School of Language and Literature G3, Bachelor’s Course English Linguistics Course Code: 2EN50E Supervisor: Mikko Laitinen Credits: 15 Examiner: Ibolya Maricic Date: 4 June 2013  

 

 

Acronyms in an Asynchronous Environment

A Corpus Study of Acronym Frequency in Online Discussion Forums

Tomas Viberg

 

 

Abstract This study is a research of the frequency of acronyms in an online forum and the meaning of

the most frequent ones in their context. In the study, definitions are given for language forms

used online so that one is able to compare a set of similarities and differences between these

online varieties and the Standard English. The method consists of identifying and searching for

a set of CMD-typical acronyms. These acronyms are taken from prior studies as well as from

Crystal’s (2006:91f) list of known CMD-acronyms. The material is retrieved from an online

forum of asynchronous communication, and the results show the frequency of the acronyms as

well as discuss their meanings in context. The results indicate that acronyms are highly

infrequent in asynchronous environments, and their use decreases from 2010 to 2013.

The conclusion of this study is that the infrequency of acronyms in asynchronous

environments may be due to the nature of asynchronous online communication, in which users

have time to write their replies. When comparing this study’s corpora with studies on

frequencies in synchronous environments, the acronym frequency in this study was lower than

the frequency shown in the synchronous studies.

Keywords: acronyms, asynchronous discussion forums, computer mediated communication,

computer mediated discourse, frequency, initialisms

 

 

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1  1.1  AIM  AND  RESEARCH  QUESTIONS  ..................................................................................................................................  2  

2. BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................... 3  2.1  DEFINITIONS  ....................................................................................................................................................................  3  2.2  THE  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  CMC  ..................................................................................................................................  5  2.3  PREVIOUS  RESEARCH  .....................................................................................................................................................  6  

3 MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................................. 8  3.1  MATERIAL  ........................................................................................................................................................................  8  3.2  METHOD  ...........................................................................................................................................................................  9  3.3     PROBLEMS  AND  LIMITATIONS  .................................................................................................................................  9  

4. RESULTS ............................................................................................................................... 11  4.1   ACRONYM  FREQUENCY  AND  MEANINGS  FROM  THE  2010  CORPUS  .................................................................  11  4.2  ACRONYM  FREQUENCY  AND  MEANINGS  FROM  THE  2013  CORPUS  .....................................................................  13  

5. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 16  6. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 18  LIST OF REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 20  APPENDIX 1: DAVID CRYSTAL’S (2006:91F) LIST OF KNOWN ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 22  

 

  1  

1. Introduction In today's technologically dependent world interaction has become easier. People from

different parts of the world are nowadays able to communicate with each other simply by

logging on to the Internet. Freiermuth (2011:128) describes Computer Mediated

Communication (CMC) as the term for interaction online. The language used in CMC has

been given many names such as Netspeak and Chatspeak (Squires, 2009) for example. As

explained by Herring (2004:1), Computer Mediated Discourse (CMD) is the term used when

describing the language used in online discussions. All varieties of languages used online will

henceforth be referred to as CMD.

According to Herring (2004:2f), there are two varieties of synchronicity in which

computer users can interact with other users. These two varieties are synchronous and

asynchronous CMD. Synchronous CMD is described as real time conversations, such as

conversations taking place in online chats and Instant Messaging (IM) (Herring, 2004:2f). In

synchronous CMD, the participants need to be present when the conversation takes place. The

asynchronous variety is conversations that do not take place in real time and users do not need

to be logged on to receive their messages. Therefore, asynchronous CMD allows users to

reflect and formulate their messages using more time. One particular form of asynchronous

CMD is forum discussions. The data in this essay is collected from the Internet forum Two

Plus Two, which is a forum for poker players.

Regarding the activity on Internet forums, the site rankings-big-boards.com ([www])

lists the most used forums available by the number of messages contributed as well as visitors

for each forum. The rankings show that there is millions of messages contributed to online

forums daily, and also that hundreds of thousands of people visit forums online. As stated by

Crystal (2011:58), new technology influences languages greatly where new words and

expressions are invented for equipment and functions associated with the new technology.

The most commonly known features of CMD are the abbreviations and the use of

symbols, as well as the lack of punctuation and capitalization of letters. As described in prior

studies, such as Squires (2009) and Tagliamonte and Denis (2008), on features of CMD, there

have been assumptions regarding how CMD has influenced English negatively. The voices

raised on social interaction sites and in the media have argued that the use of abbreviations

ruins the language. These assumptions have, however, been proven to be widely exaggerated

since the frequency of abbreviations used in the corpora of these studies were under 3% of the

 

  2  

total (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008:12; Squires, 2009:483).

