Advertisement

The Coevolution of Computer-Mediated Communication and Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis

  • Susan C. HerringEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Susan Herring, the originator of the computer-mediated discourse analysis (CMDA) paradigm, describes efforts to extend CMDA over time in order to address changes in computer-mediated communication (CMC), such as nontextual communication and the trend toward convergence of multiple modes of CMC in a single platform. Following a review of three broad stages of technological evolution that shaped CMC from 1985 to 2017 and the themes favored by CMDA researchers at each stage, Herring proposes a reconceptualization of CMC itself as inherently multimodal. This reconceptualization includes communication mediated by graphical phenomena such as emoji and avatars in virtual worlds, as well as by certain kinds of robots. She argues that the principles at the core of the CMDA paradigm apply equally to interaction in these nontextual modes.

References

  1. Aarsand, P. A. (2008). Frame switches and identity performances: Alternating between online and offline. Text & Talk, 28(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al Rashdi, F. (2015). Forms and functions of emojis in WhatsApp interaction among Omanis. Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
  3. Amaghlobeli, N. (2012). Linguistic features of typographic emoticons in SMS discourse. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(2), 348–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, J. F., Beard, F. K., & Walther, J. B. (2010). Turn-taking and the local management of conversation in a highly simultaneous computer-mediated communication system. Language@Internet, 7, article 7. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2010/2804/index_html#d57e622
  5. Androutsopoulos, J. (2006). Introduction: Sociolinguistics and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(4), 419–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Androutsopoulos, J. (2007). Style online: Doing hip-hop on the German-speaking web. In P. Auer (Ed.), Style and social identities: Alternative approaches to linguistic heterogeneity (pp. 279–317). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  7. Androutsopoulos, J. (2008). Potentials and limitations of discourse-centred online ethnography. Language@Internet, 5, article 8. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2008/1610
  8. Androutsopoulos, J. (2011). From variation to heteroglossia in the study of computer-mediated discourse. In C. Thurlow & K. R. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 277–298). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Androutsopoulos, J. (2013). Networked multilingualism: Some language practices on Facebook and their implications. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(2), 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913489198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Androutsopoulos, J., & Beißwenger, M. (2008). Introduction: Data and methods in computer-mediated discourse analysis. Language@Internet, 5, article 2. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2008/1609
  11. Androutsopoulos, J., & Ziegler, E. (2004). Exploring language variation on the internet: Regional speech in a chat community. In B.-L. Gunnarsson et al. (Eds.), Language variation in Europe (pp. 99–111). Uppsala: Uppsala University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Anis, J. (2007). Neography: Unconventional spelling in French SMS text messages. In B. Danet & S. C. Herring (Eds.), The multilingual internet: Language, culture, and communication online (pp. 87–115). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Arnold, G. W. (1978). A computer-mediated structured communications system. Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University School of Engineering Science. Retrieved from http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs/papers/others/1978/Arnold_ComputerMediated.pdf
  14. Atifi, S., Mandelcwaijg, S., & Marcoccia, M. (2011). The co-operative principle and computer-mediated communication: The maxim of quantity in newsgroup discussions. Language Sciences, 33(2), 330–340. http://dx.doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.langsci.2010.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bamman, D., Eisenstein, J., & Schnoebelen, T. (2014). Gender identity and lexical variation in social media. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Baron, N. S. (1984). Computer mediated communication as a force in language change. Visible Language, 18(2), 118–141.Google Scholar
  17. Baron, N. S. (1998). Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of email. Language and Communication, 18, 133–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Barron, A. (2006). Understanding spam: A macro-textual analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(6), 880–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.04.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Baym, N. (1995). The emergence of community in computer-mediated communication. In S. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 138–163). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Beißwenger, M. (2008). Situated chat analysis as a window to the user’s perspective. Language@Internet, 5, article 6. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2008/1532
  21. Berdicevskis, A. (2013). Language change online: Linguistic innovations in Russian induced by computer-mediated communication. Doctoral thesis, University of Bergen. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1956/6847
  22. Bieswanger, M. (2007). 2 abbrevi8 or not 2 abbrevi8: A contrastive analysis of different space and time-saving strategies in English and German text messages. Texas Linguistics Forum, 50, 1–12. Retrieved from http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/salsa/proceedings/2006/Bieswanger.pdf
