Linguistic Characteristics of Digital Communication: A Cohesive Analysis
POINT-B: LINGUISTIC CHARACTERIZATION
Beyond a pragmatic approach, this analysis examines the linguistic elements that underpin the fundamental characteristics of text as an act of communication: cohesion and alignment.
A. POLICY
At the morphological level, the text demonstrates correct use of alignment morphemes between various elements at the phrase and sentence levels. There’s also proper use of coordinated and subordinated bonds (e.g., “a computer thing,” line 1; “email and Internet,” line 3).
Cohesion is intensified by discourse organizers and connectors, which emphasize consistency. These vary in type, including:
- Modal: “as if” (line 3)
- Temporal: “at first” (line 4), “but” (line 7)
- Counterargument: “even” (line 5)
- Summative and focused: “but perhaps” (line 7)
The text introduces discursive operations of doubt (“but perhaps”) and confirmation (“de facto,” “certainly,” line 11).
Semantic Lexicon:
Deictic elements reinforce links between discourse units. Textual deixis is present through nouns like “thing” (line 1), an example of pro forma. However, the most common deixis relies on pronouns, particularly those in an anaphoric relation (e.g., “when which,” line 4). The indefinite pronoun “any” also plays this role cataphorically, as does the neutral “what” (“what lies…,” line 7).
Importantly, deixis establishes a relationship between the text and the extra-textual communicative situation. The use of “one” suggests a stable relationship between sender and receiver, given the impersonal nature of the semantics. Similarly, the determiner “our” (line 23) implies involvement of both sender and receiver.
Spatial deixis is evident in terms like “Babel” and references to smaller spaces like “airport” and “bathroom.” “Babel” also carries a temporal reference, contrasted with the recent era of computing.
Personal-collective deixis is notable in terms like “people-mail” and “God.” The latter, representing a monitoring force over humanity, carries social connotations.
Lexical Relationships:
Lexical relationships, in both form and content, are crucial for textual cohesion. The text exhibits various phenomena, including:
- Enumerations (lists): Notably, these lack accents, capitalization, and specific examples like “FedoraForum” (line 2). These lists recur throughout, reinforcing deixis.
- Derivation: Examples include “think-thought” and “syntax-syntactic.”
- Hierarchical relationships: The text showcases hypernyms like “misuse” and hyponyms like “all together, without accents, etc.” (line 20).
- Synonymy: Examples include “bathroom” and “toilet” (lines 10-11).
- Antonymy: An example is “know-confused” (line 13).
The relationship between real and imaginary terms is established through tropes and lexical substitutions. While not overly poetic, these resources are effective. Examples include “Dadaist rant” (line 17), “seemed aphasics” (line 3), and “God strikes again” (line 24). The latter two also carry a strong sense of irony. The phrase “Our Babel is the computer” (line 23) offers broad interpretative possibilities, highlighting the real-imaginary relationship.
Conclusion:
Keywords that encapsulate the text’s core themes include “computing” and “linguistic improprieties.”
Based on the analyzed traits, the text demonstrates strong cohesion.