Cover not available
Article published In:
(Im)politeness and Moral Order in Online Interactions
Edited by Chaoqun Xie
[Internet Pragmatics 1:2] 2018
► pp. 352–378

The meta-conventionalisation and moral order of e-practices

A Japanese case study

| Dalian University of Foreign Languages | Hungarian Academy of Sciences
| Tsuru University
This paper overviews the phenomenon of the meta-conventionalisation of interpersonal practices in the context of computer-mediated communication. The term ‘meta-conventionalisation’ refers to the coding of the conventional interpersonal practices of a particular group, or various groups, in the form of entertainment as films and novels. The word ‘meta’ refers to the fact that such pieces of artwork narrate a set of conventional practices from a quasi-observer point of view, without involving their audience in these practices as language users – in this sense they are different from good practice guides (typically described as ‘netiquette, in the context of e-pragmatics), which assume that readers will internalise the practices they describe. Meta-conventionalisation has been an understudied phenomenon, in spite of representing an important aspect of our daily lives. We illustrate how this phenomenon operates by examining a Japanese case study: a popular novel which features the online interactions of a group of otaku, that is, asocial young people who lock themselves up and interact in highly specific ways.
Keywords: meta-conventionalisation, interpersonal interaction, conventional practices, moral order, Japanese, otaku
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background: Previous research on meta-conventionalisation & Japanese e-language, and the data studied
    • 2.1Meta-conventionalisation
    • 2.2Research on Japanese e-language
    • 2.3Data
  • 3.Analysis
  • 4.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 January 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00016.kad
References (50)
References
Aida, Miho. 2005. “Otaku o meguru gensetsu no kousei: 1983nen-2005nen sabu karuchaa shi.” [Constituents of remarks on otaku: History of sub-culture 1983–2005]. Hiroshima Shudai Ronshu 461: 17–58.Google Scholar
Brooks, Max. 2012. World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War. London: Cuckworth Overlook.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary. 1999. “‘Why to be normal?’: Language and identity practices in a community of nerd girls.” Language in Society 28(2): 203–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calhoun, Cheshire. 2009. “What good is commitment?” Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy 119(4): 613–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, Haruko. 2008. Socializing Identities through Speech Styles: Learners of Japanese as a Foreign Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2010. “Conventionalised impoliteness formulae.” Journal of Pragmatics 421: 3232–3245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, and Jane Demmen. 2011. “”Nineteenth century English politeness: Negative politeness, conventional indirect requests and the rise of the individual self.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics 12(1/2): 49–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danet, Brenda, Susan C. Herring. 2007. “Introduction: Welcome to the multilingual Internet.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, and Susan C. Herring, 3–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar. 2010. “A genre approach to the study of im-politeness.” International Review of Pragmatics 2(1): 46–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Graham, Sage Lambert. 2008. “A manual for (im)politeness?: The impact of the FAQ in an electronic community of practice.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, ed. by Derek Bousfield, and Miriam A. Locher, 281–304. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hirai, Tomohisa. 2007. “channeru no komyunikeeshon ni kansuru kousatsu: intaa netto to senron keisei ni kansuru giron e no hihan.” [Communication in ‘2 Channel’: A critical approach to the internet and public opinion arguments]. Media Communication 571: 163–174.Google Scholar
Holt, Richard. 2004. Dialogue on the Internet: Language, Civic Identity, and Computer-mediated Communication. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Hung, David W. L., and Maich Nichani. 2000. “Constructivism and e-learning: Balancing between the individual and social levels of cognition.” In New ‘Literacies’: Educational Response to a Knowledge-based Society: Proceedings of the ERA-AME-AMIC Joint Conference 2000, ed. by Jessie Ee, Berinderjeet Kaur, Ngan Hoe Lee, and Yeap Ban Har, 144–150. Singapore: Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
Inoue, Ippei. 2006. “Netto shakai no wakamono kotoba.” [Youth language in network society]. Gengo [Language] 35(3): 60–67.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2008. “Historical pragmatics.” Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5): 894–906. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. “Courtesy and politeness in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight .” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia: The Journal of Adam Mickiewicz University 49(3): 5–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z. 2013. Relational Rituals and Communication: Ritual Interaction in Groups. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
