Emojis are the body language of the digital age(nautil.us)
nautil.us
Emojis are the body language of the digital age
http://nautil.us/issue/50/emergence/why-you-need-emoji
53 comments
One thing that emojis cannot convey is unconscious body language. There are many subtle communications that can bear influence in empathy, love, trust (or distrust-- i.e. catching someone in a lie). Unconscious body language isn't required, but you can't ignore the fact that it is missing.
> One thing that emojis cannot convey is unconscious body language.
Would be interesting to build a chat application that uses the front-facing camera and a little ML to determine your facial expression and attach the appropriate emoji while you focus on writing the text.
Even more interesting would be if it did that without showing you the emoji it inserts.
Would be interesting to build a chat application that uses the front-facing camera and a little ML to determine your facial expression and attach the appropriate emoji while you focus on writing the text.
Even more interesting would be if it did that without showing you the emoji it inserts.
I think that it is for this moment. When the 4g and 5g networks work well in whole world, we won't need emojis, because video will be used to comunicate with others. Everytime we will be less reticent to transmit videos or pics. People want to show themselves and others want to see them, the real person.
People want to show themselves and others want to see them, the real person.
I think that varies with age, demographic, culture etc. There's a lot of people who hate the idea of being on camera.
I think that varies with age, demographic, culture etc. There's a lot of people who hate the idea of being on camera.
This reminds me of David Foster Wallace's section in Infinite Jest about the anxiety-inducing video phone technology (very predictive, considering it was written in 1996) -
"And the videophonic stress was even worse if you were at all vain. I.e. if you worried at all about how you looked. As in to other people. Which all kidding aside who doesn’t. Good old aural telephone calls could be fielded without makeup, toupee, surgical prostheses, etc. Even without clothes, if that sort of thing rattled your saber. But for the image-conscious, there was of course no such answer-as-you-are informality about visual-video telephone calls, which consumers began to see were less like having the good old phone ring than having the doorbell ring and having to throw on clothes and attach prostheses and do hair- checks in the foyer mirror before answering the door."
http://declineofscarcity.com/?page_id=2527
"And the videophonic stress was even worse if you were at all vain. I.e. if you worried at all about how you looked. As in to other people. Which all kidding aside who doesn’t. Good old aural telephone calls could be fielded without makeup, toupee, surgical prostheses, etc. Even without clothes, if that sort of thing rattled your saber. But for the image-conscious, there was of course no such answer-as-you-are informality about visual-video telephone calls, which consumers began to see were less like having the good old phone ring than having the doorbell ring and having to throw on clothes and attach prostheses and do hair- checks in the foyer mirror before answering the door."
http://declineofscarcity.com/?page_id=2527
And video will replace phones calls... This is as unlikely to be true as it ever was. Video requires an immediacy of response that text communications don't, which is why they are and will continue to be popular.
Video calls work somewhat over 3G and work great over 4G. People just don't want to use a video call. It's a sociological problem and not a technical one and 5G isn't going to change that.
I believe gifs are already quickly replacing emjois now that apps like telegram and facebook chat apps have gif searched integrated. In the private and public chats I'm in, all emotions are conveyed through gifs.
I hope video doesn't become the default method of communication. I don't like my face or voice and would rather not bother others with them when there's always trusty ol' text.
They are more like tone of voice.
[deleted]
You do not need emoji.
You need to communicate. Clear, concise, eloquent, and precise use of english* allows this to occur. The reason that this breaks down is because too often people resort/revert to using slang or not thinking before they write.
You end up with text equivalent of 'verbal diarrhea'.
I do not know what 99% of those "pacman" faces are supposed to mean. Maybe it's because I'm on the Autistic scale and I have trouble reading expressions, maybe it's because I'm an 'old fart' and these kids need to get off my lawn.
I understand that emoji are just a simple evolution from emoticons. I do not understand why we needed to expand on:
=) or =(
TFA posits that emoji are "body language" for internet communication. If people just wrote what they fucking meant this wouldn't be an issue. (Look at the constant misunderstandings that arise from sarcasm or lack thereof, for an excellent representation of poor writing.)
