Social inclusion and social exclusion as a tool for reflecting social processes in the lexical neoformations of youth English slang

DOI:

The communicative nature of social categories, the discursive problems of social reality and the fragmentary construction of sociocultural reality in speech, including the class stratification of modern society and the communicative regulation of social processes in the context of globalization, require more detailed study in order to understand the communicative mechanisms and processes of their manifestation in the lexical nominations of modern realities. Against the backdrop of various active political, economic and social changes in English-speaking countries, including the active process of mediatization of society, there are intensifying linguistic processes of social exclusion – social inclusion, which make the chosen research topic relevant, socially significant and promising.

The purpose of the article is to determine the mechanisms and patterns of modern communicative practices in the public space and interpersonal Internet communication, as well as their lexicalization through the use of English slang neoformations of stylistically reduced communication register in speech.

Russian scientists of the St. Petersburg Linguistic School (B.A. Larin, L.P. Yakubinsky, E.D. Polivanov) were among the first to address the problems of social linguistics, who developed ideas in line with the macrosociolinguistic and variational nature of language. The main ideas in understanding the factors contributing to the successful construction of Internet communication and the formation of Internet linguistics as an innovative research area in the modern paradigm of linguistics at various times have been introduced by A.A. Atabekova, A.A. Berkovich, M.B. Bergelson, T.Yu. Vinogradova, E.N. Galichkina, E.I. Goroshko, A.V. Zubov, R.G. Leibov, A.V. Kuznetsov, L.F. Kompantseva, I.S. Lutovinova, O.I. Maksimenko, N.B. Mechkovskaya, N.S. Baron, David Cristall.

The scientific novelty lies in determining the sociocultural parameters of the youth sociolect by means of slang neologisms that, as constituents of sub-standard youth vocabulary, specify the communicative practices of social exclusion and social inclusion.

It seems to us expedient to identify the linguistic mechanisms of objectification of the processes of exclusion and inclusion based on the material of English youth slang. This will make it possible to verify the relevance and social significance of the categories of social exclusion and social inclusion, as well as to draw up a typology of the corresponding linguistic ways of expressing modern realities, and thereby to clarify the ideas about these phenomena that have developed in society.

Material and methods

The categories of social exclusion – social inclusion, despite their opposition, show a fairly close relationship. Thus, social inclusion can be considered as a process of overcoming social exclusion. That is why the category of social exclusion is described to a greater extent in the scientific literature. Social exclusion and social inclusion in the conditions of social stratification in the most general form is represented primarily by the opposition “friend – foe”. Moreover, the second component of this opposition is more structured, since it is associated with the processes of various kinds of social isolation.

The source of material for our research was the lexical units of youth English slang published in the Slang Bang telegram channel, specializing in the vocabulary of youth sociolect. A subcorpus of the period from 2019 to 2023 is used, which contains 760 slangisms applied to the context of various communicative situations. To identify the communicative features of the categories of social exclusion – social inclusion, youth sociolect was selected. This is due to the fact that on this empirical material it is possible to determine a number of sociolinguistic features that specify the social processes designated by these lexemes. Accordingly, it allowed to highlight groups of lexical units that objectify the categories of social exclusion – social inclusion from the aspect of social stratification.

Analysis of selected lexemes from the corpus of youth slang made it possible to reveal a number of sociolinguistic features that specify the concepts designated by these lexemes and, respectively, groups of linguistic units that objectify the categories of social exclusion – social inclusion in the communicative aspect.

The study used general scientific methods of description, analysis, synthesis, generalization and linguistic methods proper – structural-semantic, contextual analysis, elements of component and word-formation analysis.

Results and discussion

The fundamental characteristic of modern society is fast communication, therefore, variable forms of human interaction in society and in the Internet are becoming more popular, the main tool of which is the use of specific slang lexical units. The semantics of such neoformations, their graphic form and communicative situations of their usage serve as lexical indicators of social inclusion – social exclusion, i.e. it is a way of selfestrangement and self-expression. The scientific research interest in the sociological phenomenon of exclusion and inclusion originates in the works of foreign sociologists, who later come to realize the direct relationship of social processes and their reflection in the language. In this regard, in 1974 R. Lenoir in his work “Les Exclus” introduced the concept of social exclusion designed to determine socially unprotected groups of the population [Lenoir, 1974].

