2006 ﺔﻨﺴﻟ (27 ﻡﻗﺭ ﻥﻭﻨﺎﻗ ﺓﺭﺎﺠﺘﻟﺍ ﻥﻭﻨﺎﻗ … · 2006 ﺔﻨﺴﻟ (27) ﻡﻗﺭ ﻥﻭﻨﺎﻗ ﺓﺭﺎﺠﺘﻟﺍ ﻥﻭﻨﺎﻗ
Investigating Sentence Structure in Skype English Chatalustathiq.com/LionImages/News/202-5.pdf ·...
Transcript of Investigating Sentence Structure in Skype English Chatalustathiq.com/LionImages/News/202-5.pdf ·...
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
81
Investigating Sentence Structure in Skype English Chat
Tahani Awad Jasim (MA)
Dept. of Arabic- College of Islamic Sciences
University of Baghdad
Email:[email protected]
Abstract
The prevalence of text-based computer-mediated communication (CMC) has enormous
impact on the growing amount of research into the distinctive features of the text-based CMC.
Recently, an urgent need arises to examine the linguistic features of this mode of
communication. The present paper investigates sentence structure, viz, sentence length and
sentence complexity, of 20 authentic Skype English chats. These sentential features have been
examined and quantified to determine the structural characteristics of Skype chat. It has been
found that short and simple sentences are the most frequent sentence types in this electronic
register. The higher frequency of short and simple sentences in the present corpus can be
attributed to chatters' tendency to save time and keystrokes, and thus speed up the
communication process. That is, considerations of linguistic economy may help to explain the
structural simplicity of this register. The linguistic economy of synchronous chats can result
from the temporal constraints of the medium, and this, in turn, can lend support to the speech-
like features of synchronous chat. Besides, Skype English chat is similar to other chat
systems, viz, Y! and IRC with reference to sentence structure. On the basis of these findings,
a number of pedagogical implications and future projects are suggested.
"سكايب"تقّصي ٌبنية الجملة االنكليزية في وسيلة التواصل االجتماعي
المدرس المساعد تهاني عواد جاسم
كلية العلوم االسالمية-قسم اللغة العربية جامعة بغداد
الخالصة
ئص اللغويـة الٌمميـزة أدى االنتشار الواسع للتواصل االكتابي بواسطة الحاسوب الـى زيـادة ُمطـردة فـي حجـم البحـوث والدراسـات للخصـايتقّصى البحث الحالي .لهذا النوع من وسائل التواصل االلكتروني و ظهرت توجهات حديثة لدراسة هذا الضرب االلكتروني وخصائصه اللغوية
عشـرين نصـا حقيقيــا بٌنيـة الجملـة االنكليزيـة وبالتحديـد طـول وتركيبـة الجملـة االنكليزيـة فـي وسـيلة التواصـل االجتمـاعي سـكايب ٌمعتمـداً علـى تم تحليل هذه الخصائص اللغوية وتبين أن هذا الضرب اللغوي االلكتروني يمتاز في ٌكثرة استعماله للجمل القصـيرة والبسـيطة مقارنـة .للتحليل
ل عمليــة مــع انــواع الجمــل االخــرى وان اســتعمال مثــل هكــذا ُجمــل ٌيســهم فــي تــوفير الجهــد والوقــت علــى عــاتق الٌمســتخدم وٌيســهم فــي تســهيوان اعتبارات االقتصاد اللغوي قد تساعد في تفسير البساطة البنيويـة لهـذا الضـرب اللغـوي ويمكـن ايعـاز االقتصـاد اللغـوي هـذا الـى .التواصل
وسـيلة ان بٌنيـة الجملـة فـي ,فضـالً عـن ذلـك.طبيعة القيود الزمنية المفروضة على هذا الضرب اللغوي وهذه الصفة تشابه الكالم الى حـداً كبيـروفـي ضـوء هـذه النتـائج تـم .)الياهو واي ار سي( التواصل االجتماعي سكايب ُتشابه تلك الموجودة في وسائل التواصل االجتماعي االخرى
.اقتراح عدداً من المضامين والتوصيات التعليمية باالضافة الى بحوث مستقبلية
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
82
1. Introduction:
Rapid advancements in the communication technology during the last two
decades have had a demonstrable influence on language. The spreading of
electronic revolution, along with chat groups, e-mails, discussion groups, virtual
worlds, etc. which give in turn, definition of a new domain of language study
called variously computer-mediated communication, electronic discourse ,
netspeak , internet linguistics, etc. Computer-mediated discourse (henceforth,
CMD) is the communication produced when human beings interact with one
another by transmitting messages via networked computers. The study of
computer-mediated discourse is a specialization within the broader
interdisciplinary study of computer-mediated communication (henceforth
CMC), distinguished by its focus on language and language use in computer
networked environments, and by its use of methods of discourse analysis to
address that focus (Herring, 2001:613).
