THE EVOLUTION OF LINGUOSEMIOTIC SIGNS IN DIGITAL CULTURE AND MECHANISMS OF COMMUNICATIVE MEANING-MAKING
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article investigates the evolution of linguosemiotic signs in digital culture and the mechanisms through which communicative meaning is created in online interaction. In contemporary digital communication, meaning is no longer produced only by verbal language; it is constructed through the interaction of words, hashtags, images, memes, abbreviations, punctuation marks, typography, reaction markers and platform-specific signs. The purpose of the study is to identify the main types of linguosemiotic signs in digital culture and to explain their communicative functions. The research is based on descriptive, semiotic, discourse-analytical and functional-pragmatic methods. The results show that digital signs perform several functions: emotional intensification, contextual specification, identity marking, evaluation, irony, group belonging and communicative economy. The article argues that digital culture transforms traditional linguistic signs into multimodal semiotic units. This transformation requires a new approach to communication analysis, because online meaning is formed not by isolated words, but by a system of verbal and non-verbal codes. The scientific significance of the article lies in explaining digital meaning-making as a linguosemiotic process.
This article investigates the evolution of linguosemiotic signs in digital culture and the mechanisms through which communicative meaning is created in online interaction. In contemporary digital communication, meaning is no longer produced only by verbal language; it is constructed through the interaction of words, hashtags, images, memes, abbreviations, punctuation marks, typography, reaction markers and platform-specific signs. The purpose of the study is to identify the main types of linguosemiotic signs in digital culture and to explain their communicative functions. The research is based on descriptive, semiotic, discourse-analytical and functional-pragmatic methods. The results show that digital signs perform several functions: emotional intensification, contextual specification, identity marking, evaluation, irony, group belonging and communicative economy. The article argues that digital culture transforms traditional linguistic signs into multimodal semiotic units. This transformation requires a new approach to communication analysis, because online meaning is formed not by isolated words, but by a system of verbal and non-verbal codes. The scientific significance of the article lies in explaining digital meaning-making as a linguosemiotic process.
Article Details
Section
References
1. Saussure F. de. Course in General Linguistics. – London: Duckworth, 1983. – 236 p.
2. Peirce Ch. S. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 2. – Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932. – 535 p.
3. Barthes R. Elements of Semiology. – New York: Hill and Wang, 1967. – 111 p.
4. Eco U. A Theory of Semiotics. – Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976. – 354 p.
5. Kress G., van Leeuwen T. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. – London: Routledge, 2006. – 291 p.
6. Crystal D. Language and the Internet. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. – 272 p.
7. Danesi M. The Semiotics of Emoji: The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet. – London: Bloomsbury, 2017. – 192 p.
8. Herring S. C. Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1996. – 314 p.
9. Yus F. Cyberpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. – Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2011. – 353 p.
10. Tagg C. Exploring Digital Communication: Language in Action. – London: Routledge, 2015. – 292 p.
11. Jewitt C. The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. – London: Routledge, 2014. – 544 p.
12. Chandler D. Semiotics: The Basics. – London: Routledge, 2017. – 328 p.