*Disclaimer about my own ignorance: I don't know if non-english speakers suffer the same follies as english. English is a sloppy, imprecise language. It takes effort to clearly convey a message that cannot be misconstrued.
You need to communicate. Clear, concise, eloquent, and precise use of english* allows this to occur. The reason that this breaks down is because too often people resort/revert to using slang or not thinking before they write.
You end up with text equivalent of 'verbal diarrhea'.
I do not know what 99% of those "pacman" faces are supposed to mean. Maybe it's because I'm on the Autistic scale and I have trouble reading expressions, maybe it's because I'm an 'old fart' and these kids need to get off my lawn.
I understand that emoji are just a simple evolution from emoticons. I do not understand why we needed to expand on:
=) or =(
TFA posits that emoji are "body language" for internet communication. If people just wrote what they fucking meant this wouldn't be an issue. (Look at the constant misunderstandings that arise from sarcasm or lack thereof, for an excellent representation of poor writing.)
*Disclaimer about my own ignorance: I don't know if non-english speakers suffer the same follies as english. English is a sloppy, imprecise language. It takes effort to clearly convey a message that cannot be misconstrued.
You are missing the point. The whole reason people use emojis is because they don't have a clear meaning. They have a blurry range of multiple interpretations, spanning more on the emotional side than the intellectual one.
- you can use them when you don't have anything to say, don't know what to say, or don't want to say something but need to answer something
- you can use them without thinking much
- you can use them to exchange on a more emotional basic mode
- you can use them to give personal context : feeling, mood, expectations, etc.
- you can use them to break language and sociological barriers, that exist in our very own society.
Those are the stuff we all do without knowing when socializing in groups, flirting, negotiating, lying, trying to escape responsibility, having fun, killing time, maintaining links, being human... But IRL we use a different symbolism: body language, social positioning, tones, etc.
They are not accurate. They don't need to be. We are quite basic in our regular interactions. Usually they are around sex, power, fun or love. Not about the geopolitical situation in Venezuela during march 78.
Now, being able to do that with pure text requires not only much more effort, time and skills, but also knowledge. And the internet/mobile age gave everyone the opportunity to write, but most people are not that good with writing. Really not that good. Plus if basic communication requires too much effort it loses effectiveness.
So they just translate their IRL skills into something they can use by writing: it's just a shift in symbolism.
Personally, I think the emojis were getting more and more popular as girls used computers more and more.
- you can use them when you don't have anything to say, don't know what to say, or don't want to say something but need to answer something
- you can use them without thinking much
- you can use them to exchange on a more emotional basic mode
- you can use them to give personal context : feeling, mood, expectations, etc.
- you can use them to break language and sociological barriers, that exist in our very own society.
Those are the stuff we all do without knowing when socializing in groups, flirting, negotiating, lying, trying to escape responsibility, having fun, killing time, maintaining links, being human... But IRL we use a different symbolism: body language, social positioning, tones, etc.
They are not accurate. They don't need to be. We are quite basic in our regular interactions. Usually they are around sex, power, fun or love. Not about the geopolitical situation in Venezuela during march 78.
Now, being able to do that with pure text requires not only much more effort, time and skills, but also knowledge. And the internet/mobile age gave everyone the opportunity to write, but most people are not that good with writing. Really not that good. Plus if basic communication requires too much effort it loses effectiveness.
So they just translate their IRL skills into something they can use by writing: it's just a shift in symbolism.
Personally, I think the emojis were getting more and more popular as girls used computers more and more.
We were using the equivalent to "emoji" in our 1980's computer labs as teens.
People were using typewriters to expand on the standard character set long before that.
We finally have a platform-agnostic, expressive symbolic language to complement the written word - a triumph.
People were using typewriters to expand on the standard character set long before that.
We finally have a platform-agnostic, expressive symbolic language to complement the written word - a triumph.
I can't remember if we had any concept of a emoji but it was a habit for a term for my friends and I to use the "coloration" of the sprites in our collective PacMan clone to communicate the mood when we last left the computer and we graded the visual in representation of how we were feeling about our most recent additions to the source code.