Most CMC currently in use is text-based, that is, messages are typed on a
computer keyboard and read as text on a computer screen, typically by a person
or persons at a different location from the message sender. Text-based CMC
takes a variety of forms (e.g. e-mail, discussion groups, real-time chat, etc.)
whose linguistic properties vary depending on the kind of messaging system
used and the social and cultural context embedding particular instances of use.
Crystal (2003:426) states that dramatic evolution in CMC has left its impact
on all language levels including graphology, morphology, lexis, syntax,
semantics, and pragmatics. He suggests that CMD is a distinct language domain
with its own linguistic features, and when we examine the linguistic properties
of it, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that we have here is not simply a new
variety of English, but a whole new medium comparable to speech and writing
in its distinctiveness, and subsuming a great deal of linguistic variation. That is,
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
83
there is a widely held view that CMD exists as a variety of language displaying
features that are unique to the internet arising out of its character as a medium
which is electronic, global, and interactive.
The 1990s era has been the rise of a wave of CMD research on this emergent
register that linguists and language scholars have began to take serious notice of
CMD, and to study its linguistic properties. Identifying the linguistic
characteristics of this mode of communication can have important consequences
for understanding the nature of computer-mediated language (cf. Werry, 1996;
Rumsien, 2004, amongst many). This argument has motivated the present
paper to examine this new electronic register to uncover some of its linguistic
features.
Thus the present paper attempts to investigate the sentence structure of a new
mode of English used in real-time internet chat (i.e., synchronous chat). More
specifically, it focuses on synchronous Skype chat with reference to its
sentential characteristics, namely, sentence length and sentence complexity. It is
intended to answer the following questions:
1. What are the sentential characteristics of synchronous Skype chat with
reference to its sentence length and sentence complexity?
2. What are the similarities and/or differences between synchronous Skype chat
and other synchronous chat systems, namely, Yahoo Messenger (henceforth, Y!)
and Internet Relay Chat (henceforth, IRC) with reference to sentence length and
sentence complexity?
3. What are the similarities and/or differences between the synchronous Skype
chat and speaking and writing modes?
To the best of researcher's knowledge, the present study is the first of its type
that investigates Skype English chat with reference to its sentence structure.
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
84
2. Chat Communication: Theoretical Underpinnings
The internet is an electronic, global, and interactive medium, and each of
these properties has consequences for the kind of language found there. The
most fundamental influence arises out of the electronic character of the channel.
Despite the set of novel features of e-English chat, Crystal (2004:20) dismisses
the common view that online communication is illiterate and bad language. He
agrees that much of it is non- standard, highly deviant from the usual rules of
language, tolerant of spelling errors, and full of new words. But he is fascinated
by its variety and innovation. He asserts that the phenomenon of netspeak is
going to change the way we think about language in a fundamental way because
it is a genuine new medium of language.
Electronic communications have affected language in three distinct ways.
First, they change the way language is used. Second, they have created a need
for a global tongue, and it has been demonstrated that English has filled that slot.
Third, they will influence the future of other languages which people will
continue to speak (ibid.:13).
When people interact via computers, their behaviour in front of keyboard and
screen very much resembles what they do when they are engaged in the
traditional task of writing. On the other hand, the nature of the interaction is in
many ways more similar of what they do when they are speaking- and terms
such as "conversation" and "chat" are used to characterize their variety. Crystal
argues that netchat is neither exactly like speech, nor like writing, it is an
entirely different medium. Its uniqueness is underlined when one considers its
properties which have no counterpart in either spoken or written language. He
outlines the main properties of netchat in comparison to speaking and writing as
follows:
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
85
Netchat compared to speech Netchat compared to writing
Speech properties Netchat Writing properties Netchat
1- time- bound Yes; but in
different ways 1- space- bound
Yes; but with
restrictions
2- spontaneous Yes; but with
restrictions 2- contrived
No; but with
some
3- face- to- face No 3-visually
decontextualized Yes
4- loosely structured Yes 4-elaborately structured No
5- socially interactive Yes; but with
restrictions
5-factually
communicative variable
6- prosodically rich No 6- graphically rich No
Table 1: Netchat and speaking/writing modes (After Crystal, 2004:43-44 with some
modifications).