Most studies of abbreviation frequencies online have been based on instant messaging

(IM), which is a real-time chat in a synchronous environment. The abbreviations that are

mostly used in online discussions are acronyms and initialisms. The definition of an acronym

is that it is shortened from two or more words to form a unit (Yule, 1996:68). An example of

an acronym is NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). An initialism is an

abbreviation that cannot be pronounced as one word, for example [afk] and [brb]

(Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008:8).

This study aims to research the frequency of CMD-distinctive acronyms and initialisms

in asynchronous discussions, namely on online discussion boards. These discussion boards

are also known as forums. Two corpora are used as data, and the corpora are collected from

two different time periods in order to compare if the acronym usage has decreased or

increased over time on this particular forum. The next chapter explains the aim and presents

the research questions.

1.1 Aim and research questions The aim of this study is to research the most frequent acronyms and initialisms on the online

poker discussion forum Two plus Two. By collecting two corpora from the same forum and

discussion topic, but from different time periods, the frequencies are compared to determine if

there has been an increase or a decrease in usage of acronyms and initialisms. The corpora

consist of 500 posts from 2010 and 500 posts from 2013. The frequency of this study is also

compared to frequencies from other studies (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires, 2009) in

order to determine if there are any differences or similarities regarding frequency of acronyms

and initialisms in asynchronous and synchronous CMD. This leads to the following research

questions:

• Has the usage of acronyms decreased or increased over time in this particular forum?

• What are the most frequent acronyms in the corpora and how are they used?

• Compared with prior studies, how does the frequency of acronyms differ in

synchronous and asynchronous environments?

Chapter 2 defines typical CMD-acronyms through previous research, and explains the

characteristics of CMD in depth. In chapter 3, it is explained how this study was conducted

and the materials used. The fourth chapter shows the results from the study; both how

 

  3  

frequently used the acronyms are as well as how they are used in context. Chapter 5 discusses

how the results can be interpreted, and, lastly, chapter 6 provides the author’s conclusions.

2. Background This section will give definitions of all the terms used throughout this essay. Prior research on

the subject will also be presented.

2.1 Definitions The English language is one of the major languages of the world today. According to Crystal

(2002:1), there are over 400 million people who use English as their mother tongue, and

combined with second- and third-language speakers the total of English speakers in the world

is in the region of a billion. There have been many influences throughout history that have

made English the global language it is today. Examples of these influences are religion,

globalization and not least technology (Crystal 2002:3).

To be able to compare varieties in a language, a standard definition of a language must

be made. Crystal (2005:6) defines Standard English as a standard that includes defined

grammar, phonology and orthography. These are the three units of a language that can be

easily controlled and verified, because it is possible to set defined standards and rules that

apply to them. Pronunciation, dialects and vocabulary on the other hand, are areas that differ

and change continuously, and are therefore impossible to put into a standard. Therefore,

Standard English is defined purely on its linguistic properties. Crystal (2005:6) argues that

Standard English is the language taught for educational purposes, and is used excessively

where formal English is expected. CMD on the other hand is used for other purposes.

CMD is, according to Herring (2004:1), most often used through text-based

communication. Herring (2004:1) argues that the linguistic properties vary based on many

different factors, such as language variety, social and cultural factors, and messaging systems

used. Crystal (2011:32) describes the language of the Internet as a new language variety.

Language varieties are, according to Crystal (2002:203ff), explained through local dialects,

accents, as well as social and cultural backgrounds. Herring (2004:6) explains that CMD is a

language variety that, although text based, consists of elements of spoken language.

The research material presented in this essay is collected from an asynchronous forum

discussion, also defined as an Internet forum or an online discussion board. Herring (2002:1)

describes a forum as a community where the members discuss various topics, share ideas, and

communicate with people from all over the world. A forum consists of threads; threads are the

 

  4  

discussion topics started on the forum by the users. The users on forums are called posters,

and they start a thread either to ask a question or to start a discussion. When an answer is

made, it is called a post. Herring (2002:1) also explains that the posters are anonymous, but

still have to register and create nicknames to be able to contribute to the forum.

CMD has influenced the English language, as some typical CMD acronyms and

initialisms have become part of it. The best-known acronym, [lol] (Laughing Out Loud) and

the best-known initialism, [omg] (Oh My God), have been included as words in the Oxford

English Dictionary (OED). The OED ([www], 2011) defines [lol] as “Etymology: Initialism

< the initial letters of laughing out loud; sometimes also pronounced as an acronym.” and

dates the first known use of the acronym back to 1989 when it was used in an electronic text

at a message board called FidoNews. As described by OED, [lol] can be regarded as an

acronym or initialism. [lol] and [omg] are considered colloquial by OED, but now included in

the dictionary. CMD is the source of hundreds of acronyms and abbreviations like these, some

used more frequently than others. Crystal (2006:91f) lists examples of typical acronyms used

online, such as shown in column (a).

