Text Messaging and Digital Rhetoric
In Defining and Locating Digital Rhetoric, Robert de Beaugrande and Wolfgang Dressler’s approach to text as “communicative event” is an interesting advancement. Digital text does not limit itself to a public platform. The context of their approach and criteria is more within the realm of text in digital spaces. I want to discuss these elements in the context of text messaging. We often don’t view text messaging as a discourse that requires rhetorical elements, but effective messaging is necessary across all discourse sectors. We can and should implement this criterion in our regular use of text messaging on a personal level. How many times have you received a text and forgot to respond or ignored a text because you couldn’t understand its context? We spend much of our lives texting and we often lose sight of its key function: effective rhetoric.
Cohesion and Coherence in Text Messaging – Not!
Digital text depends on cohesion and coherence to maintain its clarity unlike traditional mediums of personal discourse, like letters and archaeal email. Text messages convey brief, context-dependent messages, meaning rhetorical devices are necessary for meaningful discourse. However, people do not view text messaging as a meaningful act of writing or discourse. Cohesion obeys the linguistic and grammatical rules while coherence ensures that the text message remains intelligible to the reader. Anyone who has had a superficial conversation via text understands that neither rule applies. Text messaging is often fragmented, nonlinear and sometimes incoherent. Society, as a whole, does not view texting as a moment for writing and communicating effectively.
Situationality, Informativity and the Trap of Intertextuality
Text messing is often asynchronous. Shaped by situationality, which is the context of the text function (who is texting, why, urgency, etc). Intertextuality which is the link to other texts and informativity which refers to how much new information a text provides. In this context, I will be using intertextuality in the context of memes, social media links and videos. How often have you been busy and received a social media link from a friend or a meme referencing some previous conversation you’ve had? In this case, we often take into consideration the situationality and informativity of the content. Text messaging with no situational relevance and lacking informativity may lead to discourse neglect.
A Lost Art of Text Messaging: Intentionality and Acceptability
Intentionality refers to the author’s purpose while acceptability refers to whether the reader views the text message as valid, meaningful. Recipients have the potential to be inundated with messages that they perceive to lack intention. This makes acceptability difficult which leads to little to no discourse. Text messages are open to multiple interpretations. Without other elements such as body language, tone of voice and even emojis, rhetoric becomes highly subjective. Texters have lost the art of managing intentionality and must begin to become conscious of how messages might be received. Texting is a participatory act of discourse. Intent is key.
Leave a Reply