DOTI (downgrading of text initialisms)
gogaku at IX.NETCOM.COM
Tue Apr 30 18:55:04 UTC 2013
John McWhorter has an article on the CNN site saying LOL can be completely devoid of humor:
On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:22 PM, Benjamin Barrett <gogaku at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the kind follow-up.
> Ultimately, I think this has to be considered looking at intra- and inter-speaker variation.
> One person I spoke with, about 25 years old, told me that LOL can be used for just about anything, from sarcasm to genuine humor. Because the initials "LOL" stand for "laugh out loud," there will always be people who use them that way, which then gives people the ability to differentiate social usage according to their interlocutor.
> I, too, noticed the switch with WTF, and quickly adapted it to mean LOL for certain interlocutors (quickly meaning I noticed and adopted it this year).
> On Nov 28, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Victor Steinbok wrote:
>> It's a useful concept to note, but I doubt that a trend like that can be
>> dated with any precision. The problem is that you can only recognize it
>> once it already happened and it's not always clear what to watch for as
>> it's happening. What I said is old is the scale--from <g> to ROFLMAO and
>> beyond (it might have been GRVVF, not just RVVF). The more you use
>> chat/txt features, the more likely you are to note the frequency of each
>> element. I was not a frequent chat user, but between 1997 and 2005,
>> there was a marked increase in use of LOL as a generic response--so, it
>> went from "very funny" to "I hear you" in meaning. Obviously, the other
>> abbreviations appeared with increased frequency as well, although I am
>> not entirely convinced that LMAO is now as frequent as LOL was 10-12
>> years ago.
>> My other point is that scale inflation is completely natural. For
>> example, the more one uses expletives in his speech, the less expressive
>> they become--in extreme cases, they nearly serve the function of commas
>> and other punctuation more than a semantic function. When expletives
>> become initialism, the transition is even faster. It's a bit harder to
>> notice in writing, but, for instance, "WTF" is now as proverbial as
>> "LOL"--everyone is perfectly aware of what it means, but it's now used
>> in contexts where plain "fuck" would not normally be acceptable--if all
>> txting initialism were expanded, most people would sound like Dennis
>> Hopper in Blue Velvet. Another one is "STFU" which is not used in its
>> more "traditional" meaning but also in the sense "You're kidding!" or
>> the meek "I don't want to hear this" (but more frequently is the
>> equivalent of "Bite me!"). But I don't think that scale inflation is
>> limited to initialisms.
>> On 11/28/2010 1:36 PM, Benjamin Barrett wrote:
>>> I rarely chat or use these initialisms, so I'm probably behind the times. I think I understood this downgrade a year or two.
>>> You say it's old. I looked in the archives for mention of this downgrade and did not find anything. Do you have an approximate date for when it started?
>>> On Nov 28, 2010, at 4:01 AM, Victor Steinbok wrote:
>>>> I'm a bit puzzled by this presentation. Although I would not dispute the
>>>> general "downgrading", in principle, all of the information below would
>>>> be "new" if we were somehow stuck in 1998, Groundhog Day style. I still
>>>> have my email archives from the late 1990s that include all the
>>>> initialism listed below and more. LOL is indeed the lowest (even though
>>>> one friend still insists on using "<grin>" for being smug about one's
>>>> own attempt at humor--not so much funny/not funny). This is followed by
>>>> both ROFL and LMAO--perhaps ordered, perhaps not--and further by ROFLMAO
>>>> that folds the two together. Some use an enhanced version that reads
>>>> ROFLMAO-RVVF. I am not entirely sure why this is the top of the comic
>>>> food chain, but RVVF means "running very very fast". The entire LOL
>>>> scale was introduced to me--a chat novice, at the time--in 1997. There
>>>> has indeed been a LOL scale inflation, with each rung being less funny
>>>> now than it used to be, but, as I said, none of this is new. The only
>>>> change, as far as I can tell, is that we no longer use brackets to
>>>> highlight the initialism--largely because both LOL and ROFLMAO have
>>>> become so ubiquitous. (Note that<g>--which means either grin or
>>>> giggle--and<grin> still get the bracket treatment. There is also<@>.)
>> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l