Subsequently, two approaches to the interpretation of these social phenomena emerged – French and Anglo-Saxon. The French view is focused on social solidarity, the integration (inclusion) of the individual into society. Exclusion is seen primarily as a consequence of group monopoly, the compulsion of a social order that serves the interests of included communities and presupposes recognition of the privileged rights of communities and the protection of their integrity, which requires respect for social minorities that do not encroach on the integrity of the community [Gomien, Harris, Zwaak, 1998]. In the Anglo-Saxon tradition, inclusion is understood as individual freedom of expression, equality of rights for all social communities, while social exclusion is associated with the irrelevant implementation of social rights.

Paloma Fernández de la Hoz characterizes the concept of social exclusion, associating it primarily with such a social problem as poverty [Fernández de la Hoz, 2004]. Dominik Schnapper and Robert Castel propose a similar approach, while highlighting additional social signs of exclusion such as insecurity, vulnerability, and marginalization. Analogic views are reflected in the works of Martin Cronauer and Petra Bur as well [Schnapper, 2010; Castel, 1995]. However, it should be noted that the concept of social exclusion is not universal, since the phenomenon of exclusion is multidimensional, has no clear boundaries and is ambivalent, i.e. interpreted by researchers depending on the focus of studying the problem.

In the framework of Anglo-American studies, Tony Bilton proposes an “inside-outside” dichotomy within the concept of social exclusion, i.e. excluded and those who exclude [Bilton, 2002]. Eric Wesselman and James Wirth consider social exclusion and inclusion in relation to communication theory, analyzing the relationships of people within a community, taking into account the mutual influence on interpersonal relationships. Thus, social exclusion depends on the conditions and participants in the communication process, their social status and ideological ideas about what it means to belong to society. In our work, we will start from the definition given by E. Wesselman and analyze the lexical units of open and closed social groups from the position of inclusion and exclusion of their vocabulary in relation to the literary norm of the English language. It should be noted that the antinomy of social exclusion – social inclusion has been studied to a greater extent precisely by exclusion, which is dictated by the need to describe its negative impact on the development of literary language from the standpoint of its ecology and in order to develop possible ways to overcome it [Shamne, Milovanova, 2023a].

The study of objective features in the language of exclusion and inclusion is based on already developed and tested approaches in sociology. However, in linguistics these phenomena have been developed fragmentarily and there is a certain lacunarity in their comprehensive study. The theory of “Social inclusion through the enhancement of linguistic culture” is being developed at the Komensky University, which describes the communicative strategies of the exclusion discourse as ways of social distancing. At the same time, the discourse of exclusion is understood as a way of verbal reflection on alien phenomena by denying them, i.e. exclusion from the social space, as a result at the linguistic level, a bipolar opposition “friend – foe” stands out [Kozharnovich, 2021].

Werner Kallmeyer describes the linguistic process of social integration and exclusion regarding the problem of xenophobia and identifies three important parameters in communication: 1) social stereotypes – generalizing statements about social groups (for example, Americans are tolerant); 2) social prejudices – attitudes associated with social stereotypes; 3) social discrimination – assumes that people are put at a disadvantage because of their membership in a certain social group or category [Kallmeyer, 2002].

Considering the communication parameters developed by W. Kallmeyer, as well as socio- and linguistic-cultural factors influencing the processes of social exclusion – inclusion, it should be noted that slang is a marker of intra-group solidarity and it acts as a correlate of social groups, providing them with a common specific experience that shares random values and world-views. It is used as a tool that allows for the dichotomy of “friend – foe”, and is also applied as a means of influencing and characterizing social identity and acts as a guarantee of intra-group cohesion of the individual team. Consequently, the social phenomena of linguistic exclusion and inclusion are most vividly embodied through the use of substandard vocabulary in speech and its further transition into the vocabulary of a literary language in the process of adaptive assimilation [Titarenko, 2022].

