Author Archives: Benjamin

Innbilt mangel på norsk terminologi

Anne Mette Sundes artikkel «Inspect kniven i inventoryen min.» Språklig praksis i et nytt domene (2016) tar for seg den språklige praksisen som oppstår i det norske Counter-Strike- miljøet. I artikkelen presenterer hun språkdata fra et norsk Counter-Strike e-sportslag, som viser at deres kommunikasjon er sterkt preget av engelske ord og uttrykk. Jeg skal nå forsøke å presentere grunnleggende trekk ved dette språket og undersøke bakgrunnen for den utbredte bruken av engelsk i sjargongen i CS-miljøet.

Datamaterialet samlet inn i Sundes artikkel tyder på at det mest prominente språklige trekket ved sjargongen som oppstår i CS-miljøet, nok er de engelske verb- og substantivstammene som er integrert i ellers norske setninger. Dette kan vi se i disse eksemplene hentet fra artikkelen

(8) a. Han prøvde å pushe et spot på mappet
b. Bare gamble litt på hvilken site
c. Selger min smurf account
d. Fant traden
e. Jeg kommer til å holde den scouten
f. Inspect kniven i inventoryen min                                                                                     (s. 143)

De engelske lånordene mottar norske bøyninger/morfemer for å integreres inn i de norske setningene. Noen ganger funker denne integreringen, andre ganger oppstår det «doble lag» av flertallsmarkeringer, der ord får engelske og norske flertallsmorfemer, som for eksempel ordet «Skinsene». Her får det engelske ordet «skin» både den engelske flertalls-suffikset «-s» og den norske «-ene».

Jeg tror det er viktig når en skal undersøke denne sjargongen, å legge merke til hvilken type ord som blir lånt fra engelsk. De fleste av eksemplene som er gitt i Sunde sin artikkel, er ord som representerer objekter og konsepter som hyppig oppstår i typiske CS runder. Jeg har deltatt i dette miljøet og jeg har praktisert denne CS-sjargongen. Jeg, som spillerne nevnt i Sundes artikkel, vil understreke at denne språkbruken har oppstått blant norsktalende spillere hovedsakelig av praktiske grunner. De fleste av uttrykkene som blir brukt (eksempelvis: «knife,» «headshot,» «skins» og «flashbang») kan bli definert som kjernelån, som vil si at ordene som blir lånt fra engelsk allerede har fullverdige ord på norsk. Så hvorfor bruker vi da disse ordene istedenfor «kniv», «hodeskudd», «skinn» og «sjokkgranat»? I artikkelen sier Sunde at: «[…] kjernelån [er] i større grad motivert ut fra et ønske om å identifisere seg med den kulturen som er forbundet med giverspråket» (Sunde, 2016:147). Dette utfordrer da mitt syn på sjargongens oppkomst som praktisk. Det klirrer for meg, for det siste jeg vil gjøre er da å identifisere meg med en haug alt for følelsesmessig engasjerte tenåringer. På den andre siden bruker nok jeg (og forhåpentligvis resten av spillerne) bare disse ordene og uttrykkene når jeg spiller eller snakker om spillet – noe som kan tyde på at jeg ønsker å identifisere meg med denne gruppen når jeg er i en passende kontekst.

CS er et online spill, noe som gjør at enhver spiller vil møte folk fra fremmedspråklige land. Videre er det også på sett og vis et lagspill, noe som gjør kommunikasjon til et viktig aspekt. Når en da spiller med folk som ikke er fra Norge og ønsker å kommunisere, må en ty til vår tids lingua franca (engelsk) for å kommunisere. Hvis du er ny i spillet, vil du bli møtt med en hel del engelske uttrykk (som de nevnt tidligere) som sikter til spesifikke objekter og konsepter i spillet. Jeg tror at denne nye spilleren vil differensiere mellom ordenes betydning i den virkelige verden og betydningen i spillet. I eksempel 8b. blir uttrykket «site» nevnt. Dette er en forkortet versjon av «bombsite», så spilleren vil ikke tenke på ordet «site» som det engelske ordet for plass eller posisjon – det er mer spesifikt én av de to plassene der et lag kan plante en bombe for å vinne runden.  Her blir det som på overflaten egentlig er et kjernelån, til et kulturelt lån (et ord som blir lånt for å fylle begrepsmessige «hull» i språket det blir lånt inn i), og dette er tilfellet med de fleste kjernelånene vi finner i Sundes data. Siden norske spillere
(og potensielt andre fremmedspråklige spillere) underbevisst skiller mellom ordenes betydning i den virkelige verden og i spillverden, vil denne sjargongen fortsette å inneholde betydelige innslag av engelsk. Sunde konkluderer med mer eller mindre det samme:

«Som vist i 4.1 har flere ord og uttrykk en mer spesifikk betydning i CS-sammenheng enn det utenforstående er i stand til å oppfatte; mange av de engelske termene i dataspillspråket har en betydningsnyanse som de tilsvarende norske ordene mangler, og som dermed gjør dem vanskelig å oversette.»     (s. 155)

