Orð og tunga - 01.06.2014, Qupperneq 84

72
Orð og tunga
is common practice in online communication. Thus the written and
oral strategies are complemented by non-verbal symbols, which
Crystal (2006:51) describes as "electronically mediated properties".
In his work he argues that CMC is something completely different
from previous writing and speaking due to the inclusion of spoken,
written and sign language features. At the same time it incorporates
structures and strategies that none of the named mediums utilizes.
He therefore proposes to see CMC, in contrast to speech, writing and
signing, as a "fourth medium" for language (Crystal 2006:272).
In public discourse, CMC has often been perceived as "homo-
genous language". Yet it encompasses distinct varieties. Different
"Internet situations" imply different varieties (Bittner 2003, Crystal
2006). That is to say, the language used in blogs varies from the lan-
guage in emails and, furthermore, both differ from the language used
in chat groups. According to Androutsopoulos (2003:174), two crite-
ria are hence relevant for the distinction of Internet-situational varie-
ties: the distance of time between production and perception, and the
communicative direction. This means that it is important whether the
communication is (near-) synchronous (e.g. chat) or asynchronous
(e.g. email) and whether it is interactive (e.g. chat) or not (e.g. blog).
For the categorization of CMC components Androutsopoulos
(2007:81-3) suggests four themes that are applicable across languages
and Internet situations: conceptual orality, semiotics of compensation,
linguistic economy and graphostylistics. In this regard conceptual orality
refers to aspects associated with (informal) spoken language, such as
interjections. This categorization is based on a model of speaking and
writing dimensions proposed by Koch & Oesterreicher (1994) who al-
locate the terms spoken and written language not only to the medium
in which language is used but also with linguistic style.* * 3
der to facilitate the search for relevant topics. In addition to that however, they
have now developed a semantic function, giving indications on what broader
topic the sender is referring to.
3 Koch & Oesterreicher (1994) differentiate between the termini spoken and written
language both by the linguistic medium, that is either spoken = phonic or written
= graphic, and the linguistic style, the "conception" as they call it. Concerning the
medium, the terms spoken and written language are clearly separated: Language
is verbalized either in a spoken or written manner although a change of medium
is possible (as in dictation writing). Regarding conception however spoken and
writtcn language are two opposite poles of a continuum which includes numerous
graduations. Critical for the location of an utterances or text on the continuum are
categories, such as grade of closeness or grade of emotionality, that determine its
style.