Not to mention that using clear concise language is sometimes not socially acceptable. Saying "The expected outcome of this conversation is for you to agree to have sexual relations with me" is likely going to be far less effective than just sending a smirking face emoji. It might even get you slapped or blocked. Sometimes the less said, the better.
Likewise, saying the words "yes I like that" is very different than sending a thumbs up emoji. Like you said, emoji is blurry, and clear concise language can often portray ideas that you'd rather not get into. Saying that I like something is a strong positive indicator. Maybe my feelings aren't that firm. Should I then say "yes, that's acceptable"? But then the person might feel hurt that their idea is merely acceptable. Maybe I should say "yes, I like that to an extent but I don't like it that strongly at all", but that implies I have reasons to not like it, which may not be the case. Sending a thumbs up emoji is just simple approval and nothing more. My wife made a dinner I enjoyed but didn't love. The best way to say that I didn't hate eating it but also didn't think it was the greatest meal ever is just a simple thumbs up, preferably with my mouth full of food so she doesn't ask for me to verbally explain how I feel about it.
I know this all really sucks for people who are not good at picking up on non-verbal social cues or various types of irony (including sarcasm), but human emotion is sometimes difficult to express in clear, concise language. You always have the option of asking the person what they meant, especially if you explain that you're bad at subtle communications.
Likewise, saying the words "yes I like that" is very different than sending a thumbs up emoji. Like you said, emoji is blurry, and clear concise language can often portray ideas that you'd rather not get into. Saying that I like something is a strong positive indicator. Maybe my feelings aren't that firm. Should I then say "yes, that's acceptable"? But then the person might feel hurt that their idea is merely acceptable. Maybe I should say "yes, I like that to an extent but I don't like it that strongly at all", but that implies I have reasons to not like it, which may not be the case. Sending a thumbs up emoji is just simple approval and nothing more. My wife made a dinner I enjoyed but didn't love. The best way to say that I didn't hate eating it but also didn't think it was the greatest meal ever is just a simple thumbs up, preferably with my mouth full of food so she doesn't ask for me to verbally explain how I feel about it.
I know this all really sucks for people who are not good at picking up on non-verbal social cues or various types of irony (including sarcasm), but human emotion is sometimes difficult to express in clear, concise language. You always have the option of asking the person what they meant, especially if you explain that you're bad at subtle communications.
I was very bad at picking up non verbal clues myself. Like every thibg else you can learn it. But first you must accept irrationality in your life. After that social life gets much easier.
This is very logical. I bet your communications are all very precise and logical.
Sometimes spelling out exactly what you mean takes the fun out of whatever you're doing. Like explaining a joke for example. Or lazy flirting.
Sometimes spelling out exactly what you mean takes the fun out of whatever you're doing. Like explaining a joke for example. Or lazy flirting.
[deleted]
You could have compressed everything you said into "Unamused Face"* (Can't post emoji here) instead of writing as much as you did.
* http://www.iemoji.com/view/emoji/14/smileys-people/unamused-...
* http://www.iemoji.com/view/emoji/14/smileys-people/unamused-...
Language keeps evolving. The Oxford dictionary (and the commitee is very modest about it) has 1000 new entries every year!
For me, it is a logical consequence that the digital age brings up new forms of interaction.
"I do not know what 99% of those "pacman" faces are supposed to mean."
Me neither, and yet I'm amazing at reading people in meat space.
Me neither, and yet I'm amazing at reading people in meat space.
[deleted]
Emoji are an advance over emoticons because they have a standardized description. For example, if you encounter you can find that it is U+1F625 DISAPPOINTED BUT RELIEVED FACE, allowing you to know that the sender intended to convey a combination of disappointment and relief.
This? https://emojipedia.org/disappointed-but-relieved-face/
I always thought it was an emphatic sad, not relieved. Literally none of those emoji's look relieved. Even the Samsung one looks like it's wailing in grief.
I agree with GP, most of these https://emojipedia.org/google/ are indistinguishable to me. Almost none of them look like their name "GRINNING FACE WITH SMILING EYES" looks to be in pain.