Generally speaking, there are two kinds of netchat- synchronous and
asynchronous chats. Crystal (2003: 426) states that chatgroups are ongoing
discussions on a particular topic in which computer users interested in the topic
can participate. There are two types, depending on whether the interaction takes
place in real time (synchronous) or in postponed time (asynchronous). In a
synchronous setting, a user enters a chat and joins an ongoing conversation in
real time, sending named contributions which are inserted into a permanently
scrolling screen along with the contributions from other participants. In an
asynchronous setting (e.g., news groups, mailing lists), the interactions are
stored in some format and made available to user upon demand; so they can
catch up with the discussion, or add to it, at any time. As far as the present paper
is concerned, the synchronous English chat will be considered.
Crystal remarks that there are some linguistic properties that are pertinent to
e-English chat, and these properties are of lexical, graphological, grammatical
and discoursal types (ibid.: 428). First, as far as the lexical properties of chat are
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
86
concerned, a great deal of the linguistic distinctiveness lies in its lexicon. The
following word formation processes are commonly employed in English chat:
i- Compounding: For example, "mouse" in such forms as "mouseclick";
"mouseover"; "mousepad"; "web" in "webcam"; "webmail";
"webster"; "webmaster".
ii- Blending: "Bugzilla" (a bug- tracking agency); "cybercide" (the killing
of a person in a virtual world game).
iii- Creative forms: the replacement of a word element by a similar –
sounding item, as in "ecruiting" (for recruiting); "e-lance" (for free-
lance); "net – citizen"; "net – legend"; "net – police".
iv- Affixation: "hyper" as a prefix in "hyperfiction", "hyperlink",
"hypertext"; "hyperzine".
Second, distinctive graphology is an important feature of netchat. The range
extends from an enhanced system (compared to traditional writing) using a wide
variety of special fonts and style to a reduced system with hardly no typographic
contrastivity (i.e., not even such "basic" features as italics or bold), as in many
e-mail and chatgroup conversations. Crystal points out that netchat has violated
the rules of capitalization, spelling and punctuation. Concerning capitalization,
there is a tendency to use lowercase letters, thus the whole sentences can be
produced without capitals as in "i want to go to see joe ". Chats also use
nonstandard spellings to reflect pronunciation such as "yep"; "yap"; "yay";
"nop"; "noooo" for "yes" and "no" respectively. Besides, punctuation tends to be
meager in most situations, and completely absent in some chat exchanges.
Unusual combinations of punctuation marks can occur, such as using ellipsis
dots (…) or repeated hyphens (---) to express a pause.
Third, grammar is the least noticed feature of the language of most netchat.
Crystal states that if we begin to notice the grammatical structure of chat, one
can notice the economical style of expression which is reflected in short
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
87
sentences and paragraphs, and a great deal of abbreviation, minor sentences, and
block language, etc. (ibid.: 432) .
Finally, netchat has some discoursal distinctiveness, such that we have the
option of participating in several conversations simultaneously unlike the
traditional speech. And new conventions of greeting and farewell have evolved
in chat interactions by using, for example, emoctions.
3. Chat Communication and Related Studies:
Much notice has been given by researchers all over the world to the field of
chat communication recently. Most up-to-date research on electronic chat has
restricted itself to the written communication channel. Research has so far been
centered on the following three aspects: 1) the analysis of typographical,
morphological, lexical, and syntactic features which are seen as defining
characteristics of this new register; 2) the description of elements related to
written and oral language features, and 3) the emphasis on the artificial and
virtual character of the chatters' social relationships. Chat communication is
consequently seen as a final product in the aforementioned three
approaches (Dorta, 2008: 111).
The present paper is going to review some related studies that are mainly
concerned with the first and second approaches of chat study. The findings of
such studies can be relevant and useful in one way or another in that those
findings can be compared and contrasted with these of the present study.
