28.3397, Review: Pragmatics: Danesi (2016)

Fri Aug 11 16:23:06 UTC 2017

LINGUIST List: Vol-28-3397. Fri Aug 11 2017. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 28.3397, Review: Pragmatics: Danesi (2016)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté,
                                   Michael Czerniakowski)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Clare Harshey <clare at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:23:00
From: Christopher Sams [samsc at sfasu.edu]
Subject: The Semiotics of Emoji

Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36281477

Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/28/28-561.html

AUTHOR: Marcel  Danesi
TITLE: The Semiotics of Emoji
SUBTITLE: The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet
SERIES TITLE: Bloomsbury Advances in Semiotics
PUBLISHER: Bloomsbury Publishing (formerly The Continuum International Publishing Group)
YEAR: 2016

REVIEWER: Christopher D. Sams, Stephen F. Austin State University

REVIEWS EDITOR: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

The Semiotics of Emoji: The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet
by Marcel Danesi is a welcome addition Bloomsbury’s series on advances in
semiotics. The aim of the book is to examine the role of emoji within text
communication. The book is written in “a nontechnical style, so that a general
audience can engage with its subject matter” (vii).

The Preface explains that the data in the book comes from a database that was
compiled by a research team of four students at the University of Toronto.
They selected a group of 100 undergraduate students (50 male and 50 female),
all between 18 and 22 years old, from whom they were able to collect 323
samples of electronic text containing emoji. The participants who were
identified in advance as “regular users of emoji” were also interviewed by the
undergraduate students to obtain qualitative data.

Chapter 1, Emoji and Writing Systems, discusses the origin of emoji, the
fundamentals of writing systems, writing as a social practice, and
stylization. Danesi defines emoji as “picture-word[s]” (2). Danesi ties the
use of emoji to writing systems by discussing the connections to “prehistoric
art;” he takes the reader though arguments presented by Vygotsky (where
written language is “evolutionary residue from the distant past that
unconsciously guides language development”) (6) and Bloomfield (where vocal
language precedes written language and writing is a means of recording vocal
speech) (6) as well as anthropological and cognitive theories. As a social
practice, the reader is walked through the time when the written word was used
“across time and cultural spaces to record important ideas, such as those
found in sacred texts and scientific and philosophical treatises” (10). This
discussion includes graffiti found in ancient ruins all the way to the present
day where we see how writing is used in the digital age in both synchronous
and asynchronous mediums. The section on stylization addresses that the forms
of writing are iconic. The author also addresses emoticons--a predecessor to
emoji.

Chapter 2, Emoji Uses, explains the use of emoji. The first use covered is the
phatic function, which is equated to “small talk” and subcategorized as an
utterance opener, utterance ending, or silence avoidance (19). The next use
covered is the emotive function, which Danesi explains is the “primary
discourse function of some, if not most, emoji” (21). In essence, the majority
of emoji tell the interlocutor of the state of mind of the sender. Also
covered in the chapter are the standardization of emoji by technology
developers and ambiguity—including the fact that emoji meaning can vary across
cultures. For example, the thumbs-up emoji, construed by many to carry a
positive connotation, is the equivalent of the middle finger in a number of
wide-spread cultures.

Chapter 3, Emoji Competence, focuses on knowledge of “how to intersperse emoji
images into a written text in order to imprint a positive emotional tone to it
or to maintain phatic communion with the interlocutors” (35). Here, Danesi
refers to the linguistic idea of “communicative competence.” He goes on to
claim that “implicit in emoji use is rhetorical structure” (39): Inventio
(invention) is the search for a topic, Disposition (arrangement) is the order
of the forms in order to achieve maximum persuasion, Elocutio (style) is how
the arguments are presented, Memoria (memory) is how the text can be memorized
and delivered without the use of notes, and Actio (delivery) deal with gesture
and tone (39-40). Finally, he discusses core emoji (a concrete lexicon) and
points to the work of Swadesh, who attempted to define a universal lexicon vs.
particular lexicon (42), the peripheral lexicon, and compression, that “the
emoji code allows one to deliver nuances of meaning in more compact and
holistic ways” (47).