I realize that emojis are often replacing the body language queues we send each other, but they're significantly more ambiguous. There's maybe 5 faces :'( :( :) :* :/ that I use and that's about it. They seem to be sufficient to convey the additional emotional context for me.
I agree with GP, most of these https://emojipedia.org/google/ are indistinguishable to me. Almost none of them look like their name "GRINNING FACE WITH SMILING EYES" looks to be in pain.
I realize that emojis are often replacing the body language queues we send each other, but they're significantly more ambiguous. There's maybe 5 faces :'( :( :) :* :/ that I use and that's about it. They seem to be sufficient to convey the additional emotional context for me.
Yeah I've always thought that one was unbridled grief. Disappointed but relieved? How? How is that in any way disappointed but relieved? The face is sweating, which people do when they are nervous or anxious. The mouth is frowning, which people do when they are upset. The eyebrows are curved downwards which people do when they are sad. And in a lot of the representations, the drop of water is under the eye, signaling that the face is crying. There is not a single emotion that face is expressing that could be interpreted as positive like the word "relieved" indicates.
That face is not disappointed but relieved. That face is 100% stricken with grief. That's the emoji I send to my wife when she texts me and says she's having a bad day.
That face is not disappointed but relieved. That face is 100% stricken with grief. That's the emoji I send to my wife when she texts me and says she's having a bad day.
There are many HNers who know much more about Japan than I do, but I'm pretty sure the tear on the side is meant to represent relief. Imagine it in an anime. I'm not sure why it's a frown and now a shocked face/smile, though.
Here's a short article I found on a few other misinterpreted emoji: https://www.wired.com/2015/05/using-emoji-wrong/
Here's a short article I found on a few other misinterpreted emoji: https://www.wired.com/2015/05/using-emoji-wrong/
People don't know how to quote in mail and forum posts, and one expect them to use emoji "correctly"?
You are right. I think emoji tend to develop meaning by being repeatedly used in a context. Their names are titles or identifiers but not helpful for meaning.
Which kinda sucks, because if I don't know what a word means, I go to the dictionary. Someone using a word wrong is going to really throw me off if their usage doesn't match the dictionary definition. If I don't know what an emoji means, I'll look at the title. And it's likely something very different than the emotion trying to be portrayed.
This isn't true in general. For instance, U+1F346 AUBERGINE ("the eggplant emoji") is at first glance merely a vegetable, but in practice its phallic shape means it's understood to represent a penis.
Similar things happen with other emojis -- for instance the one depicting a Peach. It's an old human tradition to make sexual puns out of our food. Since users see the pictures and not the underlying Unicode titles, users ascribe their own meaning to the images.
Similar things happen with other emojis -- for instance the one depicting a Peach. It's an old human tradition to make sexual puns out of our food. Since users see the pictures and not the underlying Unicode titles, users ascribe their own meaning to the images.
Wow, I didn't know about that one. Wonder if I'll get fired for spamming the eggplant in Slack later on.
Instagram blocked the eggplant emoji in in search back in 2015 [0], and there are vibrators that look like eggplants [1]. If you spam eggplants in a chat chances are the other participants will know the hidden meaning and wonder what you're trying to say.
[0] http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/29/technology/eggplant-instagra...
[1] https://emojibator.com/
[0] http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/29/technology/eggplant-instagra...
[1] https://emojibator.com/
You will then refer to the standard to find U+1F351 PEACH and U+1F346 AUBERGINE (Eggplant), and be amazed at the bountiful harvest your friends have had this year.
[deleted]
I can't believe you're complaining about people not being able to read or write super-effectively, when you admit you can't even read the expression on somebody's face. Have some sympathy.
People do write what they mean, and then people misunderstad it. Is this because people are stupid? No. No, it is not. It is because people are people, and they often need more than just words on a screen to understand what other people are thinking. Hence: emoji, smileys, and so on.
Railing against this is the very definition of pissing into the wind. Good luck!
People do write what they mean, and then people misunderstad it. Is this because people are stupid? No. No, it is not. It is because people are people, and they often need more than just words on a screen to understand what other people are thinking. Hence: emoji, smileys, and so on.