Crystal (2004) examines the language of synchronous IRC. He finds that
there are several signs of a marked trend towards succinctness in chat writing:
paragraph-like divisions are extremely rare; contributions tend to be single
sentences or sentence fragments; and word-length is reduced through the use of
abbreviations and initialisms. Moreover, spelling practice is also distinctive in
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
88
that US spelling is more common than British, partly for historical reasons (i.e.,
the origins of the Internet), and partly for reasons of economy, most US
spellings being a character shorter than British ones (color vs colour, fetus vs
foetus, etc.). Spelling errors in chats would not be assumed to be an indication of
lack of education but purely a function of typing inaccuracy. And punctuation
tends to be minimalist in most situations, and completely absent in some chat
exchanges.
Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) investigate the linguistic features of e-English,
relying on a large corpus of authentic IRC and Y! chat sessions. The study
concludes that economy is a salient attribute of e-English. Among the other
major linguistic features that are found in this study are: sentences are
characteristically short and simple, many words are distorted and truncated in
familiar and unfamiliar ways, abbreviations and acronyms are widespread, and
taboo words very likely to occur in most chat sessions.
Rumsien (2004) examines the lexical, syntactic, and morphological aspects
of IRC. He concludes that chat communication is unofficial and informal,
spontaneous and unconsidered, and full of abrupt phrases, self-correction,
bywords, ellipsis, inversion, various means of economy, etc. All these features
are typical of informal speech. The net language aims at simplification of the
traditional language code, but on the other hand, a language code is introduced
in order to prove that this specific code belongs to the net society.
Some studies have focused on the various strategies of linguistic economy
employed in electronic chat. For example, Murray (1990) identifies various
strategies of economical language use in synchronous CMC, such as ellipsis, in
particular, omission of pronouns and determiners, and clippings. Similarly,
Werry (1996) points out the frequent use of abbreviations, ellipsis, and
orthographic reduction (e.g., bb ppls for bye bye peoples) in IRC. He finds out
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
89
that the temporal aspect of CMC is often linked to the concept of linguistic
economy.
4. Methodology:
This section details the selection and description of the study corpus. Then
the procedures of the study analysis are described, along with the criteria for
analyzing sentence structure in terms of sentence length and sentence
complexity. It is designed with an aim to achieve the aims of the
present paper.
4.1 Selection and Description of the Corpus
In order to get an eligible sample of corpus, the present paper has adopted
the following procedures. First, the corpus is based on a certain number of
authentic Skype English chats both private and public. It is believed that this is
necessary to ensure diversity of users and interests and to avoid emphasis on a
particular group of chatters with a limited set of topics. That is, the inclusion of
both types is justified as that the language of private chats may differ, to certain
extent, from that of public ones. Accordingly, the entire corpus comprises 20
authentic chats: 10 private and 10 public chats ranging in length from 4-8 pages
for each. The sample size is determined based on procedures followed by Biber
(1990). Biber has analyzed aspects of internal variation within texts, and
concluded that texts of from 2,000 to 5,000 words in the standard corpora are
reliably representative of linguistic categories for purposes of analysis (p. 285).
Accordingly, the study corpus exceeds the word counting suggested by Biber.
Second, the issue of language and gender is taken into consideration in the
selection of the present corpus. Thus, chat samples of both sexes are included.
Third, for ethical reasons, the chatters' identity of both private and
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
90
public chats remains anonymous. Fourth, both private and public chats are
provided by net chatters voluntarily who have been assured that their chats will
be used for research purposes only.
Fifth, in getting the public chat sample, the researcher has used her own
Skype ID and to use a nickname to log into the public chat rooms, and she has
only logged in there without taking part in any discussion and ignored any
postings that she may receive from e-chatters while the recording of the session
is going on. This has been done to avoid incorporating the researcher's own
language into the present corpus.
4.2 Analysis of the Corpus
Sentence structure will be examined in terms of their length (i.e., the average
number of words in each sentence), and their syntactic complexity (i.e., simple,
compound, complex and compound - complex sentences).
Before classifying sentences as either long or short, the following question
arises: How many words should a given sentence have in order to be considered
long or short? This question has been answered differently by different scholars.