På grunn av dette blir det som i utgangspunktet er kjernelån omgjort til kulturelle lån. Hvis det er slik at kulturelle lån blir importert for å kompensere for manglende ord i språket de blir lånt inn i, og kjernelån er motivert ut fra et ønske om å identifisere seg meg giverspråket, kan man si at sjargongens praktiske funksjon overskygger den sosiale, ettersom det bare er 8,3% av dataene hos Sunde som kan kvalifiseres som kjernelån. På den andre siden er disse lånordene i en slags gråsone mellom de to kategoriene, ettersom det faktisk finnes fullverdige norske termer for de engelske ordene som blir hyppig brukt i CS-miljøet. Disse norske ordene har bare ikke blitt integrert godt nok inn i miljøet, slik at de lett kan knyttes til de spesifikke objektene og konseptene i spillet.

The correlation between the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations behind minority language usage on social media

Language is intertwined with one’s sense of identity. It can expose where you are from, what socio-economic class you belong to, and what culture/environment you identify with. When a person with two languages chooses to write in a minority language on social media, there is a lot that can be said of that person from that piece of information alone, but pinpointing the exact motivation behind this practice is a more tedious task. Writing in a minority language on social media is a conscious choice driven by potentially multiple reasons. I will now attempt to list and elaborate on a few of these motivations, using Niamh Ní Bhroin’s study (2013: 219-238) on minority language users and their motivations for using said language for communication purposes.

Bhroin’s study establishes three separate categories of motivation. The first category is called intrinsic motivation. This category defines the motivations of the people that regard social media as a platform for learning languages and for increasing competence in languages. These people might want to write in a minority language to maintain/increase proficiency and to keep the language from becoming a heritage language. In other words, they consciously write in said language for practice, for fun, and for other forms of individual gain… and not because of external pressure.

The second category is self-determined extrinsic motivations. Self-determined extrinsic motivation is, to me, the most obvious reasoning behind minority language-usage. The first thing I think about a person that is capable of writing in the majority language but chooses to write in the minority language is that he/she does this in order to show that they are proud of their language and wishes to keep it alive by using it. Bhroin (2013:223-24) says that:

[…]extrinsic motivation drives activities aimed at outcomes that are separable from specific practices. Most human activities are therefore considered to be extrinsically motivated. Extrinsic motivation is also considered to undermine intrinsic motivation as rewards, deadlines or other external pressures undermine individual autonomy.

I consider the participants that mean that they write in the minority language for this reason alone as idealists, as they do not seek any form of personal gain from the practice. The only real gain I can see from this is relatedness – to feel allied by origin, kinship, etc. However, I do believe that this is more of a consequence of writing in a minority language than a motivation for writing it. When writing on social media you usually reach out to many, and when a minority language is involved there is only a minority of the people reading that will receive the message. This is a problem as it seemingly limits the reach of your message. The majority will probably not understand what you are saying, but they still get some sort of message – a message that you are proud of your language and that you are not afraid to stand out from the crowd. This both supports and complicates the pure self-determined extrinsic motivation because as you promote the use of minority languages you also collect a personal social gain, which taints the pureness of your cause and reduces the distance between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations.



Google Images
The third category – externally-determined extrinsic motivation – is in some ways the middleman of intrinsic and self-determined extrinsic motivation. Practices driven by externally-determined extrinsic motivations are more driven by external pressure than intrinsic motivations and do not align with any ideological goal of promoting the language. The people in this category write in a minority language on social media in order to develop and promote professional careers. For example, if you wish to increase your authenticity as, say, a minister of culture, then writing in a minority language might do the trick. In other words, people that are driven by this reason write in a minority language for personal gain but does so because they are pressured by something external (norms, culture, values, etc).

There are multiple reasons behind people’s choice of writing in a minority language on social media. Some do it because it is fun, because they enjoy challenging themselves and because they want to maintain their proficiency in the language. Others do it because they want to protect and promote the language because by exposing the public to the language, they can increase the public’s tolerance for languages other than their own. The last group mentioned in Bhroin’s study is the group that actively write minority languages on social media to satisfy the external pressures put on them by society; be it jobs that require them to, or parents that force them to. As with most things in life, the motivations behind people’s use of minority languages are more complicated and immense than what the study might indicate. Perhaps some are driven by the need to distinguish themselves from the majority to feel special. Perhaps some want to show off their bilingual skills. Perhaps some do it to impress a love interest. The list goes on. The point is that there are so many reasons for why people might want to write in a minority language, and most of the reasons mentioned in the study seem to run into each other. Bhroin says in her article that, “most human activities are […] considered to be extrinsically motivated.” I disagree to some extent. I believe that it is a combination of the two, because of the correlated nature of external and internal motivations. Even though I am writing this text because of the external pressure caused by this assignment’s deadline, I do it because of an internal motivation to pass this class and to get a proper job. One could argue that the only reason I go to school and want to get a job is because modern society is constructed in a way that makes us believe that this is what life is supposed to be. On the other hand, studies such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs tells us that humans internally strive for self-actualization, which can only be obtained by having a job that makes you feel like you are living up to your potential and makes you feel that you are part of something bigger than yourself. I am way off topic but my point is that there is probably not just one reason for why people choose to write in a minority language on social media. If a person writes with intrinsic or extrinsic motivations in mind, it is important to note that one category does not exclude the other and that both might consciously or subconsciously motivate the practice.