  23. Blommaert, J., & Omoniyi, T. (2006). Email fraud: Language, technology, and the indexicals of globalisation. Social Semiotics, 16(4), 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330601019942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Bou-Franch, P., & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2014). Conflict management in massive polylogues: A case study from YouTube. Journal of Pragmatics, 73, 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Bou-Franch, P., Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2012). Social interaction in YouTube text-based polylogues: A study of coherence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01579.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Bourlai, E., & Herring, S. C. (2014). Multimodal communication on Tumblr: “I have so many feels!”. Proceedings of WebSci’14, June 23–26, Bloomington, IN. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/tumblr.pdf
  27. Bucholtz, M. (1996). Geek the girl: Language, femininity and female nerds. In N. Warner, J. Ahlers, & L. Bilmeset al (Eds.), Gender and belief systems (pp. 119–132). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar
  28. Buckingham, D. (Ed.). (2008). Youth, identity, and digital media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Byrne, D. N. (2008). The future of (the) ‘race’: Identity, discourse, and the rise of computer-mediated public spheres. In A. Everett (Ed.), Learning race and ethnicity: Youth and digital media (pp. 15–38). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/dmal.9780262550673.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Campbell, J. E. (2004). Getting it on online: Cyberspace, gay male sexuality, and embodied identity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Cherny, L. (1999). Conversation and community: Chat in a virtual world. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  32. Chun, E., & Walters, K. (2011). Orienting to Arab orientalisms: Language, race and humor in a YouTube video. In C. Thurlow & K. R. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 252–273). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Collot, M., & Belmore, N. (1996). Electronic language: A new variety of English. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 13–28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Condon, S. L., & Čech, C. G. (1996). Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 65–80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Condon, S. L., & Čech, C. G. (2001). Profiling turns in interaction: Discourse structure and function. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  36. Danby, S., Butler, C. W., & Emmison, M. (2013). When ‘listeners can’t talk’: Comparing active listening in opening sequences of telephone and online counselling. Australian Journal of Communication, 36(3), 91–113.Google Scholar
  37. Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., West, R., Jurafsky, D., Leskovec, J., & Potts, C. (2013). No country for old members: User lifecycle and linguistic change in online communities. Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW ‘13), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.1145/2488388.2488416
  38. Danet, B. (Ed.). (1995). Play and performance in computer-mediated communication. Special issue, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1(2). Retrieved from http://209.130.1.169/jcmc/vol1/issue2/
  39. Danet, B. (1998). Text as mask: Gender, play, and performance on the internet. In S. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety 2.0: Revisiting computer-mediated community and technology (pp. 129–158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Danet, B., & Herring, S. C. (Eds.). (2003). The multilingual internet: Language, culture, and communication in instant messaging, email, and chat [Special issue]. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 9(1).Google Scholar
  41. Danet, B., Ruedenberg-Wright, L., & Rosenbaum-Tamari, Y. (1997). Smoking dope at a virtual party: Writing, play and performance on Internet Relay Chat. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(4), I–II. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue4/danet.html
  42. Darics, E. (2010). Politeness in computer-mediated discourse of a virtual team. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture, 6(1), 129–150. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Desai, M., Tsui, K. M., Yanco, H. A., & Uhlik, C. (2011). Essential features of telepresence robots. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA ’11) (pp. 15–20). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Deumert, A., & Masinyana, S. O. (2008). Mobile language choices: The use of English and isiXhosa in text messages (SMS). Evidence from a bilingual South African sample. English World-Wide, 29(2), 117–147. https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.29.2.02deuCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the non-verbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20(3), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01362.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Dürscheid, C., & Siever, C. M. (2017). Beyond the alphabet – Communication with emojis. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik, 45(2), 256–285.Google Scholar