(a) 1) afk– Away From Keyboard

2) brb – Be Right Back

3) cu – See You

4) imo – In My Opinion

5) j4f – Just For Fun

6) m8 - Mate

These are just a few examples of the many acronyms that have originated from text

messaging or CMD. Acronyms can be written using either capital or lower case letters; there

are clear acronyms such as [afk] and more word play-like items that are built up by single

letters, such as [cu] or rebus-like items consisting of both letters and numbers, such as [j4f]

and [m8] (Crystal, 2006:90). Usage of both letters and numbers is also a common variety of

acronyms. Tagliamonte and Denis’ (2008) study on frequencies of abbreviations in instant

messaging online describes distinctions between the different varieties of abbreviations, and

these distinctions are as follows:

Abbreviations are defined as shortened words, and are not a distinctive feature of CMD

words (e.g. phone, tram etc.). Single letter words are where the whole word can be exchanged

with a letter or number, e.g. [u] meaning [you] and [m8] meaning [mate]. Tagliamonte and

 

  5  

Denis (2008) also describe words that are specific for Instant Messaging (IM), namely words

for expressions such as [haha], [hehe] and [hmm].

There are also other expression forms that are typical for CMD. Examples of these,

using Tagliamonte and Denis’ (2008) definitions, are emoticons, symbols and expressions.

Symbols are characters that replace words, either just as one character or more characters put

together to express feelings. When typed, they sometimes transform into emoticons. For

example, a colon and a bracket put together is a symbol depicting a happy face, [: )], and

becomes the emoticon [J] if the software used for typing the symbol (such as Microsoft

Word) has an interface that allows symbols to transform into emoticons. One example of a

symbol is [@], which expresses anger. The final term, described by Tagliamonte and Denis

(2008), is expressions, which are onomatopoeic words such as [haha] and [aargh]. These

words are also written to express emotions, but with the difference that they describe the

sound of the expression. The results presented in the research question will only discuss the

frequency of acronyms and expressions.

Speaking directly to another person using expressions is, according to Crystal

(2006:28), a distinctive feature for a spoken language. However, when writing in CMC, one

uses those features as well. Therefore, it is needed to clarify whether CMC is a spoken or a

written language.

2.2 The characteristics of CMC Freiermuth (2011) argues that CMC differs from spoken discussions, and that online chatting

is the closest possible comparison between these two types of interaction. He claims,

however, that the major difference is the interaction where people in spoken discussions find

it much easier to understand each other. Crystal (2002:133) concludes that CMC is not spoken

language, nor written language. Instead, he claims, that CMC is unique, because of its

distinguished and dynamic properties. For example, people are able to speak to others at the

same time, still given the time to reflect on what has been said in the discussion and also to

take as long as they need to respond. Still, there are features that CMC lacks, as Crystal

(2006:31) describes, such as body language and facial expressions. For example, when people

write [lol] online, one cannot be sure if they really are laughing out loud. To show emotions,

CMC-users often exaggerate the use of capital letters and punctuation in order to express

shouting. (Crystal, 2002:131). Emoticons, most often placed at the end of sentences, are used

to express emotions such as happiness [J], sadness [L] or anger [@].

 

  6  

The spontaneity used in spoken conversations is also lost in CMC, because even if the

interaction is synchronous users interacting online often reflect longer before giving an

answer, than in face-to-face conversations (Crystal, 2006:12).

As pointed out in the introduction, there have been concerns that CMD is influencing

Standard English in a negative way. A study by Squires (2009) discusses the negative

reception CMD has received in media as well as on the Internet. This study lists examples of

criticism from the media and shows that the criticism tends to claim that CMD is making its

users seem ignorant as well as threatening Standard English. Squires (2009) also gives

examples of where the usage of CMD is interpreted to be inappropriate, including

schoolwork, at job interviews and in “real life”, but also in typical CMC-based interactions

such as email conversations. However, arguments in the study describe that CMC should be

regarded as slang, rather than a destructive force destroying the English language. The voices

that are raised against CMD are mainly from the media, but also from teachers and linguists.

Therefore, Squires’ (2009) study researches the frequency of typical CMD-features such as

abbreviations, acronyms and uncapitalized letters (e.g. [i] instead of [I]) in order to find out if

the criticism from the media regarding the negative effect CMD has on Standard English is

relevant or not. The results from the study will be presented in the next chapter, together with

a similar study made by Tagliamonte and Denis (2008).

2.3 Previous Research Squires’ (2009) study uses the term enregisterment to describe how specific terms of CMD

(or Internet Language as she calls it) become distinctive features of a language. She argues

that a language becomes enregistered through sociocultural and historical features.

