means are used to try to imitate intonation: Okay:-* / Yees:-* In general, the messages collected show that there is material for examining code-switching (examples are found in which English and Russian words are inserted) and lexical usage (colloquial vocabulary, dialect words), but this is beyond the scope of this article. CONCLUSIONS It is now generally agreed that the language of text messages (especially their spelling) has distinctive features that differ from language used in other contexts, and it is sometimes regarded as an emerging, separate language register. The features of text-message language are determined primarily by its functions (it is used for informal, rapid communication) and by specific reasons for using this particular form of language: technological and economic factors (the limited message length and the difficulty of typing), the pleasure of playing with language, and the expression of social identity and individuality. The influence of the spread of text-message language on the ability to write in other contexts is a major concern. The still relatively few studies conducted in English-speaking countries offer more examples of the positive effects of text messaging. Its spelling tends to be regarded as alternative spelling which, as in the case of code-switching, is used in a particular text but is distinguished from other contexts of language use. To draw conclusions about the impact of text messaging on Lithuanian (especially regarding the use of diacritical marks), research is necessary. Analysis of the spelling in Lithuanian text messages revealed that, although they use a considerable number of distinctive spelling, punctuation, and text-entry practices—which make them visually quite different from conventionally written text—there were almost no messages that were difficult to understand, and many of these features can be explained by technological reasons, that is, the desire to shorten and type the text more quickly. On the other hand, it can be argued that some features that entered text-message language because of limited text length have persisted as habits for at least some mobile-message users, since most messages do not reach the permitted character limit. Other motives cited in the literature may also be at work—playing with language, the desire to stand out and break rules, and so on. The following main distinctive spelling features were identified in the Lithuanian text messages analyzed: diacritical marks are most often omitted, non-con L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 293 ventional v=w, i=j, ks=x) and incorrect spelling are used, as well as some unusual abbreviations (the formation and punctuation of some abbreviations differ, as do the words that are abbreviated); capital letters are omitted, sentence parts and sentences are not separated, and conventional text-entry requirements are not followed (spaces are not left after punctuation marks). Thus, fewer, but also different, spelling features of text messages were found in the Lithuanian material than those identified in English-language literature, which is most likely related to differences between the languages. LITERATŪRA Androutsopoulous J. K. 2000: Non-standard spellings in media texts: The case of German fanzines. – Journal of Sociolinguistics 4 (4), 514–533. Crystal D. 2008: Txtng. The Gr8 Db8, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fairon C., Paumier S. 2006: A translated corpus of 30,000 French SMS. – Proceedings of LREC 2006, Genova. Prieiga per internetą: http://pages.cs.brandeis.edu/~marc/misc/proceedings/lrec-2006/pdf/270_pdf.pdf Grigonienė G., Spūdytė I. 2010: Kauno kolegijos pirmo kurso studentų gimtosios kalbos raštingumo, kaip komunikacinio gebėjimo, aspektai. Tarptautinės mokslinės-praktinės konferencijos Šiuolaikinio specialisto kompetencijos: teorijos ir praktikos dermė straipsnių rinkinys. Prieiga per internetą: https://ojs.kauko.lt/index.php/ssktpd/article/viewFile/59/53 Internet & American Life Project, 2008. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.pewinternet.org Jackevičius M. 2010 02 04: Jaunimo rašysenoje tekstai tampa tekstais, vasaris – wasariu. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.delfi.lt/news/daily/education/jaunimo-rasy senoje-tekstai-tampa-tekstais-vasaris--wasariu.d?id=28580401 Lenhart A. et al. 2008: Writing, Technology and Teenagers. A report published by the Pew. Lietuvos statistikos departamentas, 2010: Rodiklių duomenų bazė. Transportas ir ryšiai. M7080307: Išsiųstų žinučių skaičius. Mante-Meijer E., Pires D. 2002: SMS use by young people in the Netherlands. – Revista de Estudios de Juventud 57, 47–58. Miliūnaitė R. 2008: Tinklaraščių kalbos vieta dabartinės lietuvių kalbos vartosenos schemoje. – Lietuvių kalba 2. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.lietuviukalba.lt/index.php?id=98 Padaugėjo rašančių komentarus lietuviškomis raidėmis, 2010 10 18. Prieiga per internetą: http://verslas.delfi.lt/Media/padaugejo-rasanciu-komentarus-su-lietuviskomis-raidemis.d?id=37637765 Plester B., Wood C., Bell V. 2008: Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children’s literacy attainment? – Literacy 43, 137–144. 