Cover not available
Part of
From West to North Frisia: A Journey along the North Sea Coast
Edited by Alastair Walker, Eric Hoekstra, Goffe Jensma, Wendy Vanselow, Willem Visser and Christoph Winter
[NOWELE Supplement Series 33] 2022
► pp. 133–148

#hokerbeest

Auf der Suche nach Spuren digitaler nordfriesischer Kommunikation

| Europa-Universität Flensburg,
In small language communities like that of North Frisian, the limited communicative range of the small language is a major obstacle when it comes to computer mediated communication in social media networks. Although completely genuine Frisian content is rarely published in public postings on the Instagram network, users do use Frisian language hashtags. This paper shows how different types of hashtags can be classified and argues that the majority of Frisian hashtags will most likely appear in non-Frisian postings.
Article outline
  • 1.Einleitung
  • 2.Instagram als Datengrundlage
  • 3.Datenerhebung
  • 4.Hashtags in Online-Kommunikation
    • 4.1Typen und Funktionen von Hashtags
      • 4.1.1Hashtags als Schlagwort
      • 4.1.2Schlagwort Sprache
      • 4.1.3Regionale Verschlagwortung
      • 4.1.4Zusatzinformation
      • 4.1.5Spielerischer Gebrauch
  • 5.Schlussbetrachtung
  • Literatur
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 10 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/nss.33.09hey
References (25)
Literatur
Belmar, G. & M. Glass. 2019. Virtual communities as breathing spaces for minority languages: Re-framing minority language use in social media. Adeptus 14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belmar, G. & H. Heyen. 2021. Virtual Frisian. A comparison of language use in North and West Frisian virtual communities. Language Documentation & Conservation. University of Hawaii Press.15. 285–315. [URL]
Blommaert, J. 2019. Formatting online actions: #justsaying on Twitter. International Journal of Multilingualism. 16(2). 112–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J. & D. Gorter. 2006. Linguistic landscape and minority languages. In D. Gorter. (Hrsg.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism, 67–80. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. 2006. Language and the Internet. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, D. 2007. Minority languages and the Internet: New threats, new opportunities. In M. Cormack & N. Hourigan. (Hrsg.), Minority language media. Concepts, critiques and case studies, 133–150. Clevedon: Multilinguial Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feierabend, S., Th. Rathgeb & Th. Reutter. 2018. JIM-Studie 2018 – Jugend, Information, Medien. Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 12- bis 19-Jähriger. Stuttgart: Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest.Google Scholar
Gorter, D., H. F. Marten & L. Van Mensel. 2012. Minority languages in the linguistic landscape. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregersen, J. 2020. Meer ist Mehr? Nordfriesland 209. 12–14.Google Scholar
Heyd, Th. & C. Puschmann. 2017. Hashtagging and functional shift: Adaptation and appropriation of the #. Journal of Pragmatics 116. 51–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heyen, H. 2020. #friesisch : Beweggründe und Hindernisse für nordfriesische Kommunikation in digitalen Medien (Estrikken/Ålstråke 113). Kiel: Friesische Philologie/Nordfriesische Wörterbuchstelle, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.Google Scholar
Ivkovic, D. & H. Lotherington. 2009. Multilingualism in cyberspace: conceptualising the virtual linguistic landscape. International Journal of Multilingualism 6(1). 17–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jongbloed-Faber, L., H. Van De Velde, C. Van Der Meer & E. Klinkenberg. 2016. Language use of Frisian bilingual teenagers on social media. Treballs de Sociolingüística Catalana 26. 27–54.Google Scholar
Jongbloed-Faber, L., J. van Loo & L. Cornips. 2017. Regional languages on Twitter. A comparative study between Frisian and Limburgish. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 6(2). 174–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kleih, R. 2019. Föhrer, Friese, Friesländer? Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Beziehung von Sprache und Identität in Nordfriesland (Estrikken/Ålstråke 111). Kiel: Friesische Philologie/Nordfriesische Wörterbuchstelle, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.Google Scholar
Kornai, A. 2013. Digital language death. PLOS ONE 8(10). 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McMonagle, S., D. Cunliffe, L. Jongbloed-Faber & P. Jarvis. 2019. What can hashtags tell us about minority languages on Twitter? A comparison of #cymraeg, #frysk, and #gaeilge. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 40(1). 32–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reershemius, G. 2010. Niederdeutsch im Internet. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen computervermittelter Kommunikation für den Spracherhalt. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 77(2). 183–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Autochthonous heritage languages and social media: writing and bilingual practices in Low German on Facebook. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 38(1). 35–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salo, H. 2009. Using linguistic landscape to examine the visibility of Sámi languages in the North Calotte. In D. Gorter, H. F. Marten & L. van Mensel. (Hrsg.), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape, 243–259. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Schlobinski, P. & T. Siever. 2018. Sprachliche Kommunikation in der digitalen Welt – Eine repräsentative Umfrage, durchgeführt von forsa. URL [URL]
Walker, A. G. H. 2001. Extent and Position of North Frisian. In Horst Haider Munske et al. (Hrsg.), Handbuch des Friesischen/Handbook of Frisian Studies, 263–284. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wikström, P. 2014. Srynotfunny: Communicative functions of hashtags on twitter. SKY Journal of Linguistics 27. 127–152.Google Scholar
Zappavigna, M. 2014. Enacting identity in microblogging through ambient affiliation. Discourse and Communication 8(2). 209–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015. Searchable talk: the linguistic functions of hashtags. Social Semiotics 25(3). 274–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar