Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Applied Linguistics Review

Editor-in-Chief: Wei, Li

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.351

Online
ISSN
1868-6311
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Does context really collapse in social media interaction?

Malgorzata Szabla / Jan Blommaert
Published Online: 2018-04-20 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0119

Abstract

‘Context collapse’ (CC) refers to the phenomenon widely debated in social media research, where various audiences convene around single communicative acts in new networked publics, causing confusion and anxiety among social media users. The notion of CC is a key one in the reimagination of social life as a consequence of the mediation technologies we associate with the Web 2.0. CC is undertheorized, and in this paper we intend not to rebuke it but to explore its limits. We do so by shifting the analytical focus from “online communication” in general to specific forms of social action performed, not by predefined “group” members, but by actors engaging in emerging kinds of sharedness based on existing norms of interaction. This approach is a radical choice for action rather than actor, reaching back to symbolic interactionism and beyond to Mead, Strauss and other interactionist sociologists, and inspired by contemporary linguistic ethnography and interactional sociolinguistics, notably the work of Rampton and the Goodwins. We apply this approach to an extraordinarily complex Facebook discussion among Polish people residing in The Netherlands – a set of data that could instantly be selected as a likely site for context collapse. We shall analyze fragments in detail, showing how, in spite of the complications intrinsic to such online, profoundly mediated and oddly ‘placed’ interaction events, participants appear capable of ‘normal’ modes of interaction and participant selection. In fact, the ‘networked publics’ rarely seem to occur in practice, and contexts do not collapse but expand continuously without causing major issues for contextualization. The analysis will offer a vocabulary and methodology for addressing the complexities of the largest new social space on earth: the space of online culture.

Keywords: context collapse; social action; analysis of interaction; symbolic interactionism; Facebook discussion

References

  • Auer, Peter & Aldo DiLuzio (eds.). 1992. The contextualization of language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Blommaert, Jan. 2008. Grassroots literacy: Writing, identity and voice in Central Africa. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Blommaert, Jan. 2015. Chronotopes, scales and complexity in the study of language in society. Annual Review of Anthropology 44. 105–116.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Blommaert, Jan. 2017. Four lines of sociolinguistic methodology. Ctrl+Alt+Dem 8 March 2017. https://alternative-democracy-research.org/2017/03/08/three-lines-of-sociolinguistic-methodology/ (accessed 20 June 2017).

  • Blommaert, Jan. 2018. Durkheim and the Internet: Sociolinguistics and the Sociological Imagination. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

  • Blommaert, Jan & Anna De Fina. 2017. Chronotopic identities: On the timespace organization of who we are. In Anna De Fina, Jeremy Wegner & Didem Ikizoglu (eds.), Diversity and super-diversity. Sociocultural linguistic perspectives, 1–15. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

  • Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic interactionism: Perspectives and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

  • boyd, dana. 2011. White flight in networked publics? How race and class shaped American teen engagement with myspace and Facebook. In Lisa Nakamura & Peter Chow-White (eds.), Race after the Internet, 203–222. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Cicourel, Aaron. 1973. Cognitive sociology: Language and meaning in social interaction. Harmondsworth: Penguin Education.Google Scholar

  • Davis, Jenny & Nathan Jurgenson. 2014. Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society 17/4. 476–485.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Dugay, Stefanie. 2016. ‘He has a way gayer Facebook than I do’: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society 18/6. 891–907.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Garfinkel, Harold. 2002. Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

  • Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2017a. ‘Whose context collapse?’ Ethical clashes in the study of language and social media in context. Applied Linguistics Review 8/2–3. 1–32.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2017b. Small stories research: A narrative paradigm for the analysis of social media. In Anabel Quan-Haase & Luke Sloan (eds.), The Sage Handbook of social media research methods, 266–281. London: Sage.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, Erving. 1961. Encounters: Two studies in the sociology of interaction. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, Erving. 1964. The neglected situation. American Anthropologist 66/6 (part 2). 133–136.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, Erving. 1971. Relations in public: Microstudies of the public order. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

  • Goodwin, Charles. 2007. Participation, stance and affect in the organization of practice. Discourse and Society 18(1). 53–73.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Goodwin, Charles & Marjorie Harness Goodwin. 1992. Context, activity and participation. In Peter Auer & Aldo DiLuzio (eds.), The contextualization of language, 77–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Goodwin, Charles & Marjorie Harness Goodwin. 2004. Participation. In Alessandro Duranti (ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology, 222–244. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Gumperz, John. 1982. Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Gumperz, John. 1992. Contextualization revisited. In Peter Auer & Aldo DiLuzio (eds.), The contextualization of language, 39–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Gumperz, John. 2003. Response essay. In Susan Eerdmans, Carlo Previgniano & Paul Thibault (eds.), Language and interaction: Discussions with John J. Gumperz, 105–126. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Karimzad, Farzad & Lydia Catedral. 2018. ‘No we don’t mix languages here’: Ideological power and the chronotopic organization of ethnolinguistic identities. Language in Society 47/1. 89–113.Google Scholar

  • Lillis, Theresa. 2013. The sociolinguistics of writing. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

  • Marwick, Alice & dana boyd. 2014. Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New media & Society 167. 1051–1067.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Marwick, Alice & danah boyd. 2010. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media and Society 13/1. 114–133.Google Scholar

  • Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

  • Rampton, Ben. 2006. Language in late modernity: Interactions in an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Rampton, Ben. 2017. Interactional sociolinguistics. Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, paper 205. https://www.academia.edu/30796363/WP205_Rampton_2017._Interactional_Sociolinguistics (accessed 19 June 2017).

  • Schutz, Alfred. 1967. The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar

  • Sibona, Christopher. 2014. Unfriending on Facebook: Context collapse and unfriending behaviors. Paper, 47th Hawai’I International Conference on Systems Science. https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/hicss/2014/2504/00/2504b676.pdf (accessed 19 June 2017).

  • Strauss, Anselm. 1993. Continual permutations of action. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Tagg, Caroline, Philip Seargeant & Amy Brown. 2017. Taking offence on social media: Conviviality and communication on Facebook. London: Palgrave Pivot.Google Scholar

  • Vitak, Jessica. 2012. The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 56/4. 451–470.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, Xuan & Sjaak Kroon. 2016. The chronotopes of authenticity: Designing the Tujia heritage in China. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, paper 169. https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/09a3cb76-8da8-4f78-b8e2-dce8d75983fd_TPCS_169_Wang-Kroon.pdf (accessed 20 June 2017).

  • Wortham, Stanton & Angela Reyes. 2015. Communication beyond the speech event. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-04-20


Citation Information: Applied Linguistics Review, ISSN (Online) 1868-6311, ISSN (Print) 1868-6303, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0119.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in