For example, Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) in their study of the linguistic
features of Internet Y! and IRC chats, adopt the number eight for words as the
dividing boundary between short and long sentences. They do not present any
convincing evidence for their argument that on what basis they have decided the
length of sentences. On the other hand, Werry (1996) suggests that long
sentences have six words and more, while sentences with less than six words can
be considered short. He justifies his defining criterion of long and short
sentences on the basis of perceptual complexity. To support his claim, he cites
some psycholinguistic experiments on sentence processing arguing that those
sentences containing six or more words are conceptually complex and need
longer time to be processed than those sentences of less than six words. That is,
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
91
on the basis of sentence processing, he attempts to establish his argument. Due
to its unquestionable argument of sentence length, the present paper is going to
adopt Werry's model of sentence length to analyze the present study corpus.
What determines sentence boundary in e-English? is another question raised
in classifying sentences into long or short. Following Al-Sa'di and Hamdan
(2005), a sentence in writing is any well-formed and meaningful string of words
which starts with an uppercase letter and ends with a full stop. Of course, a one-
word piece of language containing a gap-filler, a brief response to a statement or
question, or an interjection (like yes, well, really, aha, etc.) will be regarded as a
full sentence in this paper. Nonetheless, this compromising solution does not
come to grip with the task of determining sentence boundary in e-English. This
may be due to the absence of punctuation marks in much of chat or to the use of
improper punctuation and spelling. In most posts punctuation is missing, which
makes unit breaks difficult to recognize. Therefore, it is quite logical to employ
the most accepted linguistic norms and reasoning in trying to divide stretches of
words into sentences.
As to sentence complexity, following Quirk etal's (1985) taxonomy of
sentence complexity; English sentences can be divided into four main types,
namely, simple (containing one clause); compound (containing two conjoined
clauses); complex (containing at least one embedded clause with a main clause);
and compound - complex sentence type (containing two or more main clauses
with at least one embedded clause). The four sentence types mentioned above
will be examined in this paper.
It is noteworthy that spelling errors, grammatical errors, and missing
punctuation marks are not taken into consideration in the present corpus
analysis. As far as the statistical tool is concerned, the present corpus results will
be calculated in terms of their raw frequencies and percentages as will be shown
below.
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
92
5. Results and Discussion:
This section is intended to present the study results with an aim to answer the
questions of the present paper set forth above. First, the statistical results are
presented, and then discussed in some detail.
5.1 Sentence Length
As to sentence length, the entire corpus of the study has (4660) sentences
distributed as follows: (3993) short sentences, and (667) long sentences. All in
all, short sentences exceed long sentences in the whole corpus, and their
percentages are (85.69%), and (14.31%) respectively. Table 1 and Figure 1
show the raw frequencies and percentages of short and long sentences in the
entire corpus.
Table 1: Raw frequencies & percentages of sentence length types
in the whole corpus.
Short Sentences Long Sentences Total
No. % No. %
3993
85.69%
667 14.31%
4660
100%
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
93
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Short Long
Figure 1: Distribution of sentence length types in the whole corpus.
A closer look at the Skype corpus of private chat indicates that the total
number of sentences is (2150) sentences, (1900) of which are short sentences,
and (250) are long ones. On the other hand, the corpus of public chat includes
2510 sentences, (2093) of which are short sentences, and (417) are long ones.
This can lead to the ultimate conclusion that short sentence type is the prevailing
sentence type in e-English for both private and public samples. The statistical
difference between the two types is almost significant. These statistical results
can accord with those of previous research. The same finding has been reported
in Al-Sa'di and Hamdan's (2005) study on Y! and IRC chat. They have found
that simple sentences are more prevalent in their corpus than longer ones. Such
results can lead to the inference that e-chatters resort to short and succinct
sentences to save time and effort. Table 2 and Figures 2 and 3 below summarize
the distribution of both sentence length types in private and public Skype chats.
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
94
Table 2: Raw frequencies & percentages of sentence length types in the private and
public chat.
Chat Type Short Sentences Long Sentences
Total No. % No. %
Private 1900
88.37 %
250 11.63 % 2150
100%
Public 2093
83.39%
417 16.61 % 2510
100%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
Short Long
Figure 2: Distribution of sentence length types in the private chat.
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
95
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Short Long
Figure 3: Distribution of sentence length types in the public chat.