Furthermore, she claims that Standard English is the most important variety of English since

it is the basis on which new enregistered languages are compared. Squires (2009) is also of

the opinion that all the negative critique CMD has received in the media has helped to define

the language, together with academic research and online comment threads. Her study

therefore investigated the frequency of typical Internet acronyms from an instant messaging

data corpus of 10,000 words. The result shows that acronyms are used sparingly; with [lol]

and [ttyl] (talk to you later) being the most frequently used ones. The study argues that people

tend to use acronyms in order to save time. This is also, according to her, the reason for the

lack of punctuation and capital letters. It is also stressed that empirical evidence from other

studies show that CMC-distinctive abbreviations, acronyms, capitalization etc. are not used as

 

  7  

much as depicted in the media. Furthermore, the study shows that the participants of the study

knew the difference between the language used in CMC and Standard English, and when to

use them in the right context. Squires’ (2009) research also shows that although the best-

known features regarding CMC are not frequent in the corpus, there is one feature standing

out. The non-capitalization of the personal pronoun [I], where the lower case pronoun is used

466 times compared to the 70 uses of the upper case pronoun, proves that CMC-users tend not

to care about capitalization. Lastly, the study concludes that the enregisterment of the

language is based on codified rules of Standard English as well as on the technological

aspects.

In their study, Tagliamonte and Denis (2008) investigate a corpus of 1.5 million words

from teenagers’ instant messaging (IM). IM is a form of synchronous CMC, where the

interactions most often take place between two people chatting directly to one another. This

corpus is compared with a corpus consisting of speech from the same participants of the

research. The two corpora are compared in order to determine if there are any similarities

between spoken language and CMD. The study shows that teenagers tend to use CMD

distinctive features less frequently the older they get. Tagliamonte and Denis (2008) also

argue that although there are numerous instances of misspellings, grammatical errors,

abbreviations and shortenings, these instances are not typical for IM. The research shows that

only 2.4% of the total words are typical IM-forms, with [haha] as the most used expression

and [lol] and [omg] as the most frequent acronyms. The reason for researching frequency is to

determine whether the common perception in the media that CMD-typical varieties are

frequently used or not. The result shows that the thought use of varieties of abbreviations was

highly exaggerated. Looking at abbreviations, such as shortening the pronoun [you] by typing

[u] and the word [later] with [l8r], is explained as a stylistic decision depending on the user.

90% used [you] rather than [u]. The study also claims that the language used online by

teenagers is clearly similar to the language they develop when interacting in the “real” world,

and that abbreviations like [gotta] and [gonna] are as common in CMD as they are in spoken

language. Young teenagers mostly use LOL, whereas older teenagers use [haha] instead when

expressing laughter.

 

  8  

3 Materials and Methods This section describes the material and method used in this study. Problems and limitations of

the study are also discussed.

3.1 Material The study is a quantitative study that explores the frequency of CMD-typical acronyms in two

corpora. The two corpora are collected from two different time periods, 2010 and 2013. Both

corpora consist of 500 posts, with 14,607 words in the 2010 corpus, and 19,651 words in the

2013 corpus. The study is conducted using the most frequently used acronyms in Tagliamonte

and Denis' (2008) corpus, as well as the acronyms described in Crystal's (2006:91f) table of

abbreviations used in CMD (shown in Appendix 1). By searching through the two corpora

several acronyms were excluded from the table since they did not occur on any instances.

Appendix 1 shows the acronyms searched for in this research. There was only one acronym,

[itt], found in this study’s corpora that were not presented in any of the prior studies (Crystal,

2006; Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires: 2009).

The corpora were obtained from one of the largest forums available online, namely the

forum Two plus Two ([www]). Picture 1 shows the first page of the forum.

Picture 1: Two Plus Two’s first page.

 

  9  

The forum consists of different topics, which all include sub-topics related to the specific

topic. For example, under the topic ‘General Marketplace’ as shown in picture 1, forum users

can sell or buy products or services. The last post made in the specific topic is shown, as well

as the total threads and posts in the particular topic.

This particular forum was chosen because, although it is mainly a forum for poker

strategies, it has a wide variety of different discussion topics and all posts are in English. It

also provides printer friendly pages for non-members of the forum to download. As described

by Lindquist (2009:203) there are no reliable automated methods to compile data from forums

into a searchable corpus, and therefore the data must be downloaded manually. The corpora

presented in this study have been edited to remove quoted posts. The reason for this post-

editing is that if a post is quoted several times, it makes the frequency of certain acronyms

higher. Many forums also convert typical CMD acronyms and expressions into emoticons; for

example when [lol] or [haha] are written they are converted into ( :) ).

Two plus Two is an anonymous discussion board. However, the users have to register

with their own alias in order to be able to contribute to the forum. All other forms of

identification, such as email addresses and names, are only visible to the forum

administrators. In this study, user aliases are coded and replaced with identifying numbers to

ensure complete anonymity.

