Forums

http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/americas/2016/12/world-emojis-display-york-moma-161226184836568.html

Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year 2015 is…

An article for Al Jazeera covers the use of emojis as a bridge to the globalization of language. Recently MOMA had a display of early emojis acknowledging that the use of pictures to communicate by phone has become accepted into our culture and has a significance to the way language is used. The article talks about the ease with which emojis translate, as well as the increase in cultural representations within emojis. In 2015 the Oxford Word of the Year was the emoji ‘Face with Tears of Joy’. This prize was commented on by Casper Grathwohl, President of Oxford Dictionaries, “You can see how traditional alphabet scripts have been struggling to meet the rapid-fire, visually focused demands of 21st Century communication. It’s not surprising that a pictographic script like emoji has stepped in to fill those gaps.” The cultural significance of this for language is interesting. Throughout globalization narratives by Adichie, Achebe, Shteyngart and many others, languages are mixed within the narratives creating a quasi-hybrid narrative, perhaps emojis serve a similar function in personal communications.

This is a very interesting article and I think it speaks directly to the globalization of language. It allows people to communicate across cultures and language barriers. While this development is in many ways a positive step for the future of language, it could also pose problems for clarifying communication in encounters where a person cannot see facial expressions or describe emotion. The true meaning behind many emojis is vague and often people are not aware of the intended message. While these emojis allow people to speak across cultures, it does not account for the lack of clarity that words define for a conversation. For example, when using the popular "poop" emoji, a person could intend the image to translate as "SHIT" or as a lighthearted goofy message. In turn, this creates a problem that the use of words often clarifies. It also takes away from the depth of conversation with words. A person may be able to explain an emotion or idea in 2-3 emojis but the recipient only gets a brief glimpse of what would have traditionally been an in-depth explanation. Maybe I am similar to the protagonist (Lenny) of Gary Shteyngart's novel Super Sad True Love Story, but I cherish the eloquence of words and language (as opposed to abbreviations and emojis) because for me it offers so much more depth to a conversation. Similar to how he collects and holds onto paperback novels I continue to fight against the use of too many abbreviations and emojis. I suppose there will be a day when all language has been adapted and shortened to suit our busy lifestyles and I will be scolded for treasuring the intimacy of the English language.

Perhaps, ideally, emojis are seen as that ultimate goal for a universal language. It may not appear to have a colonial insidiousness associated with languages such as English. At the same time, as already stated, it is still subject to misinterpretation. Just the other day, I sent a message to someone about how I'd seen their name in the liner notes of a music album, and their response was simplified into a "thumbs-up" emoji. Am I to take that as an acknowledgement, or sarcasm?

I feel it is merely too much simplification at hand. I feel like there has been a shift from the emoticons that were meant to be supplementary for text-based communication, now changing into the emojis that serve to replace. Sure, it has its perks to communicate with other cultures regardless of language barriers, but I am also skeptical that it may depreciate language. Personally, I am not sold by the idea that it is a time-saver - would such a notion undermine the thought and feeling behind the words people articulate? Would I as a recipient feel somewhat undervalued if the person I'm communicating with resorted to a simplified image as opposed to making time to send a few words?

I am not a person who practices such short-forms, anyway. I feel as though it facilitates a social society warned against from writers such as Harlan Ellison, and succumbed to schedule in the dystopian metropolis of Georg Simmel's design - but that is merely my eloquent perception.