Nowadays, one of the sources of replenishment of the literary vocabulary is the youth language, whose speech characteristics and speech behavior are based on the creation and usage of unique neoformations. First of all, this is due to the openness of the youth social group to innovation, their desire for neophilia and their readiness to coin new lexicological means of communication, manifested in the exclusivity of the vocabulary. Youth slang is a marker of the linguistic development of society, since the formation of slangisms directly depends on the ongoing social reforms. The lexemes of the substandard vocabulary quickly react to these changes and reflect in their denotative meaning nominations of phenomena occurring in the social life of native speakers, through the transmission of subjective attitude, evaluation and expression [Shamne, Majer, 2023]. Speech culture and lexical richness could be characterized by the lexical means and their functions in various communicative situations. The analysis of youth vocabulary indicates an increase in speech illiteracy, lexical poverty, and, as a result, of the exclusion and inclusion of slangisms, dialectisms and colloquialisms in the literary language in an attempt to satisfy communicative requests for solving specific issues. This demonstrates the linguistic instability of society, degraded changes in language competencies and the inability to use the means of literary language to verbalize the speaker’s thoughts.

The constant search for means of individual self-expression through national identity in the process of psychological formation of a person is considered to be elementary and constitutive components of the human character development. In the process of this search, language does not act as a tool, but as a “playground”, accordingly, the word creation turns into a creative activity for the generation of neologisms. In his works, V.Z. Sannikov determines such a linguistic phenomenon as a “language game” [Sannikov, 2002, p. 312]. In the process of developing a linguistic personality, after mastering a literary language, the phase of “language profiling” begins, which is evidence of linguocognitive evolution, and as a result it motivates the youth to create a stylistically marked language code. This stage of linguistic maturation is purely individual, manifests itself in varying degrees of intensity under the influence of external sociocultural factors and is perceived as a game. At the same time, the individual need of young people for selfexpression, manifestation of creative potential and highlighting their uniqueness is revealed at the linguistic level, namely in the tendency towards neophilia and the creation of pristine slangisms, witty statements and puns, which clearly demonstrates the implementation in the speech of such a linguistic phenomenon as social inclusion [Shamne, 2023].

The use in speech of neologisms created by a certain social group is a means of linguistic representation of psycho-emotional manifestations with different connotations, both positive and negative. This is due to the lack of expressive means of the literary language capable of satisfying the need to show peak emotional displays (in most cases, representatives of youth subcultures), to reflect the “inner world” and subjectivity of perception of what is happening within the framework of established group value guidelines [Troyanova, 2008]. Specific culturally determined slangisms is reflected within the standard vocabulary transformation, which is perceived by representatives of declassed communities as an insolvent and static language toolkit that helps to verbalize their communicative needs. While slang quickly adapts to new conditions and communication situations, therefore it evolves, influencing the literary language and is borrowed by it [Shamne, Milovanova, 2023b].

The following examples demonstrate the implementation of social inclusion – exclusion based on the use of youth slang in the framework of the Internet discourse. The dichotomy “friend – foe” is realized in pejorative slangisms that characterize “strangers” in connection with ideological differences and group goal settings. In sentence (1) I’m tired of dealing with flexting guys who only talk about their cars and their money instead of actually getting to know me, the slangism flexting characterizes people who everywhere talk about their incredible achievements in their professional activities (usually within the Internet communication), which are actually far-fetched and non-existent. At the same time, such statements are criticized because they do not have an evidence base, therefore, they cause an emotional outburst in the message recipients, motivating them to create a neologism capable of reflecting the entire spectrum of emotional tension with shades of pejorative and sarcastic meaning of neoformation. Thus, the use of sub-standard lexemes in speech contributes to the opposition of social communities of “friends” and “foes”. Exclusion is realized in the use of specific group vocabulary with the possibility of its subsequent transition to the vocabulary of one social group. We would like to note once again that all the examples presented in this work are in the public domain and are taken from the Slang Bang telegram channel (URL: https://t.me/s/ slangbangb).

Sentence (2) I thought we had a good connection, but he turned out to be one of those breadcrumbers who only texts me once in a while to keep me interested also demonstrates the addresser’s affective emotional state, conveyed by the meaning of the slang word breadcrumbers, which describes people who choose tactics of minimizing communication, but without losing the social connection, i.e. providing the interlocutor with exactly as much attention as is necessary in order to maintain interest in one’s person while leveling out more friendly relationships. This slangism implicitly demonstrates a manifestation of disdain and antipathy, a kind of exclusion of a person from a category of a friend; on the other hand, this slang word requires understanding its meaning and sharing it among the participant of one socially closed community. Thereby, social inclusion or exclusion in slang neoformations is realized through the cryptographic function of speech, since the vocabulary used for these purposes remain poorly understood or not at all interpretable lexemes for representatives of other social groups.