294 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83 Ryklienė A. 2000: Bendravimas internetu: kalbėjimas rašant. – Darbai ir dienos 24, 99–107. Rivière C. 2002: Mini-messaging in everyday interactions: a dual strategy for exteriorising and hiding privacy to maintain social contacts. – Revista de Estudios de Juventud 57, 125–138. Rotautaitė I. 2007 10 09: Lietuvių kalba žlunga (Vox Populi). Prieiga per internetą: http://www.delfi.lt/archive/article.php?id=14653851 Salienė V. 2007: Kai kurie lietuvių kalbos sintaksės ir skyrybos mokymo aspektai pagrindinėje mokykloje. – Žmogus ir žodis 1, 101–104. Segerstad Y. H. 2002: Use and adaptation of written language to the conditions of computer-mediated communication. Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University, Sweden. Prieiga per internetą: http://www.ling.gu.se/~ylvah/dokument/ylva_diss.pdf Skabeikytė-Kazlauskienė G. 2007: Pasaulio modeliavimo tendencijos telefoniniame jaunimo folklore. – Tautosakos darbai 23, 151–157. Sližienė N., Valeckienė A. 1992: Lietuvių kalbos rašyba ir skyryba, Vilnius: Mokslas. Steponavičiūtė V. 2010: Informacijos ir komunikacijos technologijų įtaka kalbai: trumpųjų žinučių kalba. Magistro darbas, mokslinė vadovė lekt. Laima Nevinskaitė, Vilniaus universitetas. Tagg C., Baron A., Rayson P. 2010: “I didn’t spel that wrong did i. Oops”. Analysis and standardisation of SMS spelling variation. ICAME 2010, May 27th, Giessen. Prieiga per internetą: http://eprints.comp.lancs.ac.uk/2310/1/CorTxt_and_VARD_-_ICAME_presentation-Final.pdf SMS spelling variation Thurlow C. 2003: Generation Txt? The sociolinguistics of young people’s text-messaging. – Discourse Analysis Online. Prieiga per internetą: http://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/v1/n1/a3/thurlow2002003.html Thurlow C. 2006: From Statistical Panic to Moral Panic: The Metadiscursive Construction and Popular Exaggeration of New Media Language in the Print Media. – Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11, 667–701. Thurlow C., Poff M. 2010: The Language of Text Messaging. In Susan C. Herring, Dieter Stein & Tuija Virtanen (eds.), Handbook of the Pragmatics of CMC. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Prieiga per internetą: http://faculty.washington.edu/thurlow/papers/thurlow%26poff%282010%29.pdf Vosloo S. 2009: The effects of texting on literacy: Modern scourge or opportunity? An issue paper from the Shuttleworth Foundation, April 2009. Prieiga per internetą: http://vosloo.net/wp-content/uploads/pubs/texting_and_literacy_apr09_sv.pdf Gauta 2010 11 23 L. NEVINSKAITĖ. Trumpųjų žinučių rašybos bruožai 295 ORTHOGRAPHY OF SMS Summary The aim of the article is to describe orthographical features and functional properties of Lithuanian short messages. The data was derived from a corpus of 2060 messages written by 75 different senders of different age groups and various service providers. The material allows to get a full view of SMS orthography yet the sample is not representative thus the quantitative data is to be treated as preliminary. Earlier research in some other languages has shown that peculiarities of SMS language are mainly determined by their functions, i. e. SMS messaging is primarily used for informal immediate communication and for certain specific reasons related to technological and economic factors (limited SMS length, ease of text typing), entertainment as well as social identity and self-expression. The analysis of orthography of Lithuanian SMS has shown that although the authors have used many original ways of spelling, punctuation and typing, hardly any message was difficult to understand while many of the specific features could be explained by the authors’ attempts at brevity and speed of typing, e. g. replacing w with v and other nonstandard spelling. On the other hand, certain features which evidently appeared due to the limited message size, for example, avoidance of space after punctuation marks, have clearly become customary to some of the senders because the majority of the messages do not reach the maximum size limit. The following specific features of orthography have been established: Lithuanian diacritics are seldom used; nonstandard spelling (v replaced with w, i with j, ks with x, other incorrect spelling); use of abbreviations (both traditional and new abbreviations, ommittance of parts of words, leaving out vowels, replacing parts of words with numerals); absence of capital letters; unpunctuated clauses and sentences; nonstandard typing (no spaces after punctuation marks). The Lithuanian SMS orthography is characterized by fewer specific features than the orthography of some other languages. For example, no acronyms and initialisms and homophones have been found in this material which may be explained by the different features of different languages. LAIMA NEVINSKAITĖ Lietuvių kalbos institutas P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius [email protected] 296 KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83