forthcoming. The Language of Ritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kádár, Dániel Z., and Marcel Bax. 2013. “In-group ritual and relational work.” Journal of Pragmatics 581: 73–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z., and Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z., Michael Haugh, and Melody Wei-Lin Chang. 2013. “Aggression and perceived national face threats in Mainland Chinese and Taiwanese discussion boards.” Multilingua 32(3): 343–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katsuno, Hirofumi, and Christine Yano. 2007. “ Kaomoji and expressivity in a Japanese housewives’ chat room.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, and Susan C. Herring, 278–300. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam. A. 2010. “Introduction: Politeness and impoliteness in computer-mediated communication.” Journal of Politeness Research 61: 1–5. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marsden, Liz, and Dániel Z. Kádár. 2017. “The pragmatics of mimesis: A case study of intercultural email communication.” FLEKS: The Scandinavian Journal of Intercultural Theory and Practice 4(1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, Janet. 2009. “Stance and distance: Social boundaries, self-lamination, and metalinguistic anxiety in white Kenyan narratives about African occult.” In Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, ed. by Alexandra Jaffe, 72–91. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Laura. 2004. “You are doing Burriko! Censoring/scrutinizing artificers of cute femininity in Japanese.” In Japanese Language, Gender, and Ideology: Cultural Models and Real People, ed. by Shigeko Okamoto, and Janet Shibamoto-Smith, 148–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Morrow, Phillip R. 2012. “Online advice in Japanese: Giving advice in an Internet discussion board.” In Advice in Discourse, ed by. Holger Limberg, and Miriam A. Locher, 255–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Yukiko. 2003a. “Establishing a community of practice on the internet: Linguistic behavior in online Japanese communication.” In Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Meeting of the Berkley Linguistics Society, ed. by Pawel M. Nowak, David Mortensen, and Corey Yoquelet, 337–348. Berkeley, CA: Berkley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
. 2003b. “Linguistic innovations and interactional features of casual online communication in Japanese.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 9(1). [URL] (accessed 17 May 2017). DOI logo
. 2007. “Linguistic innovations and interactional features in Japanese BBS communication.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, and Susan C. Herring, 163–183. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Japanese BBS websites as online communication: (Im)politeness perspectives.” Language @Internet 51. [URL] (accessed 3 March 2017).
. 2010a. “Impoliteness in Japanese BBS interactions: Observations from message exchanges in two online communities.” Journal of Politeness Research 6(1): 33–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010b. “Linguistic and sociocultural studies of Japanese computer-mediated communication: A literature review.” Toyogakuen University Kiyo 181: 329–345.Google Scholar
Ohta, Amy Synder. 1999. “Interactional routines and the socialization of interactional style in adult learners of Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 31(11): 1493–1512. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okamoto, Shigeko. 2016. “Variability and multiplicity in the meanings of stereotpyical gendered speech in Japanese.” East Asian Pragmatics 1(1): 5-37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Okamoto, Takeshi. 2014. “Otaku tourism and the anime pilgrimage in Japan.” Japan Forum 27(1): 12–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paternoster, Annick. 2015. Cortesi e scortesi. Percorsi di pragmatica storica da Castiglione a Collodi. Rome: Carocci.Google Scholar
Pérez-Sabater, Carmen. 2012. “The linguistics of social networking: A study of writing conventions of Facebook.” Linguistik Online 56(6). [URL].
Planchenault, Gaëlle. 2010. “Virtual community and politeness: The use of female markers identity and solidarity in a transvestites’ website.” Journal of Politeness Research 6(1): 83–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheuermann, Larry, and Gary Taylor. 1997. “Netiquette.” Internet Research 7(4): 269–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, and Dániel Z. Kádár. 2016. “The bases of (im)politeness evaluations: Culture, the moral order and the East-West debate.” East Asian Pragmatics 1(1): 73–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina. 2001. “Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A frame-based approach.” Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina, and Dániel Z. Kádár. 2017. “Convention and ritual (im)politeness.” The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic Politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 171–195. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tobin, Joseph. 1998. “An American otaku (or a boy’s virtual life on the net).” In Digital Diversions: Youth Culture in the Age of Multimedia, ed. by Julian Sefton-Green, 106–127. London: University College of London Press.Google Scholar
Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wuthnow, Robert. 1989. Meaning and Moral Order: Explorations in Cultural Analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whyte, William F. (ed.). 1991. Participatory Action Research. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yokoya, Sumikazu. 2006. “‘Densha otoko’ de yomi toku intaa netto komyunikeeshon.” [A sociological study of the Internet communication on Densha otoko]. Sugiyama Jogakuen University Kenkyu Ronshuu 371: 1–10.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Parvaresh, Vahid
2022. On the morality of taking offence. Language & Communication 87 ► pp. 60 ff. DOI logo
Blitvich, Pilar Garcés-Conejos & Dániel Z. Kádár
2021. Morality in Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 385 ff. DOI logo
Ran, Yongping, Linsen Zhao & Dániel Z. Kádár
2020. The rite of reintegrative shaming in Chinese public dispute mediation. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 30:1 ► pp. 40 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Topics and Settings in Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 247 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.