3.2 Method The acronyms searched for in the corpora were taken from Crystal’s (2006:91f) list, which is

presented in Appendix 1. I carried out searches for all the acronyms presented in the list. The

frequency of the specific acronym searched for was divided by the total word count of the

corpora and multiplied by 100 to provide the results in percentages. The acronyms found were

then presented from the most frequently used one to the least. The meanings of the acronyms

were determined from two aspects. First, Crystal's (2006:p91f) list was used to provide the

original meaning of the specific acronym. Second, the meaning was derived out of context of

the whole sentence in my two asynchronous CMC corpora. The rationale was to examine if

the acronym was in context.

3.3 Problems and limitations Many of the acronyms searched for were not found on a single instance, and therefore their

meaning cannot be explained further. As described by Biber (1998:30), to be able to explain

the meaning of words a corpus of a great magnitude is needed. The acronyms found and

discussed in this research are interpreted from the author's interpretations and should not be

 

  10  

regarded as fact. The examples of how the acronyms are used throughout the corpora provide

examples of how their meaning could be interpreted.

In finding adequate material for this research, many forums were looked at before

choosing the Two plus Two forum. A few forums required registration and waiting for a time

period to be able to access the material. Others did not provide printer friendly material and

converted certain acronyms into emoticons. Although the material collected is from a sub-

forum called the student section, it is impossible to determine whether the posters are students

or not.

The study is limited to the most known and used CMD-typical acronyms, as listed by

Crystal (2006:91), and its material is collected from one specific forum. The reason for this is

to explore the frequency of acronyms in an asynchronous environment. Since there are

uncountable numbers of forums where discussions about almost any subject available online

take place, it is impossible to make a generalization of acronym frequency in asynchronous

CMC. However, this study aims to research how frequent acronyms are in one forum, and

explores the changes in frequency at two specific time periods on this forum in order to see if

there are any decreases or increases in frequency over a three year time period. The study also

provides explanations of the meanings of the most frequently used acronyms. The number of

words presented in both corpora is limited, but can still be seen as an introduction to research

on acronym usage in asynchronous environments online.

 

  11  

4. Results In this section the results from the corpora are provided and analysed. As stated earlier in this

essay, previous research has shown that acronyms are used sparingly in CMD. Previous

research also shows that acronyms and expressions for laughter were the most commonly

used items.

4.1 Acronym frequency and meanings from the 2010 corpus The 2010 corpus consists of 500 posts and a total of 14,607 words. A search for the acronyms

in Crystal’s (2006:p91f) list showed that a mere 0.84% of the total words were acronyms. In

concordance with the IM studies, [lol] was the most frequently used acronym, with 42

instances. [imo] and [imho] ‘in my /humble/ opinion’ was used 22 times combined. The most

notable difference between studies of IM-language, such as Tagliamonte and Denis’ (2008)

study, and this study is that laughing expressions such as [haha] and [hehe] are almost non-

existent in this asynchronous environment. The third most frequent acronym is not listed in

Crystal's (2006:91f) list, namely [itt] ‘in this thread’. Table 1 shows the most frequent

acronyms, as well as their respective frequencies.

Table 1: The frequency of acronyms in the 2010 corpus

Word: Frequency Percentage of total

Lol (laughing out loud) 42 0.29%

Imo (in my opinion) 22 0.15%

Itt (in this thread) 13 0.09%

Haha 9 0.06%

Fwiw (for what it’s worth) 7 0.05%

Idk (I don’t know) 7 0.05%

Wtf (what the fuck) 7 0.05%

Ty / thx (thank you, thanks) 6 0.05%

Btw (by the way) 4 0.04%

Total 123 0.84%

Only the most frequent items are listed in the table. There were other acronyms in the corpus

that occurred only once. Those acronyms, such as [omg] and [brb], are included in the total

 

  12  

count. The results show that the frequency on this particular forum is lower than prior studies

on synchronous environments have shown. The examples given in this chapter describe how

the acronyms used in their context are provided. Firstly, the most frequent acronym, [lol], is

discussed.

1) [001] Pretty sure Puma is indicative of lacking kick game. Nike >>>> all if you have kick game.

[002] Lol. Pretty sure it's retarded to only wear one brand. And wtf is kick game? Who needs it? Once

you are down with college, you realize sneakers are not stylish.

[003] LOL @ sneakers. Leather all day every day baby.

2) [004] I'm not surprised that your style =/= my style, but I don't ever see myself rockin boat shoes. I dress

somewhat preppy, but those shoes only go with khaki shorts + no socks. If that's the case, I would rather wear the

polo flip flops i posted earlier on this page.