The followings are illustrative examples extracted from both private and
public chats of the present corpus:
1. I SAID NOOOO
2. Y’know, I think you’re wrong
3. think I ll sit this one out
4. yeah good question
5. We’re all democrats at heart?
6. I was living in a different universe
7. do stay a little longer nickshicks
5.2 Sentence Complexity
On the basis of Quirk etal's (1985) taxonomy of sentence complexity,
mentioned above, the total frequency of sentences is (4660) distributed as
follows: (4055) simple sentences, (302) compound sentences, (257) complex
sentences, and (46) compound-complex sentences. These statistical results
indicate that simple sentence type exceeds significantly other sentence types,
i.e., the percentages of simple, compound, complex, and compound-complex
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
96
sentences are (87.01%), (6.48%), (5.51%), and (0.98%) respectively. It is
noteworthy that the compound-complex sentence type comes least in
comparison with other sentence types. Though compound sentences exceed
complex ones in the present corpus, one can notice that differences in the
frequencies and percentages of compound and complex sentences are
statistically insignificant. This finding lends support to Quirk etal's (1972: 795)
argument that in spoken English, which electronic English presumably has much
in common with, compound sentences enable better comprehensibility than do
complex ones, and therefore the former type outnumbers the latter. So, it can be
presupposed that simple sentences in e-English are the vast majority, whereas
the other types, which often require more effort and time in processing, typing
and reading, are naturally so meager. See Table 3 and Figure 4 below for the
total distribution of sentence complexity types.
Table 3: Raw frequencies & percentages of sentence complexity types
in the whole corpus.
Simple Compound Complex Compound-
Complex
Total No. % No. % No. % No. %
4055
87.01%
302
6.48%
257
5.51%
46
0.98%
4660
100%
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
97
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
simple compound complex compound-complex
Figure 4: Distribution of sentence complexity types in the whole corpus
A careful look at the distribution of sentence complexity types in private and
public corpus can indicate that simple sentences significantly exceed other
sentence types. It has been observed that there is no statistically significant
difference between compound and complex sentence types, and compound-
complex sentences are meager in both types of corpus. All in all, simple
sentences type stands out in comparison with other types in both corpus
samples. Table 4 and Figures 5 and 6 below display the distribution of sentence
complexity types in both the private and public corpus.
Table 4: Raw frequencies & percentages of sentence complexity types in the
private and public chat.
Chat
Type
Simple Compound Complex Compound-
Complex Total
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Private
1856
86.32%
150
6.97%
122
5.67%
22
1.02%
2150
100%
Public
2199
87.60%
152
6.05%
135
5.37%
24
0.95%
2510
100%
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
98
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
simple compound complex compound-
complex
Figure 5: Distribution of sentence complexity types in the private chat.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
simple compound complex compound-
complex
Figure 6: Distribution of sentence complexity types in the public chat.
The prevalence of simple sentence type in the present corpus has been
confirmed by previous research. Crystal (2004) has found that simple sentences
are so frequently employed by e-chatters to seek brevity in their use of e-English
of IRC. Similarly, Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) have found the dominance of
simple sentence type in the IRC and Y! chats in comparison to other sentence
types. More precisely, compound and complex sentence types are less frequent,
and compound-complex sentences are the least in their corpus. Economy of
effort seems to be the motivating force behind using simple sentences in the
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
99
present corpus. Murray (1990: 44) has observed that e-chatters using
synchronous CMD have a general tendency to economize on typing effort, and
mimic spoken language features.
The followings are some illustrative examples from the data:
1. wanna know why coz i got enuf
2. I look 4ward 2 hearing more on THIS
3. coz nobody wants 2 buy any?
4. thank u but the chat is crowded I dont know if anybody will read it
5. if i had remembered before i would have told u.
6. plz less text at once, nobody can read t in detail
7. u have already sent the link four times in2 chat, any essential changes?
5.3 Electronic Chat and Speaking/Writing Modes:
The present section is intended to examine whether synchronous chat can be
best situated as more speech-like or as more written-like. The higher frequency
of short and simple sentences in the present corpus can lead to the inference that
online chat may be logically perceived as a simulator of real life face-to-face
conversation. To justify this argument, Werry (1996: 57) argues that the
structure of unplanned speech reflects cognitive constraints on real-time
language encoding, for example in length of information units, lexical density,
and degree of syntactic complexity, so too the synchronous modes of CMC
impose temporal constraints on users that result in a reduction of linguistic
complexity, i.e., seeking linguistic simplicity. In same vein, Ko (1996:20)
asserts that the relatively low frequencies of certain complex linguistic features
can be due to temporal constraints that the different modes of CMC place upon
its users. Thus, it would be reasonable to expect most e-chatters resort to short,
simple and succinct sentences to save time and effort, and this, in turn, makes
synchronous e-chat resembles, to great extent, spoken English.