The presence of slangisms as marked lexical units in speech of particular social group representatives fulfills the purpose of identifying like-minded people who have similar views and attitudes to social reality, common stereotypes and share identical values. This approach allows to maintain existing social contacts and establish new social relationships through the peculiarity of inclusive speech, in which slang acts as a tool for the language code of personality recognition, since it can only be interpreted by the individuals who are familiar with such specific linguistic reality. Coined slang neoformations act as a means of social inclusion (a marker of belonging to a certain social group) and can transmit information of linguistic and extralinguistic types (interests, social status, age, plans for the future, etc.). It could be achieved through slang vocabulary, which can be marked phonetically (sound design borrowed from the dialect), morphologically (structural features of word-formation mechanisms) and grammatically (deliberate violation of traditional grammar rules). Thus, speech behavior and speech habits make it possible to carry out the “friend – foe” and signal a readiness to interact with representatives of a particular social group by “included” lexical units in speech.

As evidence of social inclusion in speech, let us consider the following examples of informal communication of the youth within the framework of the Internet interaction:

• (3)    A wave of AIgiarism is one of the reasons the use of artificial intelligence raises concerns ;

• (4)    I was talking to a chatbot for so long that I started to experience chatbotnesia ;

• (5)    He has a severe case of AIphobia , which makes him very anxious about sharing his data with any device that has AI technology ;

• (6)    If the AL-pocalypse is almost upon us, then the Great Reset is the vehicle for its implementation.

Slang lexemes in sentences (3)–(6) function as identifying signals of a specific social group reference and help to evaluate the speaker from the point of view of vocabulary specification in connection with conditions for implementation of a communicative act. Hereby, the demarcation sign of social inclusion is formed on the basis of group orientations, values and ideology of the social group. The functional unitarity is manifested in linguistic isolation from adjacent communities, since identification originality is based in the choice of slang-formative models for the creation of substandard prototerms, which serve as an indicator of the declassed group linguistic identity. In this regard, slang acts as a marker of social inclusion, since it is created by speakers who have a similar worldview, life experience, share identical values and use the created neologisms to contrast their social group with the social majority. Slang lexical tools make it possible to fully implement the cryptographic function of the language, while simultaneously functioning as a guarantor of the establishment and consolidation of intra-group relations between community members and strengthens intra-group connection.

The conceptual basis of social exclusion is one of the sides of social relations and a certain type of social practices, the realities of which are reflected by lexical means of language. S. Pogam correlates exclusion with employment problems, the quintessence of which is considered as a process of “social degradation” undergoing three successive periods: deterioration of social ties, dependence on social assistance and complete destruction of social relations [Pogam, 1999]. V.P. Kultygin, analyzing the works of E. Reis, expresses the idea that “Exclusion is a consequence of failure in social inclusion and also reflects a situation when people who previously used the prerogatives of social status are deprived of them and lose access to what they previously had” [Kultygin, 2003, p. 14].

Social exclusion in slang is expressed in its inability to influence its speakers in the professional sphere or in the process of personality formation, to demonstrate non- belonging to a certain social environment based on the stratification of society that depends on the level of education, professional affiliation, group interests and cultural upbringing. Moreover, gerontological, idiolect, gender, ethical, aesthetic, value and intra-linguistic ideological isolation can be traced in the meaning of the exclusive slangisms [Kurmysheva, 2015]. Knowledge of slang terminology allows for social identification of a person and determines their belonging to a specific social group or groups, since one individual can own several variants of social vocabulary that exist in the linguistic substandard, and people can use them depending on the communication situation. Thus, slangisms act as social markers of social exclusion, which reflect the social attitudes of members of a particular community, their attitude towards the phenomena and events of the surrounding world, i.e. their ideology and worldviews. We can judge the interests of a particular social group by its slang units. If we consider the youth slang in line with the Internet discourse, we can observe lexical heterogeneity, since it is necessary to take into account the fact that the term youth unites people of a certain age category, but with different cultural, educational, value and material heritage, who have subjective beliefs and preferences and life goals.