[005] lol ty. and those are the closest things i could find to compare to my shorts

3 [006] Still not worth 160$...or whatever absurd amount you paid for it

[007] lol poor people ITT

[lol] is used twice as many times as the second most frequent acronym, [imo], is used. Example 1

shows three posters discussing the best shoe brand. As seen by the responses by both poster [002] and

[003], [lol] could be interpreted as ‘laughing out loud’. However, the acronym is sometimes used to

emphasize, as by poster [007] in example 3, a disrespectful laughter towards other posters. [lol] is also

often followed by another acronym or expression. The posters [003] and [005] show examples of this

and also give the interpretation that [lol] is not used to describe someone who is ‘laughing out loud’;

[lol] is rather used as a synonym to an expression for laughter, such as [haha]. As shown in example b

by poster [005], if the sentence were to be read out aloud; it would probably be read as ‘haha thank

you’ rather than ‘laughing out loud thank you’.

The second most frequent acronym in the corpus, [imo], is on every instance found used in

concordance with its full meaning. Examples of how [imo] are used in the corpus follow.

4) [008] Out of curiosity why is Brown shoes >Black?

[009] they aren't imo. cons for black: when i wear black shoes i feel like my feet completely disappear

5) [010] Well I got called out for over dressing at a party/kickback last night

fwiw I knew a most there one being my cousin.

[011] There's absolutely nothing wrong with overdressing IMO. People that hate on others for looking decent

are just pissed they suck at dressing.

[imo] is used throughout the corpus as an explanation of the poster’s opinion, as shown in examples 4

 

  13  

and 5. Another notable acronym is [itt], which is the only acronym in this corpora that is not found in

Crystal’s (2006:91f) list. It is, in my opinion, an acronym that is specific for asynchronous

communication. Examples 5 and 6 show how [itt] is used.

5) [012]: 6'3". Maybe more of your height is in your legs? I typically wear ~34" pants.

[013]: me too!

[014]: short legs ITT. I'm like 5'10 and wear 32''.

[013]: I believe that your the one with long legs.

6) [015]: T-shirts and jeans are a pain in the ass to shop for. You should take at least a day to look around and try

on as many pieces as possible and see which fit you the best.

[016]: lol at some of the people itt

[itt] is used to describe persons, occurrences or situations that take place in the particular thread. As

shown in example 5, poster [014] makes the remark ‘short legs ITT’ regarding how posters [012] and

[013] have, according to him, short legs. The interpretation that his remark means that the people

posting in the thread have short legs is made because of the answer made by poster [013], claiming

that [014] on the other hand has long legs.

With the exception of the two most frequently occurring acronyms in this corpus, [lol] and

[imo], no other acronym shows a frequency higher than 0.1%. Many of the known acronyms are

found throughout the corpus, but cannot be discussed thoroughly because of their infrequency.

Compared to prior studies on acronym frequency (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires, 2009), the

results show that the frequency in this asynchronous corpus is lower than the IM corpora. However,

CMC-typical laughing acronyms and expressions are the most frequent in both types of

communication. The other acronyms typical for IM, as described by Tagliamonte and Denis (2008),

such as [brb], [omg] and [ttyl] are almost non-existent in the corpus of this study. The results indicate

that acronyms are an insignificant part of the language used in this asynchronous discussion topic.

The next section presents the result from the corpus of CMC in 2013.

4.2 Acronym frequency and meanings from the 2013 corpus The data collected from 2013 consists of 500 posts from the same thread on the Two plus

Two ([www]) forum and the total words retrieved from this corpus were 19,651, providing a

larger corpus than the corpus from 2010. Although there were more words in the 2013 corpus,

fewer acronyms were found. With a total of 49 acronyms in the whole corpus, the frequency

percentage is 0.34%. Similar to the corpus from 2010, [lol] was the most frequently used

 

  14  

acronym. The most notable differences between the corpora were that [imo] was only used

eight times in the 2013 corpus compared to the 22 instances in 2010, as well as the non-

existent use of the expression [haha] in 2013. Also, the forum-specific acronym [itt] was only

found on three instances. Table 4.2 presents the frequency of each acronym in the data, as

well as the total frequency of acronyms in the corpus.

Table 2: The frequency of acronyms in the 2013 corpus

Word Frequency Percentage of total

Lol 25 0.15%

Imo 7 0.06%

Ty / thx 6 0.04%

Itt 3 0.03%

Wtf 3 0.02%

Fwiw 3 0.02%

Btw 2 0.02%

Total 49 0.34%

The results show that acronyms, albeit being used, are used sparingly in this corpus. [lol] is

the only acronym occurring more than 10 times, and makes up for more than half of the total

frequency. The frequency percentage for the 2013 corpus is low, not showing any form of

increase of use over time. Examples of how the acronym [lol] is used follows.

6) [017]: In Canada this is really limited. Most of our cards you have a yearly cap that makes this a

negligible benefit unless you want to get into having multiple cards which is just too much work.