In Chapter 4, Emoji Semantics, Erving Goffman’s notion of framing is
discussed. Where in conventional text the interlocutor’s frame of mind must be
derived from word choice and syntactic ordering, with emoji, the visual aspect
can lend efficiency and clarity to semantics and pragmatic considerations.
Connotation is covered in addition to the thesaurus effect--the idea that
multiple emoji can convey the same general sentiment, but slight nuances in
the emoji can create connotation. For example, Danesi points out that the
smiling emoji, winking emoji, and heart-eyes emoji all convey a general sense
of happiness, but each contains a different connotation--one that is
culturally-specific at that. Danesi then introduces the concept of metaphor
and blending (e.g., the snake emoji could connote that someone is two-faced or
deceptive).

Chapter 5, Emoji Grammar, addresses emoji competence (see chapter 3) of how
emoji fit into the structure of a natural-language grammar. For example, in
calquing, an emoji sequence of a microphone with musical notes surrounding it
and an umbrella with rain drops can signify “singing in the rain” (78). Danesi
points out the systemic nature of the construction of phrases containing emoji
grammar. He explains that “emoji grammar is…a ‘placement grammar,’ based
on…the superimposition of emoji in slots where verbal structures would have
occurred” (77). Danesi posits that the conceptualization of emoji is that the
more their use is seen in marketing, branding, politics, and pop culture, and
as texts become more frequent, a kind of “second-language grammar” will
increase (81). He then draws on the work of Ronald Langacker and cognitive
linguistics when he writes, “Linguistic expressions and grammatical
constructions embody conventional imagery, which constitutes an essential
aspect of their semantic value” (82).

In Chapter 6, Emoji Pragmatics, Danesi focuses on the ability of the
interlocutor to “code switch” between alphabetic and emoji writing. He also
addresses salutation, punctuation, and other pragmatic functions, such as
“attitude, mood, and point of view” (107). The end of this chapter addresses
some questions, including whether males or females use more emoji, politeness,
and familiarity. Danesi argues that “the most basic pragmatic function of
emoji…is to add emotional tone and to emphasize certain phatic aspects of
communication” (100). To that end, he points out that many emoji are used for
starting and ending messages.

Chapter 7, Emoji Variation, examines the cross cultural use of emoji via
cross-cultural variation, usage according to nation, cultural coding,
visuality, adjacency pair variation, and cartoon-style literacy. As people
around the world have access to Unicode and various technologies, the demand
continues to grow for more and more variation. One such example of this
variation given by Danesi is the eggplant emoji to refer to male genitalia.
The eggplant is a concrete and seemingly “straightforward” emoji, the group in
the study interpreted it that way as several online sites confirmed (117).
Online sites have emerged such as emojipedia to “keep track of the additions
and provide and overall inventory” (118). Danesi makes a crucial point here
that what was meant to be a variation-free code has evolved, as natural
languages do, to a variable code.

Chapter 8, Emoji Spread, examines the use of emoji-only writing and emoji
translation. The chapter explores how emoji are becoming more interwoven in
everyday culture: the Oxford Dictionary selected an emoji as its Word of the
Year, and, at the time of this review being written, Sony pictures recently
released The Emoji Movie. Danesi further explores emoji-only writing in terms
of texts, advertisements, news, and even an emoji translation of Alice in
Wonderland.  It also examines the connection between emoji use and effort--the
idea that writing systems trend toward ease. Informants in the study commented
that they used emoji to convey emotion to the locution of their utterances.

Chapter 9, Universal Languages, deals with the theoretical idea of a universal
language and what it may look like. Artificial languages, such as Esperanto,
are included in this discussion. Danesi asserts that if emoji were to have a
chance at becoming a universal language, “it cannot be fractured through usage
too become too diversified through cultural coding” (157). He suggests that
such a system would “facilitate ease of reading, not inhibit it” (157).

The final chapter, A Communication Revolution?, examines the potential future
of emoji as “a real revolution” or “ a passing fad” (171).

EVALUATION

Overall, the book achieved the goal of examining emoji under the lens of
semiotics and, in a more broad sense, linguistics, communication, and
philosophy. Particularly welcome was Danesi’s treatment covering concepts in
Conversation Analysis, Discourse Analysis, and Translation Theory--all in
addition to syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and first and second language
acquisition. Students and teachers of any of the above areas would find the
text useful. The author relies on extensive relevant references (both classic
and modern) in each of the chapters and provides ample examples for each
concept introduced. This book also provides an example to newer scholars as to
the use of protocol when dealing with data (all data used in the book was
screened for ethical content).

The book ties together numerous studies on emoji (it alludes to the fact that
the majority of emoji in studies are positive--rather than neutral or
negative). In my comments above on Chapter 3, it could be made more clear from
the onset what the results of these studies have shown.

In the definition of emoji competence in Chapter 3, it overlooks the fact that
emoji need not always be positive. “As discussed schematically in previous
chapters, it [emoji competence] implies in part knowledge of how to
intersperse emoji images into a written text in order imprint a position
emotional tone into it or maintain phatic communion with interlocutors” (35).
There are numerous emoji in the inventory that can be used to express
annoyance, anger, sadness, or even sassiness. 

Another potential problem area is in one of the book’s strongest chapters:
Chapter 6 Emoji Pragmatics. No evidence was found that emoji are “gendered”
(i.e., there is no evidence that one gender uses more emoji than another). The
chapter concludes that “[s]ince the research group consisted of an equal
number of males and females (50 each), there is no reason to believe that our
finding will differ significantly in comparison to other research projects”
(113). With such a small sample size, this seems like a bold comment to make.
In their study, Briton and Hall (1995) found that women were believed to use
more expressive and involved non-verbal behaviors than men. Numerous other
studies confirm this fact; thus, a larger sample size and replication (not to
mention having the study done in other cultures) would be needed to confirm
this prediction. In the same section, politeness is explained, yet no clear
question or finding is presented (the section is entitled “Some relevant
questions and findings”).

One general criticism of the book’s design and layout is the resolution of
some of the images--many of them can be difficult to read due to resolution or
contrast with the background. This happens often with screenshots of text
messages and online posts and the emoji translation of Alice in Wonderland
(147).

Central to this book is that it doesn’t claim to be an in-depth qualitative or
qualitative study, but rather “is simply a starting point” (16). The students
who collected the data were able to catch a glimpse of what seems to be an
infinite corpus via text messages, Facebook, email, Twitter, and various other
social media sites. The qualitative comments provided to the “research team”
(in the book the term is in quotes) give some interesting insight into the
future study of this topic.

Throughout the text, Danesi does an excellent job of writing in a
non-technical style, and, as he assures the reader in the preface, defines any
technical terms and provides a layperson’s explanation. As he also points out,
he does not shy away from controversial theoretical debates. For example, he
addresses numerous theories on the origin of writing in Chapter 1, presenting
the ideas which have been the common ground and gained the most acceptance in
the scientific community. Of particular note is Danesi’s constant sensitivity
to culture. As he points out in Chapter 1, the creators of facial emoji have
tried to remain as culturally neutral as possible (hence the color yellow);
however, many other variants have emerged.

Danesi’s goal was to provide readers with a look at emoji that was accessible
to everyone. With this book, he reached that goal by providing a great balance
of information coming from his vast experience in various fields, not too
reliant on theory but not avoiding controversial subject matter, and a book
driven by data.

REFERENCES

Briton, Nancy & Hall, Judith. 1995. Beliefs about female and male nonverbal
communication.
            Sex Roles, vol. 32, no. 1-2, p. 79-90.

ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Chris Sams is an Associate Professor of Linguistics at Stephen F. Austin State
University in Texas. His research and teaching interests are second language
acquisition, forensic linguistics, linguistic typology and universals,
language description and documentation, Romance linguistics, historical
linguistics, and translation studies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-28-3397	
----------------------------------------------------------