Abstract
Online communication on social media platforms like WhatsApp is not only becoming ubiquitous but it has also influenced the way we use language for communication. Online text-based communication does, however, have its shortcomings and the most obvious is the absence of non-verbal cues, which more than often influences the effective communication of meaning and intent.
However, since the use of emojis became popular, this picture has changed significantly. Users are now finding new and creative ways to use emojis to convey emotion, meaning and intent in the form of different language functions and speech acts.
Emojis replaced emoticons in the late 1990s and by September 2021 the online encyclopaedia called Emojipedia (https://emojipedia.org) was hosting 3 664 emojis with names and descriptions in 19 different languages. These descriptions include suggestions of how to use each emoji. It is, however, common knowledge that in spite of these suggestions, users sometimes attach their own meanings to emojis, resulting in different interpretations and uses. This semantic and pragmatic variation comes under scrutiny in this research.
The different meanings for the same emoji result in what Danesi (2017:55) refers to as the thesaurus effect when there is no singular meaning attached to an emoji but rather a field of semantically related items. Similarly, users can also attach their own sentiments (positive, negative or neutral) to the same emoji and, based on that, make strategic choices about how, where and when to use it. In this way, an emoji becomes much more than decoration but rather a linguistic element and a visual discourse marker with form and function (Danesi 2017:18–9).
The purpose of this research is to understand the semantic and pragmatic variation of emojis as used by a group of undergraduate university students. This case study uses a mixed-method approach. An electronic questionnaire was used to collect quantitative and qualitative data. In this questionnaire, students introspectively indicated and explained their use and understanding of 12 popular emojis.
The variation in pragmatic functions was measured using the communicative functions of Jakobson (1960) and the speech act theory of Austin (1962) and Searle (1969, 1970). This allowed for an understanding of how emojis interact with online text in new and creative ways. Broadening the theoretical framework with the semiotic theory of Charles Sanders Peirce and specifically the Triadic Model of Communication (Peirce 1994) allowed for an understanding of and insight into the variations in the semiotic functions of emojis.
The findings can be summarised as follows:
(i) Not only are different emojis associated with different sentiments, but different users may also attach different sentiments to the same emoji and these may vary between predominantly positive, negative and neutral:
- The face with tears of joy (😂), the folded hands (🙏) and the raised hands (🙌) emoji show a predominantly positive sentiment.
- The loudly crying face (😭), the face with rolling eyes (🙄), the grimacing face (😬) and the angry face (😠) emoji communicate a predominantly negative sentiment.
- The thinking face (🤔), the see-no-evil-monkey (🙈) and the woman shrugging (🤷♀️) emoji convey a predominantly neutral sentiment.
(ii) There is a correlation between emojis displaying a large variation in sentiment and being open to many interpretations. A case in point here is the thumbs-up emoji (👍), the loudly crying face (😭), the face with rolling eyes (🙄), the grimacing face (😬) and the woman shrugging (🤷♀️) emoji. The sentiments of the loudly crying emoji (😭), for example, range between extremely negative and extremely positive because it is interpreted as either a crying or a laughing face. This suggested that a correlation between sentiment and interpretation was a topic for further investigation, preferably in studies using a wider variety of emoji and using real online interactions as data.
(iii) Emojis can become part of various language functions and speech acts. It can, for example, be used in a conative (appellative) manner when drawing the attention of the receiver (“Kan jy asseblief ophou om vir my te bel 🙄”) [“Will you please stop phoning me 🙄”]; in a referential manner when replacing words (“Moenie so 😭 nie”) [“Don’t 😭 like that”]; and for phatic functions similar to small talk and backchanneling. Emojis can also signal the start or end of a conversation.
(iv) The use of emojis is not restricted to emotive speech acts (“Well done🙏”), but emojis also function effectively in constative speech acts (“ek weet nie 🤷♀️”) [“I don’t know 🤷♀️”], commissives (“Ek 🙏 vir jou”) [“I’m 🙏 for you”], and directives (“ek verstaan nie so leka nie Jan 🤔”) [“I don’t quite understand, Jan 🤔”] when the sender expects a certain response from the receiver.
(v) In line with previous research, such as Danesi (2017:96), the findings show that emojis display an illocutionary force, in other words they have the ability to soften, reinforce or make a message less formal. An emoji can even add more nuanced meanings such as irony or sarcasm to a message (“Sjoe, maar hy is slim😉”).
(vi) When regarding emoji as semiotic signs and investigating how they function as icons, indexes and symbols in Peirce’s Triadic Model (Peirce 1994), the following findings emerged:
- Emojis can display an iconic function (“oh my word, regtig 🙄”).
- Emojis can display indexical functions such as uncertainty, ignorance or confusion (“ek weet nie 🤷♀️”).
- Emojis can display symbolic functions (“Sjoe maar jy’s pragtig🔥🔥🔥”) [“Wow but you’re pretty🔥🔥🔥”)
However, it is important to note that Peirce’s trichotomy of symbol, icon and index is not an absolute three-way split, but much rather a graduated scale. Therefore, an emoji (or any other sign) need not fit into only one of these categories but it can vary, depending, for example, on the context. In the case of the face with tears of joy emoji (😂), for example, the following functions became apparent:
- an iconic function when respondents interpret its meaning as laughing
- an indexical function when respondents mentioned that they use in the context of happy, joyful or funny
- a symbolic function when it becomes a symbol of humour, happiness or peace.
Siever (2020:134) uses the eggplant emoji (🍆) as an example to make a similar point. This emoji becomes iconic when it represents the vegetable, but in a different context it might become a phallic symbol.
In essence, the use of emoji is never without reason or motivation. Emojis are used intentionally to ensure the receiver understands the textual utterance in the right context. Emojis are linguistic elements; they have specific roles in various language functions, plays an important role in meaning-making, and convey meaning and intentions in new and creative ways.
Keywords: electronic message; emoji; illocution; language functions; pragmatic; semantic; sentiment; speech act; variation
- The background photo on this article’s featured image was created by Roman Odintsov and obtained from Pexels.
Lees die volledige artikel in Afrikaans
’n Introspektiewe verkenning van die gevoelswaarde, betekenis en gebruik van enkele emoji’s