| Revision as of 22:49, 22 February 2007 view source68.117.133.149 (talk) →Analysis← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:18, 22 February 2007 view source 24.137.88.45 (talk) →AnalysisNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| == Analysis == | == Analysis == | ||
| LOL | |||
| Many people are critical of "LOL" and its related acronyms, and there is some debate over their use. | |||
| Lacetti, professor of humanities at ], and Molsk in their essay entitled ''The Lost Art of Writing''<ref>{{cite news|author=Silvio Lacetti and Scott Molsk|url=http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0603/08special_writing.html|title=Cost of poor writing no laughing matter|work=]|date=]}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release|publisher=]|title=Article co-authored by Stevens professor and student garners nationwide attention from business, academia|date=]|url=http://howe.stevens.edu/babbio/pressroom/20031022-368-writingoped.html}}</ref> are critical of the acronyms, predicting reduced chances of employment for students who use such acronyms, stating that "Unfortunately for the writer of this article, people who believe this tend to have no friends and spend most of their time sitting at home jerking off to grammar text books." | |||
| Yunker and Barry<ref>{{cite conference|booktitle=Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, University of Quebec at Montreal, 22-23 June 2006|title=Threaded Podcasting: The Evolution of On-Line Learning|author=Frank Yunker and Stephen Barry|pages=516|editor=Dan Remenyi|publisher=Academic Conferences | |||
| Limited|id=ISBN 1905305222}}</ref> in a study of on-line courses and how they can be improved through ] have found that these acronyms, and emoticons as well, are "often misunderstood" by students and are "difficult to decipher" unless their meanings are explained in advance. They single out the example of "ROFL" as not obviously being the abbreviation of "rolling on ''the'' floor laughing" (emphasis added). Haig<ref name=Haig /> singles out "LOL" as one of the three most popular initialisms in Internet slang, alongside "BFN" ("bye for now") and "IMHO" ("in my humble opinion"). He describes these acronyms, and the various initialisms of Internet slang in general, as convenient, but warns that "as ever more obscure acronyms emerge they can also be rather confusing". Bidgoli<ref>{{cite book|title=The Internet Encyclopedia|author=Hossein Bidgoli|pages=277|date=2004|publisher=John Wiley and Sons|id=ISBN 0471222011}}</ref> likewise states that these initialisms "save keystrokes for the sender but might make comprehension of the message more difficult for the receiver", that "lang may hold different meanings and lead to misunderstandings especially in international settings", and thus advising that they be used "only when you are sure that the other person knows the meaning". | |||
| Hueng<ref name=Hueng />, in discussing these acronyms in the context of performative utterances, points out the difference between ''telling'' someone that one is laughing out loud and actually laughing out loud: "The latter response is a straightforward action. The former is a self-reflexive representation of an action: I not only do something but also show you that I am doing it. Or indeed, I may not actually laugh out loud but may use the locution "LOL" to communicate my appreciation of your attempt at humor." | |||
| ]<ref>{{cite book|author=David Crystal|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2001|id=ISBN 0-521-80212-1|title=Language and the Internet|date=]|pages=34}}</ref> notes that use of "LOL" is not necessarily genuine, just as the use of smiley faces or grins is not necessary genuine, posing the rhetorical question "how many people are actually 'laughing out loud' when they send LOL?". Franzini<ref name=Franzini /> concurs, stating that there is as yet no research that has determined the percentage of people who are actually laughing out loud when they write "LOL". | |||
| Victoria Clarke, in her analysis of telnet talkers,<ref>{{cite web|title=Internet English: an analysis of the variety of language used on Telnet talkers|author=Victoria Clarke|date=]|url=http://www.american.edu/lfs/tesol/2003%20Paper--Lg%20of%20the%20Internet.pdf|format=PDF}}</ref> states that capitalization is important when people write "LOL", and that "a user who types ''LOL'' may well be laughing louder than one who types ''lol''", and opines that "these standard expressions of laughter are losing force through overuse". Egan<ref name=Egan /> describes "LOL", "ROTFL", and other initialisms as helpful as long as they are not overused. He recommends against their use in business correspondence because the recipient may not be aware of their meanings, and because in general neither they nor emoticons are (in his view) appropriate in such correspondence. Lindsell-Roberts<ref>{{cite book|title=Strategic Business Letters and E-Mail|author=Sheryl Lindsell-Roberts|pages=289|publisher=Houghton Mifflin|id=ISBN 0618448330}}</ref> shares that view and gives the same advice of not using them in business correspondence, "or you won't be LOL". | |||
| == Spread from written to spoken communication == | == Spread from written to spoken communication == | ||
Revision as of 23:18, 22 February 2007
LOL (also written lol) is a common element of Internet slang used, historically, on Usenet but now widespread to other forms of computer-mediated communication, and even spread to face-to-face communication. It is an abbreviation for "laughing out loud" or "laugh out loud" "LOL" is one of many initialisms for expressing bodily reactions, in particular laughter, as text, including initialisms such as "ROTFL" ("roll(ing) on the floor laughing"), a more emphatic expression of laughter, and "BWL" ("bursting with laughter"), above which there is "no greater compliment" according to Magid.
The list of initialisms "grows by the month" and they are collected along with emoticons and smileys into folk dictionaries which are circulated informally amongst users of Usenet, IRC, and other forms of (textual) computer-mediated communication. These initialisms are controversial, and several authors recommend against their use, either in general or in specific contexts such as business communications.
The use of LOL to express laughter is unrelated to other uses of the abbreviation, many of which, such as "lots of love", predate the Internet. LOL has also replaced the more-obvious "Ha!" that letter writers use.
Analysis
LOL
Spread from written to spoken communication
This article contains phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA. For the distinction between , / / and ⟨ ⟩, see IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters."LOL", "ROTFL", and the other initialisms have crossed from computer-mediated communication to face-to-face communication. Teenagers in North America now sometimes use them in spoken communication as well as in written, with "ROFL" pronounced "roʊf•ful" or "raf•ful" and "LOL" pronounced "lʌl" or "lahl" for example. David Crystal — likening the introduction of "LOL", "ROTFL", and others into spoken language in magnitude to the revolution of Johannes Gutenberg's invention of movable type in the 15th century — states that this is "a brand new variety of language evolving", invented by young people within five years, that "extend the range of the language, the expressiveness the richness of the language". Commentators disagree, saying that these new words, being abbreviations for existing, long-used, phrases, don't "enrich" anything; they just shorten it.
Conversely, a 2003 study of college students by Naomi Baron found that the use of these initialisms in computer-mediated communication, specifically in instant messaging, was actually lower than to be expected. The students "used few abbreviations, acronyms, and emoticons". The spelling was "reasonably good" and contractions were "not ubiquitous". Out of 2,185 transmissions, there were 90 initialisms in total, only 31 CMC-style abbreviations, 49 emoticons, and only 76 occurrences of "LOL".
Variations on the theme
Despite it being an English acronym, it is often used by non-English speakers as-is, even in other scripts (eg. Template:Lang-ar, Hebrew: לול, Cyrillic: лол).
Translations in widespread use
Most of these abbreviations are usually found in lowercase.
- lal or lawl — can refer to either a pseudo-pronunciation of LOL, or the German translation (although most German speakers use "LOL"). Saying "lawl" is sometimes meant in mockery of those who use the term LOL, and not meant as serious usage. However, "lawl" can sometimes stand for "laughing a whole lot".
- ｗ — used commonly in 2channel, a Japanese equivalent of the acronym. (w stands for Warashii, which means 'to laugh' in Japanese.)
- lolz — plural form occasionally used in place of "LOL".
- mdr — French version of the expression "LOL", meaning "mort de rire". Roughly translated, it means "dead from laughing".
Other languages
Lol is a Dutch word (not an acronym), which, conveniently, means 'fun' ('lollig' means funny).
LOL in Sinhalese refers to a giant douche.
Parody
In an episode of Monk (TV series) called "Mr. Monk and the Really, Really Dead Guy", as shown in a promo clip on USA Network during the week of February 19, 2007: The title character begins to use the Internet, and is so happy at receiving his first e-mail that he tells a colleague, "it's enough to make me 'LOL' out loud".
References
- Matt Haig (2001). E-Mail Essentials: How to Make the Most of E-Communications. Kogan Page. p. 89. ISBN 0749435763.
- Louis R. Franzini (2002). Kids Who Laugh: How to Develop Your Child's Sense of Humor. Square One Publishers,
Inc. pp. 145–146. ISBN 0757000088.
{{cite book}}: line feed character in|publisher=at position 23 (help) - Michael Egan. Email Etiquette. Cool Publications Ltd. pp. 32, 57–58. ISBN 1844811182.
- ^ Jiuan Heng (2003). "The emergence of pure consciousness: The Theatre of Virtual Selves in the age of the Internet". In Peter D. Hershock, M. T. Stepaniants, and Roger T. Ames (ed.). Technology and Cultural Values: On the Edge of the Third Millennium. University of Hawaii Press. p. 561. ISBN 0824826477.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link) - Eric S. Raymond and Guy L. Steele (1996). The New Hacker's Dictionary. MIT Press. p. 435. ISBN 0262680920.
- Lawrence J. Magid (2001). The Little PC Book: Windows Xp. Peachpit Press. p. 287. ISBN 0201754703.
- Steven G. Jones (1998). Cybersociety 2.0: Revisiting Computer-Mediated Community and Technology. Sage Publications Inc. p. 52. ISBN 0761914625.
- Neda Ulaby (2006-02-18). "OMG: IM Slang Is Invading Everyday English". Digital Culture. National Public Radio.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - jadedlistener (2006-02-25). "OMG, that's, like, so uninteresting!".
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Kristen Philipkoski (2005-02-22). "The Web Not the Death of Language". Wired News.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)
Further reading
- Russ Armadillo Coffman (1990-01-17). "smilies collection". Newsgroup: rec.humor. Retrieved 2006-12-22.
{{cite newsgroup}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) — an early Usenet posting of a folk dictionary of abbreviations and emoticons, listing "LOL" and "ROTFL" - Connery, Brian A. (1997-02-25). "IMHO: Authority and egalitarian rhetoric in the virtual coffeehouse". In Porter, D. (ed.). Internet Culture. New York: Routledge. pp. 161–179. ISBN 0415916844.
{{cite book}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - Ryan Goudelocke (August 2004). "CREDIBILITY AND AUTHORITY ON INTERNET MESSAGE-BOARDS" (PDF). Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College: 22.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help)