  47. Dürscheid, C., & Stark, E. (2011). SMS4science: An international corpus-based texting project and the specific challenges for multilingual Switzerland. In C. Thurlow & K. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 299–320). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Emigh, W., & Herring, S. C. (2005). Collaborative authoring on the web: A genre analysis of online encyclopedias. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-38). Los Alamitos: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  49. Ferrara, K., Brunner, H., & Whittemore, G. (1991). Interactive written discourse as an emergent register. Written Communication, 8(1), 8–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). New varieties, new creativities: ICQ and English-Cantonese e-discourse. Language and Literature, 16(4), 345–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gao, L. (2006). Language contact and convergence in computer-mediated communication. World English, 25(2), 299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Garau, M., Slater, M., Bee, S., & Sasse, M. A. (2001). The impact of eye gaze on communication using humanoid avatars. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 309–316). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  53. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2010). The YouTubification of politics, impoliteness and polarization. In R. Taiwo (Ed.), Handbook of research on discourse behavior and digital communication: Language structures and social interaction (pp. 540–563). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Garcia, A., Standlee, A. I., Bechkoff, J., & Cui, Y. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the internet and computer-mediated communication. Contemporary Ethnography, 38(1), 52–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241607310839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Garcia, A. C., & Jacobs, J. B. (1998). The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom. Qualitative Sociology, 21(3), 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Garcia, A. C., & Jacobs, J. B. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn taking system in quasi-synchronous computer mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(4), 337–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Gee, J. P. (2014). Unified discourse analysis: Language, reality, virtual worlds, and video games. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Georgakopoulou, A. (1997). Self-presentation and interactional alliances in e-mail discourse: The style and code-switches of Greek messages. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7, 141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Georgakopoulou, A. (2011). “On for drinkies?”: Email cues of participant alignments. Language@Internet, 8, article 4. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Georgakopoulou
  60. Graham, S. L. (2007). Disagreeing to agree: Conflict, (im)politeness and identity in a computer-mediated community. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 742–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Greenfield, P. M., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2003). Online discourse in a teen chatroom: New codes and new modes of coherence in a visual medium. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(6), 713–738. http://dx.doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Gruber, H. (1998). Computer-mediated communication and scholarly discourse: Forms of topic initiation and thematic development. Pragmatics, 8(1), 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Gruber, H. (2000). Theme and intertextuality in scholarly e-mail messages. Functions of Language, 7(1), 79–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hafner, K., & Lyon, M. (1996). Where wizards stay up late: The origins of the internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  65. Hall, K. (1996). Cyberfeminism. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 147–170). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Hancock, J., Curry, L. E., Goorha, S., & Woodworth, M. (2008). On lying and being lied to: A linguistic analysis of deception in computer-mediated communication. Discourse Processes, 45(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Hardaker, C. (2010). Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication: From user discussions to academic definitions. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture, 6(2), 215–242. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Harris, J., Danby, S., Butler, C. W., & Emmison, M. (2012). Extending client-centered support: Counselors’ proposals to shift from e-mail to telephone counseling. Text & Talk, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Harrison, S. (1998). E-mail discussions as conversation: Moves and acts in a sample from a listserv discussion. Linguistik Online, 1(1). Retrieved from https://bop.unibe.ch/linguistik-online/article/view/1083/1772
  70. Haugh, M. (2007). The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research, 3, 295–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/ejc.doc
  72. Herring, S. C. (1994). Politeness in computer culture: Why women thank and men flame. In Cultural performances: Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 278–294). Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/politeness.1994.pdf
  73. Herring, S. C. (1996a). Posting in a different voice: Gender and ethics in computer-mediated communication. In C. Ess (Ed.), Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication (pp. 115–145). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Herring, S. C. (1996b). Two variants of an electronic message schema. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 81–108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Herring, S. C. (Ed.). (1996c). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  76. Herring, S. C. (Ed.). (1997). Computer-mediated discourse analysis. Special issue of the Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/v6n396.htm
  77. Herring, S. C. (1998). Le style du courrier électronique: variabilité et changement. Revue d’aménagement linguistique (formerly Terminogramme), 8485(March), 9–16.Google Scholar
