Ken's language questions

[kensan]

I have this homework task where I have to write an analysis on a forum thread from some gaming site, and the teacher said we can talk about subsystem features, formality, standard/non-standard, basically anything we can find.
I was wondering how to write a more effective analysis, I can do them, but I feel a bit lost and not sure what things we need to include (for final exam analysis too). Thank you

edit: changed title, I will probably be asking a few questions throughout the year.

[greenbeans]

Awesome homework task!

I'm not too sure how you would approach this task unless I knew and/or were familiar with a *particular* gaming site, but I'll see how I go with analysing the mere bits and pieces I've observed here at ATARNotes.com

(using the examples you've mentioned just for ideas)

Formality:
Many users type in quite casual responses. You can see this by examples such as 'can't' in lieu of 'cannot'; 'wanna' in place of 'want to', etc. This is an example of morphology, where you have shortenings and contractions, deemed more 'informal' discourse. Another example is of 'ellision': ahh my mistake, ellision is when you get rid of a sound, but it works the same! taking the example of the sentence 'I saw this on .......' the user could type 'Saw this on...' and drop the unnecessary pronoun. This is also a syntax example, sometimes used to avoid repetition. The same can be used for 'Harry ate some cake and [ate some] pie too'.

Standard and non-standard:
Pretty much ANYTHING. There are examples everywhere. People not spelling things correctly (which I probably haven't in this post! ), such as using the wrong 'practice' or 'affect'. Everything...

Some other subsystem features off the top of my head:
Prosodic features used in written texts. I.e. when someone might write *inhales deeply* they're suggesting that they are taking in a deep breath, something that can't be physically written down as it is gauged as a phonological feature. So that's why we come up with written ways of expressing these things... *sigh* *giggles* *LOLLLLLLLL* etc..

Lexical choices..
Adverbials are sometimes used to shorten things. If you take 'at the moment' it becomes ATM. There will be PLENTY of specific jargon relevant to WHATEVER forum you choose to analyse. (Aha! Spelling "analyse" with a Z will make it non-standard, as it is American orthography!) But anyway, think of all the acronyms. Here, we have ATAR, VCE, VTAC, UMAT, etc.

Look at the syntax in terms of sentence structure and types.
You could make an observation that the first post of a thread tends to use interrogative sentences as they are looking for answers to questions. Generally the 2nd poster and subsequent ones will respond in declarative sentences to pass on information, facts, etc.
Also, those that are more elaborate in their answers *may* be more likely to use complex and compound sentence structures in their responses. You might be more likely to find those responses in specific subject threads such as English, or in threads where a detailed answer is required. Similarly, you might find more cliches, puns, metaphors, whatever in the threads that include those. Basically what I'm saying is, you might find more people using them in the English threads because those kiddos have them in their course content.

With gaming forums, those that might have a better online forum, thread, whatever reputation might be more likely to give more elaborate answers with complex sentence structure and ask less interrogative sentences than others due to their acquired knowledge about the specific jargon in the domain of COD or whatever.... (I am clueless, as  I'm sure you've cotton on to by now )

That's pretty much all I can think of at the moment. Hope that's of any help to your homework task

[kensan]

Wow thanks for that! That helps a lot
Well actually the people are talking like retards, they are arguing over "COD vs Halo" and most of the language used is non-standard.
Do you know when you write an analysis, is there any specific way to order the paragraphs?
And can you include punctuation into a language analysis? Because there is not much used on the forum I'm analysing.

[greenbeans]

You can go nuts with how you figure out your paragraphs and topic sentences. Within reason. Make sure it's a logical flow and they connect well with the topic sentences and are spot on with your intro.

So say you have a question...

"Have changing social attitudes influenced language use in Australia? blah blah blah....Discuss at least two examples relevant to the 21st century. Refer to at least two subsystems in your response."

So that's yoinked from 2006's exam and then I reworded it, but you get the point.

So you could argue, Nah bro, they totes haven't changed. Here are my reasons, X Y Z. For X, let's chuck in some Phon with some Morph. Y, we'll do some more Morph but might get lucky with a bit of Syntaxytax....Z totes covers all this shiz in morph lex phon sem and syn it's a whopper of a point!

Another way: Yes they have, here are my example in para 1: phon, morph. But then again I think they haven't changed completely in THIS way, so I will demonstrate this with another para: Phon, sem, syn..whatever. Back to yes I agree: para 3, back to no: para 4 ... something along those lines.

Alternatively, you can be like: Mmmmk. I will take it as a fact that 'social attitudes are changing'. Here are my examples in Phon, then a para for Lex, then whatevs floats me boat. So work through it all with the subsystems like that if you like.

[kensan]

Ok thanks for your help

[kensan]

I'm analysing a spoken transcript, and I'm looking at "''your ol reflexes slowing down..'
Was wondering, would 'ol' come under phonology or morphology? So would it be an elision of /d/ or a shortening of the word 'old'

[Bhootnike]

phonology and yeah, its an elision of /d/. - reflects informal tone, spoken nature of language
you could argue that its also a shortening, but i think phonology is more appropriate in this case since you are analysing spoken language.


to be a bit more broader... it could also  be a reduction of the lexeme old.

