Orð og tunga - 01.06.2014, Síða 100

88
Orð og tunga
The English borrowings reveal various patterns concerning their
adaption to Icelandic grammar and orthography. Some borrow-
ings are orthographically adapted with few or no exceptions (næs),
whereas in other cases adaption seems to be a matter of personal
choice (shit or sjitt). Computer and Internet related terms are adapted
grammatically, by adding inflectional endings, but do not follow the
rules of Icelandic phoneme-grapheme correspondence (like-a, likinu,
browserinn). It has been argued that English is the dominant language
of computers and of the Internet and that borrowings in these settings
are often positively perceived (cf. Hanna Óladóttir 2009). Hence, the
preference for English spelling of such words is possibly connected to
their semantic relation to the Internet or to Facebook.
Apart from English borrowings and interjections, strategies for the
compensation of non-verbal communication strategies can be observed
in thematerial, includingemoticons, verbalized laughter, written pros-
ody and expressive punctuation. These strategies are cross-linguistic
phenomenaofCMCthathavesometimesbeen considered tobetheonly
"real" linguistic innovation of the Internet (Androutsopoulos 2007:82).
Finally, spelling deviations occur frequently in the corpus in the form
of neglecting diacritics, upper case or punctuation. Two reasons may
cause spelling deviations: The first reason may be technical limita-
tions that arise when Facebook is used with smartphones that do
not provide the Icelandic keyboard. The second reason may be that
spelling rules are not prioritized in Facebook as the communication
is informal and correct spelling is therefore considered to be less im-
portant.
As a fairly new phenomenon it cannot be foreseen yet where CMC
is heading in Icelandic and what standards may evolve. Broader
and deeper studies are needed to be able to make conclusions about
patterns and generalizations. However, the elements and strategies
introduced in this paper display significant deviations from other
written varieties. Although CMC does not necessarily develop new
linguistic features, it incorporates properties that in their combination
may form a new variety of written Icelandic with regard to (infor-
mal) language use and new means of expression. Beyond that, CMC
enables users to unfold their linguistic freedom and creativity in both
verbal and non-verbal ways (cf. Smyck-Bhattacharjee 2006). The In-
ternet therefore provides a fruitful new testing ground for the study
of (informal) language use in modern Icelandic.