Article published In:
Journal of Language and PoliticsVol. 12:3 (2013) ► pp.335–356
Pragmatics meets ideology
Digraphia and non-standard orthographic practices in Serbian online news forums
Serbian is a unique example of active digraphia, that is, the use of two scripts by the same speech community. Writers of Serbian use both the Cyrillic and Latin alphabets in various domains. Moreover, the Internet has brought to the fore competing orthographic variants within the Serbian Latin writing system. Technology-driven and ideologically motivated, non-standard de facto orthographic norms emerge as a result of the medium’s affordances embedded in a given socio-political context. This paper presents a case study on alphabet choice and the use of non-standard orthographic variants on two Serbian news websites, Politika Online and B92. The results show that a two-fold process occurs in Serbian orthographic practices, emerging from Internet discourses from below, including online commentaries: the dominance of the Latin alphabet over Cyrillic; and the stabilization of non-standard Latin orthographic variants. Metalinguistic commentaries of online posters illustrate the tension between pragmatic concerns and language ideologies.
References (26)
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2000. “Non-standard Spellings in Media Texts: The Case of German Fanzines.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 41: 514–533.
. 2007. “Language Choice and Code Switching in German Based Diasporic Web Forums.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, and Susan Herring, 340–361. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
. 2009. “‘Greeklish’: Transliteration practice and Discourse in a Setting of Computer-mediated Digraphia.” In Standard Languages and Language Standards: Greek, Past and Present, ed. by Alexandra Georgakopoulou, and Michael Silk, 221–249. Farnam: Ashgate.
Anis, Jacques. 2007. “Neography: Unconventional Spelling in French SMS Text Messages.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, and Susan Herring, 87–115. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Brborić, Branislav. 2000. О језичком расколу (On linguistic divide). Beograd: CPL.
Feldman, Laurie B., and Dragana Barac-Cikoja. 1996. “Serbo-Croatian: A Biscriptal Language.” In The World’s Writing Systems, ed. by P.T. Daniels, and W. Bright, 769–772. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ferguson, Gibson. (2006). Language Planning and Education. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2009. “Introduction: Greek Language-standardizing, Past, Present and Future.” In Standard Languages and Language Standards: Greek, Past and Present, ed. by Alexandra Georgakopoulou, and Michael Silk, ix–xxviii. Farnam: Ashgate.
Hentschel, Elke. 1998. “Communication on IRC.” Linguistik online 1. Available at: http://www.linguistik-online.de/irc.htm [Retrieved 2 February 2011].
Ivić, Pavle. 2001. “Language Planning in Serbia Today.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1511: 7–17.
Ivković, Dejan. forthcoming. “Cyber-Latinica from Below: A Comparative Pragmalinguistic Analysis of Latinization in Internet Slavic. Language@Internet.
Ivković, Dejan, and Heather Lotherington. 2009. “Multilingualism in Cyberspace: Conceptualizing the Virtual Linguistic Landscape.” International Journal of Multilingualism 6 (1): 17–36.
Jaćimović, Pavle. 2010. Српска ћирилица – нека буде што бити не може. (The Serbian Cyrillic alphabet: Let be what cannot be). Novi Sad: Petar Jaćimović.
Jaffe, Alexandra Mystra. 1999. Ideologies in Action: Language Politics on Corsica. Vol. 31. Walter de Gruyter.
Jensen, John. 1995. “Writing Portuguese Electronically: Spontaneous Spelling Reform.” Hispania 78 (4): 837–845. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/345160
Landry, Rodrigue, and Bourhis Richard. 1997. “Linguistic Landscape and Ethnolinguistic Vitality: An Empirical Study.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 161: 23–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002
Lee, Carmen. 2007. “Linguistic Features of Email and ICQ Instant Messages in Hong Kong.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, ed. by Brenda Danet, & Susan Herring, 184–208. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195304794.003.0008
Lotherington, Heather, and Yejun Xu. 2004. “How to Chat in English and Chinese: Emerging Digital Language Conventions.” RECALL 16 (2): 308–329.
Magner, Thomas. 2001. “Digraphia in the Territories of the Croats and Serbs.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1501: 11–26.
Scotton, Carol Myers. (1998). Codes and Consequences: Choosing Linguistic Varieties. New York: Oxford University Press.
McLuhan, Eric. (1998). Electric Language: Understanding the Present. Toronto: Stoddart.
Palfreyman, D., and M. Khalil. 2007. “A Funky Language for Teenzz to Use: Representing Gulf Arabic in Instant Messaging.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, ed. by B. Danet, and S.C. Herring, 43–63. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Radić, Prvoslav. 2008. “О екстерној стандардизацији српског језика [On external standardization of the Serbian language].” Južnoslovenski filolog 641: 365–383.
Saville-Troike, Muriel. (2003). The Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction. 3rd edn. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Tseliga, Theodora. 2007. ““It’s All Greeklish to Me!” Linguistic and Sociocultural Perspectives on Roman-alphabeted Greek in Asynchronous Computer-mediated Communication.” In The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication Online, ed. by B. Danet, and S.C. Herring, 116–141. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Wardhaugh, Ronald. 2011. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Vol. 281. Wiley-Blackwell.
Cited by (12)
Cited by 12 other publications
Albury-Garcés, Nathan John
2024. Choosing between Cyrillic and Latin for linguistic citizenship in contemporary Serbia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2024:286 ► pp. 161 ff. 
Jung, Youngjoo & Bora Kim
2023. Coexistence of Multiple Writing Systems: Classifying Digraphia in Post-Socialist Countries. Journal of Eurasian Studies 14:2 ► pp. 139 ff.
Fišer, Darja, Nikola Ljubešić & Damjan Popič
2021. From Fringe to Infrastructure: A Researcher’s Journey through South Slavic Language Attitudes on Social Media. Modern Languages Open 1
Thurlow, Crispin
2021. Whenglobalesemeetslocalese: transformational tactics in the typographic landscape – a Bernese case study. Social Semiotics 31:1 ► pp. 88 ff.
George, Rachel
2020. Simultaneity and the refusal to choose: The semiotics of Serbian youth identity on Facebook. Language in Society 49:3 ► pp. 399 ff.
Abu-Liel, Aula Khatteb, Zohar Eviatar & Bracha Nir
2019. Writing between languages: the case of Arabizi. Writing Systems Research 11:2 ► pp. 226 ff.
Huțanu, Monica & Annemarie Sorescu-Marinković
2017. Sisteme ortografice și identitate lingvistică la comunitatea românofonă din estul Serbiei. Diacronia :7
Huțanu, Monica & Annemarie Sorescu-Marinković
2017. Writing systems and linguistic identity of the Vlach community of Eastern Serbia. Diacronia :7
Androutsopoulos, Jannis
2016. Theorizing media, mediation and mediatization. In Sociolinguistics, ► pp. 282 ff.
Androutsopoulos, Jannis
2020. Trans-scripting as a multilingual practice: the case of Hellenised English. International Journal of Multilingualism 17:3 ► pp. 286 ff.
Ivković, Dejan
2015. Towards a semiotics of multilingualism. Semiotica 2015:207
Tasovac, Toma, Saša Rudan & Siniša Rudan
2015. Developing Morpho-SLaWS: An API for the Morphosyntactic Annotation of the Serbian Language. In Systems and Frameworks for Computational Morphology [Communications in Computer and Information Science, 537], ► pp. 137 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 september 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.