[kensan]

phonology and yeah, its an elision of /d/. - reflects informal tone, spoken nature of language
you could argue that its also a shortening, but i think phonology is more appropriate in this case since you are analysing spoken language.


to be a bit more broader... it could also  be a reduction of the lexeme old.

is reduction of lexeme the same as shortening?
Becuase we also had 'probs', and that came under morphology as shortening, isn't it the same as 'ol' kind of. I've always found it difficult to differentiate between morph and phon in these cases, they seem really similar.

[Bhootnike]

reduction is like a broader term for different types of features. note that reduction is specific to phonology, and refers to lost sounds/phonemes in the pronunciation of lexemes. or a better way to put it: "Reductions occur when sounds are reduced[or dropped off] or completely eliminated in words when spoken."
thus elision is a type of reduction .

shortenings are morphology as you said, but depending on context in which you are being asked the question, it could also be phonology.. , ill give you an example soon.

so with 'ol', and considering you are analysing spoken language, it is more appropriate to say that this is a reduction or elision to be more specific, because spoken language is linked with phonology more than morphology.
you could say its a shortening, but its easier to justify why its elision.

therefore to answer your question with respect to the fact it is spoken language, no they are different. reduction relates to phonology, whilst shortenings relate to morphology. 


consider the following:

Biology -- biol
Computer - comp

probably - probly
Computer - Ca-puta

Theres a distinct difference between the first pair and second pair.

Biology to biol, and computer to comp involves leaving out actual parts of the word out, and you could say its a morpheme that has been omitted depending on the lexeme that has been reduced(e.g. in the case of biol. 'ology' is a bound morpheme which has been omitted).
 I don't think you'd be right if you said that in comp, 'a morpheme has been omitted' because 'uter' isn't a morpheme.  (not trying to confuse you here, but since a 'morpheme' is defined as the smallest unit of meaning, you can't say morpheme because 'uter' isn't really a unit of meaning :p!)

Anyway, with biol and comp, when analysing spoken language, you can say ' the phonemes /ology/ and /uter/ have been dropped' ..  and thus it COULD be a reduction! this is what i was referring to above in my 4th line.


Now, look at the second pair:
Probably to probly involves dropping of phonemes/sounds.
computer to ca-puta involves dropping of phonemes too.
These cannot be shortenings because you have dropped a sound, not a word or anything that has meaning.


Therefore, to conclude, i'd stick with the fact that  'biol' and 'comp' are a shortening, because i have left out, or 'clipped' , or 'truncated' a part of the original word.
the latter is  an elision because i have dropped the /om/ and /er/ sounds in comptuer, and  the /b/ in probably.

Hope that clears stuff up! and hopefully i am not wrong :p

[kensan]

Thanks so much bhootnike, yeah I understand everything that you have said

Did you have a sac for language yet by the way? We're having one the first week and second week back, we got the texts to analyse over the holidays so I'm just trying to find anything I can at the moment.

edit: so just confirming.. I found another one, 'rego'. This would be elision, since 'istration' is not a morpheme.

[Bhootnike]

no worries

yeah i have had a sac, but we got the texts on the day of the sac! :p
lucky you!!! - and yeah good idea... , finding all relevant examples now is indeed a good idea!

registration to rego.

This would be elision, since 'istration' is not a morpheme.

mm,, tricky one actually, cause its sort of a liaison in that, the /o/ sound is being introduced.

Okay, so your choice was elision because 'istration' is not a morpheme.
i think i may have contradicted myself above hah, but i shall find a more precise way of looking at the reduction/shortening dilemma.

Shortenings are a shortened version of a longer word, e.g. gymnasium to gym, ambulance to ambo, (unique to aus english), service station to servo (unique to aus eng)

Reductions are phonologically specific, in spoken language, 'connected' speech' occurs and this is where we speak fluently, and naturally we will alter some sounds in order to make our speech flow.  Elision is one type of feature we may use to do so. Elision is the deletion of sounds in connected speech. for example: in speech , 'probably' is usually pronounced as probly, and the phrase: 'fish and chips' is usually pronounced fish 'n' chips,

so id actually say rego is a shortening...

[kensan]

That makes sense cheers

[Bhootnike]

hopefully i didnt confuse you, but no worries !

[panicatthelunchbar]

rego as in registration, isn't that diminutives? Aussie slang contains a lot of these, for example, barbeque-barbie, Steve-Stevo and similarly registration-rego.

So I think it is a shortening, but you could also add diminutives in your analysis to narrow it down further....also makes you look knowledgeable

[Bhootnike]

i thought diminutives were employed to show some form of intimacy/closeness between interlocutors, or to show affection , or to show some sort of 'cuteness' to something,  and thus decrease social distance, in the process building social rapport ?
so i don't think barbeque to barbie is a diminutive. more a shortening, unique to Australia. stevo would be a diminutive.