Railing against this is the very definition of pissing into the wind. Good luck!
> I do not understand why we needed to expand on: =) or =(
Let's say people are restricted to "=)" , how do they convey difference between <smiling> vs <laughing> vs <joy> vs <yummy> etc?
>English is a sloppy, imprecise language.
Every human language is imprecise. Even mathematical notation is inconsistent: e.g. sin^2(x) == (sin(x))^2 but sin^-1(x) != (sin(x))^-1. Also, the notation for partial differential equations can be ambiguous and you need context to know what the independent variable is.
parenthetical aside: I'm not a linguist but I wonder if English is actually the most precise language of the ~6000 world languages because of its abundant inventory of synonyms built up by the assimilation of German(AngloSaxon) and French languages. I've noticed that several translators have commented that poetry is easier in English because of the wide shades of meaning available. If you want the biggest bag of synonyms to write some lyrics, English seems to be the weapon of choice.
Let's say people are restricted to "=)" , how do they convey difference between <smiling> vs <laughing> vs <joy> vs <yummy> etc?
>English is a sloppy, imprecise language.
Every human language is imprecise. Even mathematical notation is inconsistent: e.g. sin^2(x) == (sin(x))^2 but sin^-1(x) != (sin(x))^-1. Also, the notation for partial differential equations can be ambiguous and you need context to know what the independent variable is.
parenthetical aside: I'm not a linguist but I wonder if English is actually the most precise language of the ~6000 world languages because of its abundant inventory of synonyms built up by the assimilation of German(AngloSaxon) and French languages. I've noticed that several translators have commented that poetry is easier in English because of the wide shades of meaning available. If you want the biggest bag of synonyms to write some lyrics, English seems to be the weapon of choice.
> If people just wrote what they fucking meant this wouldn't be an issue.
Unfortunately people also have to interpret what I wrote as a I meant it. Even the most precise language can often have many meanings. Look at legal text for example. Something that strives to be as precise as possible, still ends up requiring interpretations.
For everyday writing, emojis are little hints to help the reader better interpret what I meant.
Unfortunately people also have to interpret what I wrote as a I meant it. Even the most precise language can often have many meanings. Look at legal text for example. Something that strives to be as precise as possible, still ends up requiring interpretations.
For everyday writing, emojis are little hints to help the reader better interpret what I meant.
:rolling_eyes:
:joy: :joy: :joy:
:sunglasses:
in other words:
kek
i'll do what i want, thanks
"need" and "what i want/can/will do" are totally separate things. i only need a few basic things[0], the rest is arbitrary nonsense. including emoji
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs
:joy: :joy: :joy:
:sunglasses:
in other words:
kek
i'll do what i want, thanks
"need" and "what i want/can/will do" are totally separate things. i only need a few basic things[0], the rest is arbitrary nonsense. including emoji
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs
Emoji are just more punctuation. In the same way that ! adds an emphasis a winking emoji says that the preceding text was a joke. Once you accept emoji as punctuation it helps make communication clearer.
> English is a sloppy, imprecise language.
Compared to what? Of all the languages I know, I find English to be the least imprecise one. In fact, it's so concise that I often wonder if it's really a natural language (of course it is).
Compared to what? Of all the languages I know, I find English to be the least imprecise one. In fact, it's so concise that I often wonder if it's really a natural language (of course it is).
> You do not need emoji.
> You need to communicate. Clear, concise, eloquent, and precise use of english* allows this to occur.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple (is it ever, with language?). Different forms of communication have different standards, and some modern forms differ from normal English. For instance here's a study showing that text messages ending with a period are considered less sincere:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563215...
Clearly, there's more to it than just using clear English. I bet if some of those sentences ended with a smiley instead of a period, the intended meaning of the sentence would have come across more clearly to the recipient.
> You need to communicate. Clear, concise, eloquent, and precise use of english* allows this to occur.
Unfortunately, it's not that simple (is it ever, with language?). Different forms of communication have different standards, and some modern forms differ from normal English. For instance here's a study showing that text messages ending with a period are considered less sincere:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563215...
