Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T09:13:12.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emoticons in text may function like gestures in spoken or signed communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2017

Laurie Beth Feldman ,
Cecilia R. Aragon ,
Nan-Chen Chen  and
Judith F. Kroll
Laurie Beth Feldman
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University at Albany, Albany, NY 12222. lfeldman@albany.eduwww.albany.edu/psychology Haskins Laboratories, New Haven, CT 06511. http://www.haskins.yale.edu
Cecilia R. Aragon
Affiliation:
Department of Human Centered Design and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. aragon@uw.eduhttp://hcde.washington.eduhttp://depts.washington.edu/hdsl/nanchen@uw.eduhttp://hcde.washington.eduhttp://depts.washington.edu/hdsl/
Nan-Chen Chen
Affiliation:
Department of Human Centered Design and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. aragon@uw.eduhttp://hcde.washington.eduhttp://depts.washington.edu/hdsl/nanchen@uw.eduhttp://hcde.washington.eduhttp://depts.washington.edu/hdsl/
Judith F. Kroll
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521. judith.kroll@ucr.eduhttp://psychology.ucr.edu/faculty/kroll/index.htmlhttps://bilingualismmindbrain.com/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We draw parallels between emoticons in textual communication and gesture in signed language with respect to the interdependence of codes by describing two contexts under which the behavior of emoticons in textual communication resembles that of gesture in speech. Generalizing from those findings, we propose that gesture is likely characterized by a nuanced interdependence with language whether signed, spoken or texted.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e55
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aragon, C. R., Chen, N. C., Kroll, J. F. & Feldman, L B. (2014) Emoticon and text production in first and second languages. In: Social computing, behavioral-cultural modeling & prediction (SBP14) April 2–4, 2014, UCDC Center, Washington DC, USA, ed. Kennedy, W., Agarwal, N. & Yang, S.. Springer.Google Scholar
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J. & Cleland, A. A. (2000) Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition 75:B13–25.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996) Using language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Emmorey, K., Giezen, M. & Gollan, T. H. (2015) Insights from bimodal bilingualism: Psycholinguistic, cognitive, and neural implications of bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Available on CJO2015. doi: 10.1017/S1366728915000085.Google Scholar
Feldman, L., Cho, K. W., Aragon, C. & Kroll, J. (2015) Interactions of emoticon valence and text processing. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. Noelle, D. C., Dale, R., Warlaumont, A. S., Yoshimi, J., Matlock, T., Jennings, C. D. & Maglio, P. P.. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Galantucci, B. & Garrod, S. (2011) Experimental semiotics: A review. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 5:11. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00011.Google Scholar
Garrod, S., Fay, N., Lee, J., Oberlander, J. & MacLeod, T. (2007) Foundations of representation: Where might graphical symbol systems come from? Cognitive Science 31:961–87. doi: 10.1080/03640210701703659.Google Scholar
Giles, H. (1973) Accent mobility: A model and some data. Anthropological Linguistics 15:87–105.Google Scholar
Gregory, S. W. Jr. & Webster, S. (1996) A nonverbal signal in voices of interview partners effectively predicts communication accommodation and social status perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70:1231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregory, S. W. Jr, Dagan, K. & Webster, S. (1997) Evaluating the relation of vocal accommodation in conversation partners’ fundamental frequencies to perceptions of communication quality. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 21:23–43.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Dussias, P. E., Bice, K. & Perrotti, L. (2015) Bilingualism, mind, and brain. In: Annual review of linguistics, vol. 1, ed. Liberman, M. & Partee, B. H., pp. 377–94.Google Scholar
Mol, L., Krahmer, E., Maes, A. & Swerts, M. (2012) Adaptation in gesture: Converging hands or converging minds? Journal of Memory and Language 66:249–64.Google Scholar
Morford, J. P., Wilkinson, E., Villwock, A., Piñar, P. & Kroll, J. F. (2011) When deaf signers read English: Do written words activate their sign translations? Cognition 118:286–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niederhoffer, K. G. & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002) Linguistic style matching in social interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 21:337–60.Google Scholar
Pickering, M. J. & Garrod, S. (2004) Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27:169–225.Google Scholar
Schnoebelen, T. (2012) Do you smile with your nose? Stylistic variation in twitter emoticons. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 18(2), Article 14. Available at: http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol18/iss2/14.Google Scholar
Shepard, C. A., Giles, H. & Le Poire, B. A. (2001) Communication accommodation theory. In: The new handbook of language and social psychology, ed. Robinson, W. P. & Giles, H., pp. 33–56. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
Vandergriff, I. (2014) A pragmatic investigation of emoticon use in nonnative/native speaker text chat. Language@Internet 11, article 4. (urn:nbn:de:0009-7-39846)Google Scholar
Wilkes-Gibbs, D. & Clark, H. H. (1992) Coordinating beliefs in conversation. Journal of Memory and Language 31:183–94.Google Scholar
Yus, F. R. (2011) Cyberpragmatics. Internet-mediated communication in context. John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Yus, F. R. (2014) Not all emoticons are created equal. Linguagem em (Dis)curso 14(3):511–29. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-4017-140304-0414.Google Scholar