![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cimorenealright, then. selections from the "discussion" and "conclusion" parts of my linguistics final paper, plus the abstract and the summaries of word meanings.
Semantics of "nonsense" exclamations in instant messaging
abstract
This article examines the meanings of apparantly onomatopoeic exclamations used in instant message conversations, which may seem like nonsense at first, such as "meh," "gah" and "meep." Twenty-four members of an online community responded to a questionnaire about their interpretations of the meanings of these words using a modified semantic differential scale. Results were tabulated and compared, and conclusions drawn about the meanings of the words. Findings showed that rather than being nonsense or completely dependent on situation for meaning, these words, while in many cases closely related, have definite meanings of their own which most members of the chosen language community can agree on.
For my respondents, "meh" is a term of indifference (note "indifferent," "uninterested," "unsurprised," "mild"). It seems to be somewhat negative ("negative," "dissatisfied," "distant" as opposed to "friendly"): an expression of discontent too tired or bored to be particularly emphatic about anything except lack of interest.
"Blah" was found to be similar to "meh": many neutral scores, with the strongest indicators being for "sad," "indifferent," "dissatisfied" and "distant." However, "blah" also appears to be somewhat angry and frustrated. This, along with the higher score for sad, indicates that "blah" is a more negative and/or pitiful word than "meh."
"Eep" seems to move in the opposite direction from "meh" and "blah." As opposed to distant and/or uninterested, it was described by my respondents as "interested," "friendly," and "concerned." There are two interesting apparent contradictions: it is described as "timid" and "imploring," but also as "emphatic," and as both "imploring" and "happy." Based on my own linguistic experience in this language community, my interpretation is that "eep" expresses friendly concern emphatically. It may be timid and imploring because of the speaker's concern for the listener's feelings or her trepadition that the listener is upset, but it is emphatic in that it is a definite and unequivocal expression of concern. I believe that it is considered both imploring and happy as well, but at different times. "Eep" may be an exclamation of surprise/dismay/concern or of simple surprise, including pleased, as opposed to dismayed, astonishment. This data, however, is not conclusive; the issue could be cleared up, perhaps, with some interviews with speakers.
"Bleh" looks very similar to "blah," and in fact, when initially making up the questionnaire I intended to include only one of them. My discussions with other speakers convinced me, however, that there is a significant difference in their undertones. "Bleh" scores only 3 for "sad" and "indifferent" where "blah" scored 2, and strongly indicates lack of surprise (a factor to which "blah" was neutral). Also, "Bleh" appears to have no connotations of concern or disinterest, and was rated neutral rather than either "emphatic" or "mild" (where "blah" was 6 for "uninterested" and for "mild").
For my respondents, "meep" is more imploring, happy, and interested than "eep," but equally timid, concerned, surprised, and pleased. If "eep" and "meep" truly are simply onomatopoeic for squeaks as they appear to be, then there is no reason for "meep" to be any more interested or imploring than "eep." This supports my assertion that these terms are words with definite meaning, whatever their origin. What associations account for these differences I cannot guess.
"Feh" seems to be an expression of dissatisfaction and frustration among the people I surveyed. It scores highly as "angry" and "negative" as well, though it is apparently neither very emphatic nor very surprised. The anger implied, then, is not so much unexpected disappointment, perhaps, as something along the lines of "I knew how awful this would be, and I'm still very unhappy about it."
I was surprised that "gah" was evaluated so differently from "feh," as they are two words that I have always taken as mostly equivalent. However, "gah" is confident where "feh" is neutral, less dissatisfied, but considerably more angry, assertive, and negative. Other than the increased expression of concern and surprise, (perhaps because "feh" is most often a description of one's own state of mind, while "gah" may be used as a sympathetic commentary on events related by one's conversational partner), the main difference seems to be that "gah" is much more emphatic, by far the most emphatic of the words examined.
Conclusion
In investigating the meanings of "nonsense" slang words in instant message conversations, I hoped to determine if the interpretation of their meanings was uniform enough for mutual comprehensibility and also to describe, to some extent, what those meanings were. I believe my data demonstrates the semantic value of these exclamations: that they are clearly words with their own meanings, and not simple sounds. Some of these meanings have been catalogued to demonstrate that although they have some of the precision of a normal word, even for slang, these exclamations are uniquely amiguous and particularly rich in implication. Much like the non-verbal communication they are designed to replace, their interpretation depends to an extraordinary degree on their context--not just the conversation in which they are uttered, but the social footing of the participants in an interaction and many other factors. In short, I believe that the unique characteristics of the Internet are forcing the evolution of an unusual and possibly unprecedented kind of communication, which has been only suggested at in this limited study. Much future research will be needed to explicate it.