Sentence (7) I am struggling to keep up with the shifting sands of tiktok trends demonstrates social exclusion, which is conveyed by the slang shifting sands , which describes the variability and impermanence of the situation in the rapidly changing modern information world. The context of the statement conveys the author’s negative emotions in relation to what is happening, since fruitless efforts to analyze huge information flows are stated. The use of the expression shifting sands in speech indicates forced selfisolation from the majority due to futile attempts to succeed, and social exclusion is realized through slangism with a strong emotional overtone.

In modern English there are a large number of feminitives that have ambivalence, since such slang words act as an instrument of social inclusion and social exclusion at the same time. These lexemes are actively used with various pragmatic shades of their semantic meaning, despite the presence of stylistically neutral literary invariants. A clear confirmation of this idea is presented in the following examples:

• (8)    The film was praised for its use of the female gaze , allowing the audience to see the story from the perspective of its female protagonist .

The phrase female gaze recalls the importance of gender rights equality; it characterizes a purely feminine, non-trivial view of solving a problem, which may completely contradict established patriarchal views.

In sentence (9) She was a true shero , fighting for justice and equality in a world that often tried to silence her voice , the slang neoformation shero is used to nominate a strong and independent woman who, through her deeds inspires others and acts as a role model.

• (10)    Her blog is a powerful fempire , inspiring women around the world to embrace their own strength and potential ;

• (11)    She retreated to her she shed , a space where she could focus on her own passions and interests without any distractions.

In examples (10) and (11), the slangisms fempire and she shed describe a community of women (based on common interests/professional activities/life experience/everyday difficulties, etc.) who support each other in any situation. The use of gender-marked vocabulary in speech leads to the stratification of society into two large groups of men and women, therefore, neologisms act as a mean of social exclusion in relation to the male community, and as a mean of social inclusion in relation to the female community.

• (12)    Yesterday I was in a restaurant that put up a sign asking people to respect the atmosphere and be social in their real environment rather than acting like phubbers ;

• (13)    Just in case you want to reach out to me at the weekend, I am going technocamping ;

• (14)    Glanceability refers to presenting important and relevant information to users in a way they can easily understand and act on it ;

• (15)    He has a serious case of nomophobia because he spends all his day staring at his phone and chatting.

Considering the manifestation of inclusionexclusion algorithms by examples of English youth slang in the subcorpus of the Internet discourse in sentences (12)–(15), we suggests that the narrative is about the realities of the digital age and the related problem of digital detox. In this case, language reflects the behavioral characteristics, experiences and fears of people united by their dependence on modern technologies. The use of this kind of slangisms in speech indicates social exclusion of technodependent individuals in relation to the social majority. Thus, social exclusion and social inclusion complement and transform the usual ideas about the hierarchical class-group structure of society. These phenomena are objective and are always present in any society and can be realized through the opposition “friend – foe”, due to the need to find like-minded people.

Conclusion

Thus, we can conclude that slang is an original language model that has a special charm, primordial nominations of cognitive representations of the real world. It allows to distinguish between social groups of “friends”/ “foes”, and also acts as a tool of social exclusion and social inclusion. Signs of social exclusion are the following: limitation/lack of access to the resources, impossibility/inability to overcome restrictions, discrimination, prevalence in various areas of social relations. Accordingly, social exclusion and social inclusion are multidirectional processes. Social inclusion presupposes the inclusion of a certain person (people) in social relations, and exclusion, unlike it, is directed not inside the group, but outside it and means the exclusion of a certain person (people) from social relations in various spheres. In communication practices, this idea is reflected in negative slang nominations that actualized in different ways of forming a negative image, providing it with a threat index, negative typologization, and associating a group with antisocial and dangerous behavior. Cognitive configurations formed within the framework of communicative practices, are firmly represented in the system of collective consciousness, causing negative stereotypical perception, rejection, and distrust from the social majority.

We see prospects for further research in studying the communicative nature of a paired social phenomena inclusion/exclusion and their categorization in the context of comparative studies of discursive construction of socially significant fragments of modern reality, which determine social stratification of people, manifested at the lexical level of the language.