THE INFLUENCE OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE INTERNET AND SOCIAL NETWORKS ON STUDENTS' SPEECH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55640/Keywords:
internet language, social media, student speech, leetspeak, transliteration, emoticons, clip thinking, spelling errors, speech culture, language ecology, digital communication, orthographic competence.Abstract
This article provides a systematic analysis of the psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic effects of internet and social media language on students' speech. In the modern information society, the primary communication environment for adolescents and school-age youth has shifted from real-life interaction to virtual spaces, resulting in significant changes in both their written and oral speech. The study examines key features of internet language – graphic deformation (leetspeak), abbreviations, emoticons and stickers, transliteration, syntactic simplification, orthographic freedom, as well as phenomena such as "surface literacy" and "clip thinking" characteristic of social media. The article demonstrates how these phenomena lead to errors in dictations and essays, lexical limitations, stylistic decline in students' oral speech, and negative impacts on academic writing in schools and higher education institutions. At the same time, the creative and expressive aspects of internet language – language games, neologism creation, the principle of economy – are objectively assessed. Practical recommendations include fostering "language ecology" awareness among students and developing pedagogical strategies that encourage correct writing even on social media platforms. In conclusion, internet language is an inevitable and undeniable phenomenon, but reducing its negative effects is possible through the development of students' metalinguistic awareness.
Downloads
References
1.Baron, N. S. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. Oxford University Press.
2.Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the internet (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
3.Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student guide. Routledge.
4.Herring, S. C. (2013). Discourse in web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent. In D. Tannen & A. M. Trester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 1–25). Georgetown University Press.
5.Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. Routledge.
6.Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning (3rd ed.). Open University Press.
7.Lee, C. (2007). Affordances and text-making practices in online instant messaging. Written Communication, 24(3), 223–249.
8.Merchant, G. (2001). Teenagers in cyberspace: An investigation of language use and language change in internet chatrooms. Journal of Research in Reading, 24(3), 293–306.
9.Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. Methuen.
10.Plester, B., Wood, C., & Joshi, P. (2009). Exploring the relationship between children's knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy outcomes. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(1), 145–161.
11.Rosen, L. D. (2012). iDisorder: Understanding our obsession with technology and overcoming its hold on us. Palgrave Macmillan.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.

Germany
United States of America
Italy
United Kingdom
France
Canada
Uzbekistan
Japan
Republic of Korea
Australia
Spain
Switzerland
Sweden
Netherlands
China
India