  78. Herring, S. C. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue4/herring.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Herring, S. C. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 612–634). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  80. Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109–168. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/arist.2002.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Herring, S. C. (2003). Gender and power in online communication. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The handbook of language and gender (pp. 202–228). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Herring, S. C. (2004a). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (pp. 338–376). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Herring, S. C. (2004b). Online communication: Through the lens of discourse. In M. Consalvo, N. Baym, J. Hunsinger, K. B. Jensen, J. Logie, M. Murero, & L. R. Shade (Eds.), Internet research annual (Vol. 1, pp. 65–76). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  84. Herring, S. C. (2004c). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media & Society, 6(1), 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2007/761
  86. Herring, S. C. (2010). Web content analysis: Expanding the paradigm. In J. Hunsinger, M. Allen, & L. Klastrup (Eds.), The international handbook of internet research (pp. 233–249). Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  87. Herring, S. C. (2013a). Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent. In D. Tannen & A. M. Tester (Eds.), Georgetown University Round Table on languages and linguistics 2011: Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 1–25). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Herring, S. C. (2013b). Relevance in computer-mediated conversation. In S. C. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (pp. 245–268). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  89. Herring, S. C. (2015). New frontiers in interactive multimodal communication. In A. Georgapoulou & T. Spilloti (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and digital communication (pp. 398–402). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  90. Herring, S. C. (2016). Robot-mediated communication. In R. A. Scott, M. Buchmann, & S. M. Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Prepublication version. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/rmc.pdf
  91. Herring, S. C., & Dainas, A. R. (2017). “Nice picture comment!” Graphicons in Facebook comment threads. In Proceedings of the Fiftieth Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-50). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/hicss.graphicons.pdf
  92. Herring, S. C., & Demarest, B. (2017). “I’m the first video Voicethread – It’s pretty sweet, I’m pumped”: Gender and self-expression on a multimodal interactive website. Apprentissage des langues et systèmes d’information et de communication, 20(1). https://alsic.revues.org/3007.
  93. Herring, S. C., & Martinson, A. M. (2004). Assessing gender authenticity in computer-mediated language use: Evidence from an identity game. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 424–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Herring, S. C., & Paolillo, J. C. (2006). Gender and genre variation in weblogs. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(4), 439–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Herring, S. C., & Zelenkauskaite, A. (2009). Symbolic capital in a virtual heterosexual market: Abbreviation and insertion in Italian iTV SMS. Written Communication, 26(1), 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Herring, S. C., Johnson, D. A., & DiBenedetto, T. (1995). ‘This discussion is going too far!’ Male resistance to female participation on the Internet. In M. Bucholtz & K. Hall (Eds.), Gender articulated: Language and the socially constructed self (pp. 67–96). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  97. Herring, S. C., Stein, D., & Virtanen, T. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of pragmatics of computer-mediated communication. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
  98. Herring, S. C., Kutz, D. O., Paolillo, J. C., & Zelenkauskaite, A. (2009). Fast talking, fast shooting: Text chat in an online first-person game. In Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press. Preprint. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/hicss.bzflag.pdf
  99. Herring, S. C., Scheidt, L. A., Bonus, S., & Wright, E. (2004). Bridging the gap: A genre analysis of weblogs. In Proceedings of the 37th Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-37). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press. Retrieved from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/herring.scheidt.2004.pdf
  100. Heyd, T. (2013). Email hoaxes. In S. C. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (pp. 387–410). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  101. Heyd, T. (2014). Doing race and ethnicity in a digital community: Lexical labels and narratives of belonging in a Nigerian web forum. Discourse, Context & Media, 4–5(June–September), 38–47. http://dx.doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.dcm.2013.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Hinrichs, L. (2006). Codeswitching on the web: English and Jamaican Creole in e-mail communication. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Hinrichs, L., & White-Sustaíta, J. (2011). Global Englishes and the sociolinguistics of spelling: A study of Jamaican blog and email writing. English World-Wide, 32(1), 46–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Hodsdon Champeon, C. B. (2010). Conversations within conversations: Intertextuality in racially antagonistic dialogue on Usenet. Language@Internet, 7, article 10. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2010/2820