Clearly, there's more to it than just using clear English. I bet if some of those sentences ended with a smiley instead of a period, the intended meaning of the sentence would have come across more clearly to the recipient.
I bet your opinion is reinforced even though your comment becomes more and more grey.
That's the feeling I get when I read the responses: someone saying that they don't have to have a precise meaning, some one says that it's something you insert when you have nothing to say, someone else is surprised to find out that some emoji doesn't mean what they thought it means according to the official description.
You wonder: what kind of communication is that? You are 99% correct, it's not communication.
Whedon had this great line that "when people stop talking, they start communicating", and he wasn't talking about body language. He was talking about the babbling, the noise in the communication. Emoji is indeed just more noise. I think People disapprove you because, just like there are useful idiots, I guess there's also useful noise. But that's still idiots and noise.
If you say something and someone doesn't understand, then you clarify what you said. This is a conversation. This is communication. Those who believe that a smiley can magically convey more than words, describe more accurately your mood etc. believe in the illusion of communication. :-) is good as an abbreviation of "you made me smile", but that's about it.
Furthermore, standardizing it pointless. Emoticons are the product of a community. Their meaning is defined within a community and their use marks the fact that you belong to that community. Twitch for instance sells the right to use custom Emoji-like things in their chat channels. One of them is the face of a former Twitch dev named "Kappa" that is being used for some reason as a mark of irony. On IRC, I've seen channels strongly disapproving even the use of the old :-D and prefer "haha" instead. Perhaps they were upset with people coming up with a new variant every week, like 8-| or :-3 that didn't have any meaning except for those who "invented" them just for the sake of invention.
Communities have their own set of codes, for instance there's TT or QQ for "crying", ^^ for smiling, etc. People will for ever invent new ways of expressing themselves with letters and symbols, just like every generation invents its own slang.
Whoever came up with this idea of an Emoji standard didn't understand what they saw.
That's the feeling I get when I read the responses: someone saying that they don't have to have a precise meaning, some one says that it's something you insert when you have nothing to say, someone else is surprised to find out that some emoji doesn't mean what they thought it means according to the official description.
You wonder: what kind of communication is that? You are 99% correct, it's not communication.
Whedon had this great line that "when people stop talking, they start communicating", and he wasn't talking about body language. He was talking about the babbling, the noise in the communication. Emoji is indeed just more noise. I think People disapprove you because, just like there are useful idiots, I guess there's also useful noise. But that's still idiots and noise.
If you say something and someone doesn't understand, then you clarify what you said. This is a conversation. This is communication. Those who believe that a smiley can magically convey more than words, describe more accurately your mood etc. believe in the illusion of communication. :-) is good as an abbreviation of "you made me smile", but that's about it.
Furthermore, standardizing it pointless. Emoticons are the product of a community. Their meaning is defined within a community and their use marks the fact that you belong to that community. Twitch for instance sells the right to use custom Emoji-like things in their chat channels. One of them is the face of a former Twitch dev named "Kappa" that is being used for some reason as a mark of irony. On IRC, I've seen channels strongly disapproving even the use of the old :-D and prefer "haha" instead. Perhaps they were upset with people coming up with a new variant every week, like 8-| or :-3 that didn't have any meaning except for those who "invented" them just for the sake of invention.
Communities have their own set of codes, for instance there's TT or QQ for "crying", ^^ for smiling, etc. People will for ever invent new ways of expressing themselves with letters and symbols, just like every generation invents its own slang.
Whoever came up with this idea of an Emoji standard didn't understand what they saw.
Thank-you for your reply.
I was glad to see that somebody understood the point I was trying to make, and expanded upon it.
I was glad to see that somebody understood the point I was trying to make, and expanded upon it.
What's more interesting to me is the adoption of emoji as a modern ideographic writing system, and how the incidence of multiple connotations of specific emoji mirrors the development of other ideographic writing systems (CJK et al).
Emoji, gif keyboards, and general linguistic and sociological developments in digital communication are all interesting. But body language is entirely different, and to conflate the two as the article does is not a good look.