[018]: LOL Canada. Using cards is way better than cash for everyday purchases in the USA.

7) [019]: Just found a pair of black/silver club masters for 9.99 lol

8) [020]: polos look better than tshirts

[021]: no, they make me look fat

[020]: lol

As in the corpus from 2010 [lol] is still used either as an expression for laughter, shown in

example 8 by poster [020] who laughs at the comment by poster [021], or as a sarcastic

remark shown by poster [018] in example 6. In the latter example, the remark made by poster

[018] could be interpreted as ‘Ridiculous Canada’. Lastly, the poster in example 7 uses [lol]

 

  15  

to express that he believe that 9.99 was a cheap prize for the particular item.

[imo] was the second most used acronym in 2013 as well as in 2010. Occurring on

seven instances, it made up a mere total of 0.06% of the total words. The following examples

present how [imo] is used.

9) [022]: I already have a brown pair like these wich I like a lot, but it's suede and I m also required

towork for a few weeks in a place where last thing I need is to stand out (and also i need 2nd pair

anyways for the dinner/drinking/cultural things~). Does this style of shoe fit both purposes even if it's

black?

[023]: wingtips and captoes are fine for both formal and casual wear imo. i prefer the wingtips.

10) [024]: AE McAllisters on sale for $250 right now. More than worth the extra hundred and a much

better looking shoe imo. Get the walnut.

[imo] is, as in the 2010 corpus, used to describe the poster’s own opinion. Examples 9 and 10

show how posters give other posters advice, based on their own opinion. The other acronyms

found throughout the corpus were infrequently used, ranging between 0.04% and 0.02%. The

third most used acronym, [ty], was only found on six instances. An example of how [ty] is

used is presented below.

11) [025]: How do I take care of these beauties? Maybe just not wear them to such venues in the first

place, but you get the same effect from walking in the rain and such, so would be good to know how to

avoid letting them ruin.

[026]: Suede eraser + brush. If that doesn't work cover the spots in baking soda, leave overnight,

remove baking soda the next day and scrub with a brush. There are some other things if it's an oil stain or

something, but those two methods should remove most basic spots if you treat them ASAP.

[025]: ty, will go and purchase these things tomorrow

As shown in the example, poster [025] expresses his gratitude for getting the advice by poster

[026], and responds by using [ty] instead of ‘thank you’.

In comparison with prior studies (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires, 2009) and the

results presented from this corpus, it shows that [lol] is the most used acronym but that there

are no other similarities. The main difference is that laughing expressions are more frequent

in IM-conversations, and as the examples provided in this essay show, Crystal’s (2006:31)

argument regarding that it is hard to know if [lol] really denotes ‘laughing out loud’ may be a

correct assumption. The decrease in frequency shown between the two time periods of the

corpora shows indications that the usage decreases in time on this asynchronous forum. The

next chapter discusses possible reasons for this decrease more thoroughly.

 

  16  

5. Discussion As previous studies regarding acronym frequency in CMC show, the usage of CMD-typical

acronyms is at a low rate. The material used in this study shows that their frequency in this

particular asynchronous forum is only 0.52% of the total words when the two corpora are

combined. When comparing the results from the two corpora, the corpus from 2010 has a

0.5% higher frequency than the corpus from 2013. Also, [lol] is the most frequent acronym in

both corpora, and is the only acronym that is used to express meanings in the results. [lol] is

used rather as a synonym to laughing expressions, such as [haha], than an acronym. The

results are an indication that CMD-acronyms are a small part of the language used on forums.

The tendencies shown in this research are that acronym frequency has decreased over a time

span of three years in the Two plus Two forum, as well as [lol] still being the most used

acronym.

In the previous studies (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires, 2009) that were

discussed in this paper, the frequency of acronyms was about 2% higher. The major

difference was that the use of laughing expressions, such as [haha] and [hehe] were much

more frequent in the previous studies than they were used in this study. Moreover, acronyms

such as [brb], [omg] and [ttyl] are almost non-existent in the corpora of this study, whereas

these acronyms were among the most frequent ones in the other studies. On the other hand,

acronyms prominent in the corpora of this study are not listed in Tagliamonte and Denis’

(2008) or Squires’ (2009) studies. Therefore, it is assumable that the language used in

asynchronous environments differs from the language in the synchronous variety. The results

of this study, combined with theories and results from previous research give indications as to

why the language may differ.

The corpus of this study is from an asynchronous chat group where the users are given

more time to reflect on their contributions to the thread. As Squries (2009) argues, CMD-

acronyms are mainly used for saving time, which is not needed in an asynchronous

environment. As stated by Herring (2004:6), users of asynchronous environments are given

more time to reflect over their answers and do not need to hurry them. This may be an

explanation as to why the frequencies shown in table 1 and 2 were lower than the results from

the previous research by Tagliamonte and Denis (2008), and Squires (2009). By comparing

corpora from two variations of CMD, the synchronous instant messaging and asynchronous

forum posting, this study may give an indication of where CMD-typical acronyms are used

the most.

