A listener has a question about emoticons, those little sideways symbols you type to suggest emotions in informal electronic writing. You know, like using a colon, dash, and a capital P to stick out your tongue like this 😛 or using a colon, dash, and small letter d to say "Yum!" :-d But if you're going to toss emoticons into your prose, the caller asks, how in the world do you punctuate them?
Listen here:
[audio: http://feeds.waywordradio.org/~r/awwwpodcast/~5/334758615/080714-AWWW-emoticons-minicast.mp3 ]
Download the MP3 here (4.7 MB).
To be automatically notified when audio is available, subscribe to the podcast using iTunes or another podcatching program.
The question came up whether emoticons are parts of speech or are punctiuation. When they are part of a written sentence, clearly they are punctuation, with the same role as question marks and exclamation marks: they modify the meaning of the sentence. As punctuation or stand-alone emblems in a written context, they are a graphic representation of the same facial expressions infants use to communicate with adults. It seems as certain as the standardized spelling resulting from the printing press that emoticons are here to stay and with long-term near-universal use will come to be accepted as officially proper. Those of us who treasure writing as a means to transcend the limitations of conversation, rather than a quicker way to coverse electronically, will continue to regard emoticons as intellectually lazy excuses for linguistic baby-talk.
I think it is worth noting that emoticons are not entirely a new concept. Wire and radio telegraph operators had codes for communicating laughter and affection, and "XO" has a longer history as "hugs and kisses" on informal personal letters and notes. The limits of written or transmitted correspondence has led to the invention and reinvention of abbreviated linguistic modes, and these modes have coexisted for centuries. The question of punctuation seems moot to me, because emoticons should be reserved for the most abbreviated and informal of modes where punctuation is optional.
I also feel the need to disagree with Mr. Sonka on this note. Human languages are flexible enough to include multiple modes for multiple contexts, and human beings are flexible enough to switch between modes without a moment's thought. I see no conflict between using emoticons and abbreviated modes in chat or informal email, and laying down the red ink on documents that do not conform to the styles I enforce as an editor.
>>>The question of punctuation seems moot to me, because emoticons should be reserved for the most abbreviated and informal of modes where punctuation is optional.<<<
Kirk, I think this is a really good point. So here's a question for you: How about emoticons in emailed business correspondence? This came up in a talk I gave yesterday to a group of attorneys. On the one hand, if one is being sarcastic, one would hope that you could simply convey it with the tone of your writing. But there's some psychological research out there suggesting that people overestimate their ability to convey sarcasm in writing. So if one's sending, say, semi-formal business correspondence by email, is it advisable to use emoticons lest one's humor be misunderstood?
Those of us who treasure writing as a means to transcend the limitations of conversation, rather than a quicker way to coverse electronically, will continue to regard emoticons as intellectually lazy excuses for linguistic baby-talk.
Bud, I agree with you to some extent. I'd like to think my writing's clear enough that people can always read my meaning, but as I said above, we often tend to overestimate our ability to convey exactly what we mean.
I'm curious: What about if you're just texting someone quickly? I assume, you wouldn't mind an emoticon or two then? (All of this has been much on my mind lately for a presentation I'm developing about email communication, so I'm quite interested to hear other people's opinions about this.)