The term “language” covers both speech and writing. While these two aspects are unified under the abstract label of language, they are usually considered distinctive, due to their large number of differences. For example: speech is as old as man, relies primarily on our hearing capability, is more rapidly produced than writing, etc. Writing is relatively new and is produced differently than speech because it can only be written and read – making it deviate from traditional speech production models. These are some of the things that make us perceive speech and writing as different. However, technological advances have started to challenge our understanding of these two communication methods as “separated” and “different.” Social media has brought with it a new kind of language that in some ways unites these seemingly opposing phenomena.
The rise of social media, has given birth to a language that I consider the lovechild of speech and writing. The language resembles written dialect, but nonetheless, it still comes off as a blend between writing and speech. This lovechild is a written language that, even more so than dialect, mirrors the way people talk. For Norwegians (or other countries with alphabetic scripts), it replaces the common written language’s lettersith letters that actually get articulated in the writer’s spoken language. For example – instead of writing “kompliment” a user of this language should prefer the spelling “komplimang” because it represents the way he pronounces the word. This is where it gets tricky, because there is seemingly no difference between alphabetic scripts, dialect writing and this new social media language. I think the part of the lovechild language that separates it from the former two, are its heavy use of acronyms and abbreviations. Instead of writing Oh my god, the users of this language would prefer the acronym “OMG,” and “TBH” instead of “oh my god” and “to be honest.” Some Norwegians write “d” instead of “det,” which represents the way they pronounce “det” and at the same time it doesn’t – because the ortophonic way of rendering it would be /de/. I believe the reason for the heavy presence of abbreviations and acronyms are in part practical, and very much intertwined with technology. The early cell phones had an impractical system for writing, which made people start to feel the need to omit certain parts of words in order to communicate faster and more effortless. I believe that the generation growing up with these cell phones kept this practical language solution through the rapid evolution of cell phones, and transferred the language over to the improved social media platforms. This is how the lovechild language develops and evolves with technological advances, at least that is how it develops for me. I have developed an annoying habit when I chat. I chat like this:


instead of writing everything I want to say in a single chatbubble, I break simple messages into several bubbles. The reciever of my ruthless break with standard chatting ettiquette will receive several “pings” and/or vibrations. I have not always chatted this way, it started with a particular facebook update that made it more difficcult to appear hard to get. The update where facebook implemented the “seen” feature made me subconsciously start to treat chatting as a form of speech (as can be seen in the picture above). Maybe this way of writing better represents the way that we speak, because when you answer instantanious with the first thing that crosses your mind it can indicate that you feel pressure from an awareness of the other person watching you receive their question and compose the answer. Imagine someone asking you a question, and then you just stand there staring at them for 30 seconds before you respond – uncomfortable, right? These are the things that make me believe that social media language is a blend between speech and writing, and that this language’s development is closely tied to technological advances.

On the other hand, the heavy use of acronyms doesn’t quite fit into this language that is supposed to be the lovechild of writing and speech, because it does not contribute to the unification of these communication methods, if anything it further distances the two. We say “oh my god” not “O.M.G.” Well, at least we used to say “oh my god”… which brings me to my next point. Languages have a tendency to devour weaker languages. There is a genuine fear that our time’s lingua franca – English – will devour Norwegian. I understand this fear seeing as to how I as an English language and literature student sometimes find myself in a position where I struggle to find the Norwegian word for things, well I know that the Norwegian word for things is ting. In addition, code switching between Norwegian and English has become a reoccurring phenomenon among Norwegians (especially young people).  There are plenty of possible reasons for this depending on the context, but our time’s increasing globalization is, to me, the prime suspect. Some consider this intensified use of English words in Norwegian speech as the start of the Norwegian language’s undoing. As a countermeasure, the Norwegian Language Council frequently convert and translate English words. To stop us from killing our language, they have replaced bacon with “beiken,” hashtag with “emneknagg” and keyboard with “tangentfjøl”. While these words are charming, they are not widely known because what kind of person keeps himself up to date with the Language Council’s shenanigans, when you can be keeping up with the Kardashians?

The nature of the language that inhabits social media is hard to define. While it is definitely written language, it also embodies features that traditionally belonged to speech – making it some kind of hybrid. Even though this language’s heavy use of acronyms and abbreviations seemingly separates writing and speech (because it creates letter combinations that does not get articulated in the spoken language), it can also be seen as a form of unification. Speech is a more rapid form of communication, and these acronyms and abbreviations contributes to a shortening of the writing process, which to some degree makes it adopt this rapid feature of speech. This language, like all languages, constantly changes and evolves… and perhaps it changes faster than standard written and spoken language as it is more closely tied to  technologic advances. Nevertheless, social media has compromised our understanding of speech and writing as completely separated methods of communication.