***and of course, if you want to, you can ask me to send you the rest.
Semantics of "nonsense" exclamations in instant messaging
abstract
This article examines the meanings of apparantly onomatopoeic exclamations used in instant message conversations, which may seem like nonsense at first, such as "meh," "gah" and "meep." Twenty-four members of an online community responded to a questionnaire about their interpretations of the meanings of these words using a modified semantic differential scale. Results were tabulated and compared, and conclusions drawn about the meanings of the words. Findings showed that rather than being nonsense or completely dependent on situation for meaning, these words, while in many cases closely related, have definite meanings of their own which most members of the chosen language community can agree on.
For my respondents, "meh" is a term of indifference (note "indifferent," "uninterested," "unsurprised," "mild"). It seems to be somewhat negative ("negative," "dissatisfied," "distant" as opposed to "friendly"): an expression of discontent too tired or bored to be particularly emphatic about anything except lack of interest.
"Blah" was found to be similar to "meh": many neutral scores, with the strongest indicators being for "sad," "indifferent," "dissatisfied" and "distant." However, "blah" also appears to be somewhat angry and frustrated. This, along with the higher score for sad, indicates that "blah" is a more negative and/or pitiful word than "meh."
"Eep" seems to move in the opposite direction from "meh" and "blah." As opposed to distant and/or uninterested, it was described by my respondents as "interested," "friendly," and "concerned." There are two interesting apparent contradictions: it is described as "timid" and "imploring," but also as "emphatic," and as both "imploring" and "happy." Based on my own linguistic experience in this language community, my interpretation is that "eep" expresses friendly concern emphatically. It may be timid and imploring because of the speaker's concern for the listener's feelings or her trepadition that the listener is upset, but it is emphatic in that it is a definite and unequivocal expression of concern. I believe that it is considered both imploring and happy as well, but at different times. "Eep" may be an exclamation of surprise/dismay/concern or of simple surprise, including pleased, as opposed to dismayed, astonishment. This data, however, is not conclusive; the issue could be cleared up, perhaps, with some interviews with speakers.
"Bleh" looks very similar to "blah," and in fact, when initially making up the questionnaire I intended to include only one of them. My discussions with other speakers convinced me, however, that there is a significant difference in their undertones. "Bleh" scores only 3 for "sad" and "indifferent" where "blah" scored 2, and strongly indicates lack of surprise (a factor to which "blah" was neutral). Also, "Bleh" appears to have no connotations of concern or disinterest, and was rated neutral rather than either "emphatic" or "mild" (where "blah" was 6 for "uninterested" and for "mild").
For my respondents, "meep" is more imploring, happy, and interested than "eep," but equally timid, concerned, surprised, and pleased. If "eep" and "meep" truly are simply onomatopoeic for squeaks as they appear to be, then there is no reason for "meep" to be any more interested or imploring than "eep." This supports my assertion that these terms are words with definite meaning, whatever their origin. What associations account for these differences I cannot guess.
"Feh" seems to be an expression of dissatisfaction and frustration among the people I surveyed. It scores highly as "angry" and "negative" as well, though it is apparently neither very emphatic nor very surprised. The anger implied, then, is not so much unexpected disappointment, perhaps, as something along the lines of "I knew how awful this would be, and I'm still very unhappy about it."
I was surprised that "gah" was evaluated so differently from "feh," as they are two words that I have always taken as mostly equivalent. However, "gah" is confident where "feh" is neutral, less dissatisfied, but considerably more angry, assertive, and negative. Other than the increased expression of concern and surprise, (perhaps because "feh" is most often a description of one's own state of mind, while "gah" may be used as a sympathetic commentary on events related by one's conversational partner), the main difference seems to be that "gah" is much more emphatic, by far the most emphatic of the words examined.
Conclusion
In investigating the meanings of "nonsense" slang words in instant message conversations, I hoped to determine if the interpretation of their meanings was uniform enough for mutual comprehensibility and also to describe, to some extent, what those meanings were. I believe my data demonstrates the semantic value of these exclamations: that they are clearly words with their own meanings, and not simple sounds. Some of these meanings have been catalogued to demonstrate that although they have some of the precision of a normal word, even for slang, these exclamations are uniquely amiguous and particularly rich in implication. Much like the non-verbal communication they are designed to replace, their interpretation depends to an extraordinary degree on their context--not just the conversation in which they are uttered, but the social footing of the participants in an interaction and many other factors. In short, I believe that the unique characteristics of the Internet are forcing the evolution of an unusual and possibly unprecedented kind of communication, which has been only suggested at in this limited study. Much future research will be needed to explicate it.
***and of course, if you want to, you can ask me to send you the rest.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 20 May 2002 02:53 am (UTC)was this just a paper you absolutely had to do and simply chose a topic you like...or are you into internet language...the way i'm into fandom in general for example? do you intend to do more of these?
(no subject)
Date: 20 May 2002 05:52 am (UTC)