1

Morphological aspects of Georgian electronic language

Natia Amaghlobeli
Natiama2000@yahoo.fr
Ilia State University

Caucasian Language Issues Advances in Kartvelian Morphology and Syntax (AKMS) 29-30 september, 2009

Background
Development of the so called sms language Morphologic and typographic changes Difficult to understand for standard language users Electronic communication in Georgia as popular as in Europe Sms language used rarely than in English or French

Objective and corpus

Quantitative and qualitative analysis of non-standard orthographic forms in Georgian electronic language. 100 French short messages (1578 words) 100 Georgian short messages (1350 words)

Method
The last 100 sent sms from Georgian free sms portal http://www.georgiansms.com The last 100 sent sms from French free sms portal http://www.ftplanet.net Quantitative analysis of shortenings in Georgian and French corpus Forms of shortenings in Georgian and French corpus
So far as the users of these portals in Georgia and France are of similar social properties, it can be considered that there is no differences between both data in a light of social variables and the difference should be found in the linguistic plan.

Results (1)
In French corpus: abbreviations can be found in 26% of messages

nearly each of them consists of average 60% abbreviated words

A toi ki fu important ds ma vi je sui dsl m ojourd'8 g DciD ke tu nen fer + parti (total words - 21, abbreviated- 13)
In Georgian corpus: abbreviations can be found in 4% of messages

nearly each of them consists of average 1% abbreviated words

Nat rogor xar? sad daikarge? aq ra ambebi datrialda ro icode, mere mogiyvebi shemomexmiane ro miocli ra. gk. pk. (total words - 19, abbreviated- 2)

Results (2)
In French examples:

Abbreviation is used for every word where it is possible. In Georgian examples: There are a few words which already have developed standard abbreviated forms and users are confined to them: gk = gkocni sixa = sixarulo gena = genacvale

Results (3)
In French corpus: 6 methods for abbreviation: 1. Acronyms: rstp = rpond sil te plait; mdr = mort de rire 2. Consonant skeleton :dsl = desol(e), gtm = je taime 3. Clipping: dem = demander, auj = aujourdhui 4. Logograms: 2main = demain; vi1 = vient 5. Syllabograms: c = [se] cest, ces; g = [je] je; t = [te] tes 6. Phonetic style: chui = je suis; kelkun = quelquun In Georgian corpus: 4 methods for abbreviation (rarely): 1. Acronym: = ? (rx= rogor xar?) How are you? 2. Clipping: = (gena = genacvale) darling 3. Consonnant skeleton: = (mgr = magari) cool

Chart of results
5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0
total fr geo 26 4 acrony m e 7 4 conson nant skeleton 19 3 logogra m 10 0 sy llabog ram 23,5 0 phonetic sty e 45 0

fr go e

clipping 15,6 3

Analyze (1)
Absence of phonetisation in Georgian sms language: Orthography based on phonetic principles:
Words pronounced similarly as spelled No diphthongs Number of letters and number of sounds in the word is similar

No need for phonetisation

French: beaucoup (8 letters) - [boku] (4 phonemes) Georgian: = bevri (5 letters) [bevri] (5 phonemes).

10

Analyze (2)
Absence of syllabograms in Georgian sms language
In syllabograms each letter is pronounced according to its alphabetical name. In French alphabetical name of each letter is presented as syllable, therefore one letter can replace the hole syllable in word. Ex: cest = c [ce]. In Georgian alphabetical names of letters are particular sounds. Ex. alphabetical name of Georgian letter (s) is [s]. Syllabograms are impossible

11

Analyze (3)
Logograms rarely used in Georgian corpus In French No declination: root of numbers and nominative case form are the same. Words that represent numbers are one syllabic, thus easy to find syllables of similar pronunciation in other words. In Georgian In nominative case words get a marker . In Georgian using words in the form of root is uncommon. Therefore such abbreviations are used rarely. 3 = ga3(sam)magda 3 [sami]: sam root, i nominative case mark Words change according to case or conjugation, root is often changed as well. Therefore if the particular word in nominative case can be used in logograms, in possessive case it cannot. 2 ( ) singular, nominative case, the word 2 (ori) also is in nominative. 2 ( ) plural, genitive case. The word 2 (ori)

12

Conclusion
Three main features that prevent Georgian from the development of sms language: Inflectional morphology and existence of marks of declination, by reason of which usage of logograms is difficult. Phonetic principle of Georgian orthography the given phoneme is represented with a single letter. In Georgian alphabet phonemes have the same names as corresponding sounds that do not allow creating syllabograms.

13

References
Anis J., Internet communication et langue franaise, Paris, Herms Science, 1998 Anis J., Parlez-vous texto ?, Guide des nouveaux langages du rseau, 2VINDOUJTEKRI ???, Le cherche-midi diteur, 2001 Fairon C., Klein J.R., Paumier S., Le Langage SMS, Louvain University Press (PUL), 2006 Pierozak I., Approche sociolinguistique des pratiques discursives en francais sur internet : ge f dais fotes si je vux , Revue Francaise de Linguistique Applique, vol. Vfasc. 2000