Crystal (2004: 41) asserts that electronic discourse taking place in real time is
more speech-like than this taking place in non-real time. In synchronous chats,
chatters are expected to produce information for others more rapidly. This
requirement may help to explain why e-chat shows evidence of temporal
pressure towards linguistic economy. Chatters are often in a hurry when they
type and send posts, and they may have learned from experience that a more
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
100
readable post is the one that is clear, uses shorter sentences. Such posts are more
likely to be read and to receive a response in an environment in which many
posts compete for the addressee's attention. From this perspective, chatting
exchange can be seen as a cooperative process of facilitating information
transfer and processing. E-chatters, like language speakers, do their best not to
prolong their share of speaking, and instead seeking linguistic brevity.
6. Conclusions:
The universal application of computer technologies has led to the
development of a new electronic register known as electronic chat. E- English
chat is better viewed as a newly emerging register with its own characteristics
and uses. Many attempts are urgently needed to uncover the linguistic
characteristics of this register.
So far it has been found that short and simple sentences are the most
predominant types in the present corpus. These sentences types are employed by
e-chatters for brevity sake, i.e., to save time and effort on their own parts.
Besides, Skype English chat is similar to other chat systems, viz, Y! and IRC
with reference to sentence structure.
The chat communication is, in some of its features, very close to face to-face
interaction, and this is true especially for the briefness of the sentences.
Linguistic economy may help to explain its structural features, especially when
users are trying to type at a conversational speed, as in the case of real-time chat.
Structural simplicity, viz, short and simple sentences in the present corpus, can
save time and keystrokes and thus speed up the communication process. The
speech-like features of synchronous chat are typically claimed to result from the
temporal constraints of the medium.
The study results have practical implications for the use of text-based
synchronous computer-mediated communication in educational settings. The
finding that the interactive chat communication disfavors elaborated forms of
expression calls into question its suitableness for use in high-level academic
discussions. At the same time, the interactive nature of this mode may make it
well-suited for class discussion in which widespread participation is the desired
outcome. Future research can be suggested to examine other linguistic features
of this electronic register at all of its linguistic levels including orthography,
morphology, syntax, semantics, etc.
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
101
References
-Al-Sa'di, R. and Hamdan, J. (2005) "Synchronous Online Chat:
Computer-Mediated Communication". World Englishes, 24(4), 409-24.
-Biber, D. (1990) "Methodological Issues regarding Corpus- Based Analyses of
Linguistic Variation". Journal of Literary and Linguistic Computing, 5 (4), 257-269.
-Crystal, D. (2003) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. 2nd
edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Crystal, D. (2004) Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Dorta, G. (2008) "Politeness and Social Dynamics in Chat
Communication". In Dialogue in and between Different Cultures. Edited by Marion Grein, (pp.111 –24). iada.online.series
-Herring, S. (1996) "Introduction". In Computer-Mediated
Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Edited by S. Herring, (pp. 1-10). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
-Herring, S. (2001) "Computer- Mediated Discourse". In The Handbook of
Discourse Analysis. Edited by D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H. Hamilton, (pp. 612-34). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
-Ko, K. (1996) "Structural Characteristics of Computer-Mediated Language: A Comparative Analysis of Inter Change Discourse". Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3), 1-30.
-Murray, D. (1990) "Computer Mediated Communication". English Today, 23, 42-6.
-Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1972) A
Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
-Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
-Rumsien, G. (2004) "Development of Internet English: Alternative Lexis, Syntax and Morphology". Journal of Languages Studies. 6, 48-55.
-Werry, C. (1996) Linguistic and Interactional Features of Internet Relay Chat.
In Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-
Investigating Sentence Structure in ............ ميالديةميالديةميالديةميالدية 2012 ––––هجرية هجرية هجرية هجرية 1433لسنة لسنة لسنة لسنة ) ) ) ) 202 ((((العدد العدد العدد العدد ----االستاذاالستاذاالستاذاالستاذ
Skype English Chat
102
Cultural Perspectives. Edited by S. Herring (pp. 47-63). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.