The Many Ways We Write Online
by Tanisha Pandey
Think about the last time you checked your phone. Maybe you sent a quick, half-finished message on WhatsApp, switched apps to post something carefully-worded on Instagram, and then scrolled through BeReal without typing anything at all. Chances are, you didn’t just change what you communicated, but how – by using different words, different styles, maybe even different emojis. These differences are not random. They are shaped by a set of factors, such as the type of content and writing styles one is in contact with, what those styles represent, and how one makes use of this information to design their own writing styles. These habitual language practices give a user the sense that certain ways of speaking feel more authentic and intuitive than others. For example, after October 7, expressions of support for Palestine on social media often shifted away from explicit use of words like ‘Palestine’ and instead made use of the watermelon emojis to address the topic. This helped users and activists respond to platforms’ algorithmic moderation of sensitive terms. Similarly, YouTube’s content filters flag words like ‘abortion’ as sensitive or inappropriate. As a result, YouTubers increasingly rely on euphemisms such as ‘unalive’ while addressing related themes. In both cases, what people say and how they say it is shaped by platform-specific rules, the audience, and their expectations.
The subfield of sociolinguistics that studies language in digital spaces concerns itself with questions of how writing online functions socially. Here, digital writing styles, just like spoken language, are tied to ideas of who a particular Tweet’s author could be and what their social positioning within the broader society could look like. Accruing over interactions, repetition, and collective beliefs, certain ways of typing (or writing) come to be associated with particular kinds of people, moods, or communities.
A comprehensive example of this comes from Florian Busch’s 2021 PhD dissertation on digital writing among German-speaking adolescents. Busch shows that people have surprisingly clear ideas about what counts as ‘normal’ writing on different digital platforms. In everyday messaging with friends, especially on WhatsApp, certain features are widely perceived as default, such as lowercase nouns, missing punctuation, emojis, and/or repeated letters. Together, these features contribute to a distinct digital writing style, which, for the participants he interviewed, often contrasted with writing for school. Additionally, Busch demonstrates that deviations from what is considered to be default writing conventions are not arbitrary. For example, a full stop at the end of a message can signal annoyance. Careful punctuation can be read as serious, distant, or educated. Emojis repeated excessively might index affection, irony, or stereotypical personas. These meanings only work because there is already a shared expectation of what normal digital communication looks like. Writing styles, then, become resources for positioning oneself socially in relation to others.
A similar logic underlies Jannis Androutsopoulos’ 2023 study of the so-called “indignation mark” (also understood as the graphic sequence <!!1!> and its variants) on German-language use on Reddit. What may look like a typo to some carries symbolic meaning for others. Contrary to expressing emphasis, this sort of punctuation stylizes an exaggerated, outraged voice often used in interactions where writers seek to typically distance themselves from a topic or person. Over time, this sign has become associated with mocking conservative or nationalist positions. Once recognized as such, the sign is used to position oneself politically. Here again, small graphic details carry ideological weight within specific online communities.
The advancements undergone by this sub-discipline of sociolinguistics also inform research conducted at the University of Bern. A recent SNSF-funded project at the University of Bern’s Department of German Studies examines how German speakers juggle multiple conversations across platforms on their smartphones. Using detailed case studies, the researchers have shown that users constantly recalibrate how they write depending on who they are talking to, as well as where and when they are talking. WhatsApp, Instagram, language choice, emojis, message length, and even response time all become tools for managing relationships and identities in parallel. What this research makes clear is that everyday digital communication is not chaotic or careless; it is highly patterned, socially meaningful, and deeply strategic.
So, the next time you hesitate before sending a message, switch platforms to quickly post something, or take a second to choose an emoji over a word, you are not overthinking it. You are navigating a complex sociolinguistic landscape, one that is shaped by algorithms, communities, and the many facets of the internet you move through every day.
References
Androutsopoulos, J. (2023). Punctuating the other: Graphic cues, voice, and positioning in digital discourse. Language & Communication, 88, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2022.11.004
Busch, F. (2021). Digitale Schreibregister: Kontexte, Formen und metapragmatische Reflexionen [De Gruyter,]. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110728835
Busch, F., Lallo, J., & Täge, J. (2025). Navigating digital repertoires: Translingual practices in smartphone communication across platforms. Discourse, Context & Media, 68, 100949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2025.100949
Spitzmüller, J., 2013. Metapragmatik, Indexikalität, soziale Registrierung. Zur diskursiven Konstruktion sprachideologischer positionen. Zeitschrift für Diskursforschung 1 (3), 263–287. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-97551.
Ilbury, C., Grieve, J., & Hall, D. (2024). Using social media to infer the diffusion of an urban contact dialect: A case study of multicultural London English. Journal of Sociolinguistics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12653