  105. Honeycutt, C., & Herring, S. C. (2009). Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration via Twitter. In Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  106. Hubler, M. T., & Bell, D. C. (2003). Computer-mediated humor and ethos: Exploring threads of constitutive laughter in online communities. Computers and Composition, 20(3), 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Huffaker, D., & Calvert, S. (2005). Gender, identity, and language use in teenage blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00238.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Hughey, M., & Daniels, J. (2013). Racist comments at online news sites: A methodological dilemma for discourse analysis. Media Culture Society, 35(3), 332–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443712472089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Jenks, C., & Firth, A. (2013). Multi-party voice-based chat room interaction. In S. C. Herring, D. Stein, & T. Virtanen (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (pp. 217–241). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  110. Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations – and negotiated interaction – in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 79–98.Google Scholar
  111. Jones, R. H. (2004). The problem of context in computer mediated communication. In P. LeVine & R. Scollon (Eds.), Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis (pp. 20–33). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Jones, R. H. (2011). C me Sk8: Discourse, technology and “bodies without organs”. In C. Thurlow & K. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Joyce, E., & Kraut, R. (2006). Predicting continued participation in newsgroups. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(3), 723–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00033.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Jucker, A. H. (2002). Hypertextlinguistics: Textuality and typology of hypertexts. In A. Fischer, G. Tottie, & H. M. Lehmann (Eds.), Text types and corpora: Studies in honour of Udo Fries (pp. 29–51). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
  115. Jucker, A. H. (2010). “Audacious, brilliant!! What a strike!” Live text commentaries on the internet as real-time narratives. In C. Hoffmann (Ed.), Narrative revisited: Telling a story in the age of new media (pp. 57–77). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Kapidzic, S., & Herring, S. C. (2011). Gender, communication, and self-presentation in teen chatrooms revisited: Have patterns changed? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01561.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Katz, J. K., & Crocker, E. L. (2015). Selfies and photo messaging as visual conversation: Reports from the United States, United Kingdom and China. International Journal of Communication, 9, 2387–2396.Google Scholar
  118. Kiesler, S., Seigel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Ko, K.-K. (1996). Structural characteristics of computer-mediated language: A comparative analysis of InterChange discourse. Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/v6n396.htm
  120. Koteyko, N., Jaspal, R., & Nerlich, B. (2013). Climate change and ‘climategate’ in online reader comments: A mixed methods study. The Geographical Journal, 179, 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4959.2012.00479.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Kramarae, C., & Taylor, H. J. (1993). Women and men on electronic networks: A conversation or a monologue? In H. J. Taylor, C. Kramarae, & M. Ebben (Eds.), Women, information technology, and scholarship (pp. 52–61). Urbana, IL: Center for Advanced Study.Google Scholar
  122. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse – The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  123. Kushin, M. J., & Kitchener, K. (2009). Getting political on social network sites: Exploring online political discourse on Facebook. First Monday, 14(11). Retrieved from http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2645/2350. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v14i11.2645.
  124. Lange, P. G. (2007). Commenting on comments: Investigating responses to antagonism on YouTube. Paper presented at the Society for Applied Anthropology Conference, Tampa, FL. Retrieved from https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/14888058/commenting-on-comments-investigating-responses-to-antagonism-
  125. Lee, C. K. M. (2007). Affordances and text-making practices in online instant messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307303215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Lee, C. K. M. (2016). Multilingualism online. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Lee, M. K., & Takayama, L. (2011). “Now, I have a body”: Uses and social norms for mobile remote presence in the workplace. In Proceedings of CHI 2011 (pp. 33–42). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  128. Lenihan, A. (2011). “Join our community of translators”: Language ideologies and Facebook. In C. Thurlow & K. R. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 48–64). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Leppännen, S., Pitkänen-Huhta, A., Piirainen-Marsh, A., Nikula, T., & Peuronen, S. (2011). Young people’s translocal new media uses: A multiperspective analysis of language choice and heteroglossia. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1080–1107. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01482.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Licoppe, C., & Morel, J. (2012). Video-in-interaction: “Talking heads” and the multimodal organization of mobile and Skype video calls. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(4), 399–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Lim, S. S. (2015). On stickers and communicative fluidity in social media. Social Media + Society, 1(1). http://journals.sagepub.com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/doi/abs/10.1177/2056305115578137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Ling, R. (2005). The sociolinguistics of SMS: An analysis of SMS use by a random sample of Norwegians. In R. Ling & P. E. Pedersen (Eds.), Mobile communications: Re-negotiation of the social sphere (pp. 335–349). London: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Ling, R., & Baron, N. S. (2007). Text messaging and IM: Linguistic comparison of American college data. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Locher, M., & Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Marcoccia, M. (2004). On-line polylogues: Conversation structure and participation framework in internet newsgroups. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(1), 115–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00038-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Marcoccia, M., Atifi, H., & Gauducheau, N. (2008). Text-centered versus multimodal analysis of instant messaging conversation. Language@Internet, 5, article 7. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2008/1621
  137. Marwick, A. (2013). Online identity. In J. Hartley, J. Burgess, & A. Bruns (Eds.), Companion to new media dynamics (pp. 355–364). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Mauntner, G. (2005). Time to get wired: Using web-based corpora in critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 16(6), 809–828. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/stable/42888717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. McDonald, D. (2007). Visual conversation styles in web communities. In Proceedings of the Fortieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-40). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press. Retrieved from http://www.pensivepuffin.com/dwmcphd/papers/McDonald.HICSS-40.preprint.pdf
  140. McKinlay, A., Procter, R., Masting, O., Woodburn, R., & Arnott, J. (1994). Studies of turn-taking in computer-mediated communications. Interacting with Computers, 6(2), 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/0953-5438(94)90022-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Milani, T. M. (2013). Are ‘queers’ really ‘queer’? Language, identity and same-sex desire in a South African online community. Discourse & Society, 24(5), 615–633. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513486168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Miller, H., Thebault-Spieker, J., Chang, S., Johnson, L., Terveen, L., & Hecht, B. (2016). Blissfully happy or ready to fight: Varying interpretations of emoji. AAAI 2016. Retrieved from http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~bhecht/publications/ICWSM2016_emoji.pdf
  143. Mitra, A. (1999). Characteristics of the WWW text: Tracing discursive strategies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00330.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Morand, D. J., & Ocker, R. J. (2003). Politeness theory and computer-mediated communication: A sociolinguistic approach to analyzing relational messages. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-36). New York: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  145. Morel, E., Bucher, C., Pekarek-Doehler, S., & Siebenhaar, B. (2012). SMS communication as plurilingual communication: Hybrid language use as a challenge for classical code-switching categories. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 35(2), 260–288.Google Scholar
  146. Murray, D. E. (1985). Composition as conversation: The computer terminal as medium of communication. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings (pp. 203–227). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  147. Murray, D. E. (1988). The context of oral and written language: A framework for mode and medium switching. Language in Society, 17, 351–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Myers, G. (2010). The discourse of blogs and wikis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  149. Nakamura, L. (1995). Race in/for cyberspace: Identity tourism and racial passing on the Internet. Works and Days, 25/26, 13(1 & 2), 181–193.Google Scholar
  150. Nastri, J., Peña, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2006). The construction of away messages: A speech act analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00306.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Newon, L. (2011). Multimodal creativity and identities of expertise in the digital ecology of a world of Warcraft guild. In C. Thurlow & K. R. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 203–231). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  152. Niederhoffer, K. G., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Linguistic style matching in social interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21(4), 337–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/026192702237953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Nishimura, Y. (2012). Puns in Japanese computer mediated communication: Observations from misconversion phenomena. AAAI Technical Report FS-12-02 Artificial Intelligence of Humor. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5678/5929485b9c73e260cb930564d66f964ade45.pdf
  154. Nishimura, Y. (2015). A sociolinguistic analysis of emoticon usage in Japanese blogs: Variation by age, gender, and topic. In Selected Papers of Internet Research 16. The 16th Annual Meeting of the Association of Internet Researchers. Phoenix, AZ, USA, October 21–24.Google Scholar
  155. O’Connail, B., Whittaker, S., & Wilbur, S. (1993). Conversation over video conference: An evaluation of the spoken aspects of video-mediated communication. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 8(4), 389–428. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0804_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. O’Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What is Web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. O’Reilly Network website. Retrieved from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
  157. Page, R. (2012). The linguistics of self-branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags. Discourse & Communication, 6(2), 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Paolillo, J. C. (1996). Language choice on soc.culture.punjab. Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/v6n396.htm
  159. Paolillo, J. C. (1999). The virtual speech community: Social network and language variation on IRC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue4/paolillo.htmlCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Pastore, M. (2000, August 10). Women surpass men as US web users. ClickZ. Retrieved from https://www.clickz.com/women-surpass-men-as-us-web-users/68756/
  161. Peterson, E. E. (2011). How conversational are weblogs? Language@Internet, 8, article 8. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Peterson
  162. Phillips, W. (2015). This is why we can’t have nice things: Mapping the relationship between online trolling and mainstream culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  163. Phillips, W., & Milner, R. M. (2017). The ambivalent internet: Mischief, oddity, and antagonism online. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  164. Pihlaja, S. (2011). Cops, popes, and garbage collectors: Metaphor and antagonism in an atheist/Christian YouTube video thread. Language@Internet, 8, article 1. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Pihlaja
  165. Puschmann, C. (2010). The corporate blog as an emerging genre of computer-mediated communication: Features, constraints, discourse situation. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.Google Scholar
  166. Radford, W., Chisholm, A., Hachey, B., & Han, B. (2016). [Telephone. Person. Sailboat. Whale. Okhand] or “Call me Ishmael” – How do you translate emoji? Cornell University Library. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/arXiv:1611.02027
  167. Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in a computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14(1), 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Rintel, E. S., Mulholland, J., & Pittam, J. (2001). First things first: Internet Relay Chat openings. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00125.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Rintel, E. S., & Pittam, J. (1997). Strangers in a strange land: Interaction management on Internet Relay Chat. Human Communication Research, 23(4), 507–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Riordan, M. A., Markman, K. M., & Stewart, C. O. (2013). Communication accommodation in instant messaging: An examination of temporal convergence. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 32(1), 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X12462695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Rodino, M. (1997). Breaking out of binaries: Reconceptualizing gender and its relationship to language in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1997.tb00074.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Rowe, C. (2011). Whatchanade? Rapid language change in a private email sibling code. Language@Internet, 8, article 6. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Rowe/index_html#d57e2085
  173. Rowe, I. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Santana, A. D. (2014). Virtuous or vitriolic: The effect of anonymity on civility in online newspaper reader comment boards. Journalism Practice, 8(1), 18–33. http://www-tandfonline-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/doi/full/10.1080/17512786.2013.813194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Sargeant, P., & Tagg, C. (Eds.). (2014). The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  176. Schönfeldt, J., & Golato, A. (2003). Repair in chats: A conversation analytic approach. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(3), 241–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Sebba, M. (2003). ‘Will the real impersonator please stand up?’ Language and identity in the Ali G websites. Arbeiten aus Anglistik and Amerikanistik, 28(2), 279–304.Google Scholar
  178. Severinson Eklundh, K. (1986). Dialogue processes in computer-mediated communication: A study of letters in the COM system. Linköping Studies in Arts and Sciences 6. University of Linköping.Google Scholar
  179. Shaw, D. (1997). Gay men and computer communication: A discourse of sex and identity in cyberspace. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Virtual culture: Identity and communication in cybersociety (pp. 133–145). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  180. Shortis, T. (2007, June). Gr8 txtpectations: The creativity of text spelling. English Drama Media. Retrieved from http://nl.ijs.si/janes/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/shortis07.pdf
  181. Siebenhaar, B. (2006). Code choice and code-switching in Swiss-German Internet Relay Chat rooms. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(4), 481–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Simpson, J. (2005). Conversational floors in synchronous text-based CMC discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(3), 337–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Sindoni, M. G. (2014). Through the looking glass: A social semiotic and linguistic perspective on the study of video chats. Text & Talk, 34(3), 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. Spilioti, T. (2009). Graphemic representation of text-messaging: Alphabet-choice and codeswitches in Greek SMS. Pragmatics, 19(3), 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. Spivack, N. (n.d.). Web 3.0: The third generation web is coming. Lifeboat Foundation. Retrieved from https://lifeboat.com/ex/web.3.0