 

  17  

Another aspect discussed thoroughly in Tagliamonte and Denis’ (2008) study, is the age

of the contributors. This study cannot specify the posters’ ages but it can be assumed that all

posters are at least 18 years old, since one must be over 18 to be allowed to play poker online.

Tagliamonte and Denis (2008) argue that the frequency of used acronyms decreases in

correlation with the user’s age. Therefore, an assumption can be made that the posters on Two

plus Two use acronyms sparingly because of their age. This assumption must, however, be

researched more thoroughly to find out whether age is of relevancy for the frequency of

acronyms used or not.

 

  18  

6. Conclusion The aim of this study was to determine if there were any increase or decrease of

acronyms and initialisms on an asynchronous forum in a time period of three years. The data

collected showed a decrease in acronym and initialism usage. Since the frequency only

showed a total of approximately 0.5% and the fact that most users on forums do not know

other users by name combined with the notion that they are users discussing their hobby, the

frequency of acronyms might seem to be low. Nevertheless, when looking at distinctive

features for acronym usage, such as using them as time savers (Squires, 2009) and the factors

of age (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008) the low frequency is more explainable. It is an

indication that posters on this forum take time to formulate their answers, but the results

provided cannot explain if the infrequency of acronyms correlate with the posters age.

Regarding the most frequent acronyms and initialisms, the results show that the most frequent

items in the corpora are [lol] and [imo]. Laughter is not expressed often by the users of Two

plus Two, but when they express laughter they use [lol] instead of expressions such as [haha]

or [hehe]. The most frequent item, [lol], was the only acronym that could be interpreted in

different ways depending on how it was used in its context. [lol] was used both as an

expression for laughter and as sarcasm. One could speculate that the reason for [lol] being the

most used acronym in the majority of CMC corpus-based studies is because it has many

different interpretations. Also, there were only one acronym found, [itt], that were not

provided in Crystal’s (2006:91f) list or in Tagliamonte and Denis’ (2008) or Squires’ (2009)

studies.

Typical CMD-acronyms are less frequent than the usage presented in studies regarding

synchronous chats (Tagliamonte and Denis, 2008; Squires, 2009). However, since forum

discussions online can be about any topic, it is impossible to draw definite conclusions about

the general acronym frequency from a research of just one topic and one thread. However, the

frequency of acronyms proved to be lower than expected in this study. Expressions for

laughter, such as [haha] and [hehe], are described as a distinctive feature in synchronous

chats, but are not in this asynchronous study.

Although the research presented in this paper cannot show a generalization of acronym

frequency on forums, the results show a decrease in frequency in the researched forum’s

thread over time. This study can be regarded as an introduction to further research on

language used on Internet forums. In order to research the subject more thoroughly, a

 

  19  

suggested future study would be to follow frequent forum users for a period of time, in order

to see clearer patterns in CMD-acronyms used in posting on forums.

 

  20  

List of references

Biber, D, Conrad, S & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Crystal, D (2011) Internet Linguistics, Abingdon: Routledge

Crystal, D. (2006) Language and the Internet, London: Penguin Group.

Crystal, D. (2002) The English Language – A guided tour of the language, London: Penguin

Group.

Crystal, D. (2005) The stories of English, London: Penguin Group.

Freiermuth, M. (2011) Debating in an Online World: A Comparative Analysis of Speaking,

Writing, and Online Chat. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse &

Communication Studies (Te&Ta) 2011; 31 (2): 127-151.

Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching

online behaviour. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual

Communities in the Service of Learning (pp: 338-376). New York: Cambridge University

Press. Preprint: http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/cmda.pdf

Lindquist, H. (2009) Corpus linguistics and the description of English, Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press.

Squires (2009), Enregistering Internet Language, Cambridge: Language in Society / Volume

39 / Issue 04 / September 2010, pp 457-492

Tagliamonte, S and Denis, D (2008). Linguistic Ruin? LOL! Instant messaging, Toronto:

American Speech, Vol. 83, No. 1, Spring 2008.

Yule, G (1996). The study of language – second edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press

 

  21  

Online sources

Big Board Rankings (2013) http://rankings.big-boards.com/ Accessed 25 February

Oxford English Dictionary (2013). http://dictionary.oed.com.proxy.lnu.se/ Accessed 5 April

2013.

Two Plus Two Forum (2013). http://twoplustwo.com/ Accessed 25 March

 

  22  

Appendix 1: David Crystal’s (2006:91f) list of known abbreviations

 

  23  

Appendix 1 continued: