Inclusion of Social Media Abbreviations in Communicative Language Testing
Keywords:Social media abbreviations, CLT, grammatical knowledge
Communicative competence is a broader term that covers all knowledge, capacity and skills. This study invites the attention towards communicative abbreviations as used on social media platforms and in electronic communication. Researchers have placed these abbreviations in pragmatic and grammatical knowledge in Batchman’s (1990) model. These abbreviations are internationally recognized and mutually intelligible by the community of social media. Keeping in view the ideas that social media is the active and easily accessible platform to get information and express views, and a large number of world’s population (being the active user of social media) uses different abbreviations in communication; this study proposes to assess the communicative competence of speakers with the help of the abbreviations. Knowhow of these abbreviations will help the speakers perceive and produce information on social media more actively and quickly. List of abbreviations with their meanings has been given in this study.
Keywords: abbreviations; CLT; communicative competence; social media
Adel, M., & Hashemi, H. (2015). Ontological analysis of identity formation and its linkage to the theories of second language acquisition. Cumhuriyet Science Journal, 36(3), 141-161.
Alderson, J. C. (1991). Language testing in the 90s: How far have we come? How much further have we to go? In Anivan, S. (Ed.), Current development in language testing: Seameo regional language center.
Amirian, S. M. R., Moqaddam, H. H., & Moqaddam, Q. J. (2017). Critical analysis of the models of language proficiency with a focus on communicative models. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(5), 400-407.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford university press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and Developing Useful Language Tests (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
Branckaute, F. (2010). Facebook Statistics: The Numbers Game Continues. The Blog Herald, Filed as News on Aug, 11.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Canale, M. (1983). On some dimensions of language proficiency. Centre de recherches en éducation franco-ontarienne, Institut d'études pédagogiques de l'Ontario= The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Carroll, J. B. (1961). Fundamental consideration in testing of English language proficiency of foreign students. New York: MacGrohil.
Carroll, J. B. (1968). The psychology of language testing. In Language testing symposium: A psycholinguistic approach (pp. 46-69). Oxford University Press Oxford, UK.
Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1995). Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied linguistics, 6(2), 5-35.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Farhady, H. (1980). Justification, development, and validation of functional language tests. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
Farhady, H. (1983). New directions for ESL proficiency testing. Issues in language testing research, 253-269.
Farhady, H., Jafarpur, A., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Testing language skills: From theory to practice. Tehran: SAMT Publications.
Ghaniabadi, S., & Hashemi, H. (2015). Exploring teachers’ reaction to the identity construction of Iranian students in EFL context. Ciencia & Natura, 37(3), 106-122.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Kress, G. R. (1976). System and function in language: Selected papers. Oxford University Press.
Harding, L. (2014). Communicative language testing: Current issues and future research. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 186-197.
Hymes, D. (1967). Models of the interaction of language and social setting. Journal of social issues, 23(2), 8-28.
Jue, W. A. N. G. (2005). A Study of the Social Functions of Abbreviation [J]. Journal of Ningbo University (Liberal Arts Edition), 2.
Khairutdinov, R. R., Mukhametzyanova, F. G., & Gaysina, A. R. (2017). Socio Psychological Characteristics of the Subject Use of the Subject Use of Slang and Abbreviations in English-Speaking Social Networks. Turkish Online Journal of Design and Communication 7, 832-839.
Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The modern language journal, 70(4), 366-372.
Lado, R. (1961). Language Testing: The Construction and Use of Foreign Language Tests. A Teacher's Book.
Morrow, K. (1979). Communicative language testing: Revolution or evolution? In Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Munby, J. (1978). Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oller, J. (1979). Language tests at school. London: Longman.
Ruiyun, W. (2005). A comparative study of abbreviations used in net news headlines in English and Chinese. Applied Linguistics, 1.
Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign-language teaching (Vol. 12). Marcel Didier.
Savignon, S. J. (1987). Communicative language teaching. Theory into practice, 26(4), 235-242.
Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual review of applied linguistics, 18, 268-286.
Spolskey, B. (1985). The limits of authenticity in language testing. Language Testing, 2(1), 3140.
Twitter, (2011). Twitter official blog. Twitter inc, San Fransisco, California. http://blog.twitter.com/2011/numberss
Van Ek, J. A. (1977). The threshold level for modern language learning in schools. London: Longman.
Vollmer, H. J., & Sang, F. (1983). 1983: Competing hypotheses about second language ability: a plea for caution. In Oller, JW, Jr., editor, Issues in language testing research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 29-79.
Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford University Press.
Wang, Y., Min, Q., & Han, S. (2016). Understanding the effects of trust and risk on individual behavior toward social media platforms: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 34-44.
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.