  186. Squires, L. (2010). Enregistering internet language. Language in Society, 39, 457–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Stockton, N. (2015, June 24). Emoji – Trendy slang or a whole new language? Wired Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2015/06/emojitrendy-slang-whole-new-language/
  188. Stommel, W. (2008). Conversation analysis and community of practice as approaches to studying online community. Language@Internet, 5, article 5. Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2008/1537
  189. Stromer-Galley, J., & Martinson, A. (2009). Coherence in political computer-mediated communication: Analyzing topic relevance and drift in chat. Discourse & Communication, 3(2), 195–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481309102452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. Su, H.-Y. (2003). The multilingual and multi-orthographic Taiwan-based Internet: Creative uses of writing systems on college-affiliated BBSs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00357.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Subrahmanyam, K., Smahel, D., & Greenfield, P. M. (2006). Connecting developmental constructions to the internet: Identity presentation and sexual exploration in online teen chat rooms. Developmental Psychology, 42(3), 395–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.3.395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. Tagg, C. (2012). The discourse of text messaging: Analysis of SMS communication. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  193. Tagliamonte, S., & Denis, D. (2008). Linguistic ruin? LOL! Instant messaging and teen language. American Speech, 83, 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Themistocleous, C. (2013). Digital code-switching between Cypriot and Standard Greek: Performance and identity play online. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(3), 282–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913512727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Thurlow, C., & Mroczek, K. (Eds.). (2011). Digital discourse: Language in the new media. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  196. Tynes, B., Reynolds, L., & Greenfield, P. M. (2004). Adolescence, race, and ethnicity on the internet: A comparison of discourse in monitored vs. unmonitored chat rooms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25(6), 667–684. http://dx.doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.appdev.2004.09.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. Vaisman, C. (2013). Beautiful script, cute spelling and glamorous words: Doing girlhood through language playfulness on Israeli blogs. Language & Communication, 34, 69–80. http://dx.doi.org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1016/j.langcom.2013.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. van Compernolle, R. A. (2008). Morphosyntactic and phonological constraints on negative particle variation in French-language chat discourse. Language Variation and Change, 20(2), 317–339. https://doi-org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1017/S0954394508000112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. Voida, A., & Mynatt, E. T. (2005). Six themes of the communicative appropriation of photographic images. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’05) (pp. 171–180). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  200. Walton, S., & Jaffe, A. (2011). “Stuff white people like”: Stance, class, race, and internet commentary. In C. Thurlow & K. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 199–219). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  201. Warschauer, M., El Said, G. R., & Zohry, A. G. (2002). Language choice online: Globalization and identity in Egypt. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2002.tb00157.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Weininger, M. J., & Shield, L. (2004). Proximity and distance: A theoretical model for the description and analysis of online discourse. In 11th CALL Conference: CALL & Research Methodologies, Addendum to the Proceedings of the CALL 2004 Conference. University of Anwerp. Retrieved from http://webh01.ua.ac.be/didascalia/call_2004.htm
  203. Werry, C. (1996). Linguistic and interactional features of Internet Relay Chat. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 47–63). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  204. Wikipedia. (2016, December). World Wide Web. Retrieved December 6, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web
  205. Yates, S. J. (1993). Gender, computers and communication: The use of computer-mediated communication on an adult distance education course. International Journal of Computers in Adult Education and Training, 3(2), 21–40.Google Scholar
  206. Yates, S. J. (1996). Oral and written aspects of computer conferencing. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 9–46). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  207. Yee, N., Bailenson, J. N., Urbanek, M., Chang, F., & Merget, D. (2007). The unbearable likeness of being digital: The persistence of nonverbal social norms in online virtual environments. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10(1), 115–121. https://doi-org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1089/cpb.2006.9984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. Yus, F. (2010). Cyberpragmatics: Internet-mediated communication in context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  209. Zappavigna, M. (2012). Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  210. Zelenkauskaite, A., & Herring, S. C. (2008). Television-mediated conversation: Coherence in Italian iTV SMS chat. In Proceedings of the Forty-First Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-41). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations