This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for merging with Small talk on 28 June 2011. The result of the discussion was Not to merge. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BobLee4, Baileymichaelis, Ntijerina. Peer reviewers: Jmartinez4316, CA108017.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 06:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wow, an article with an adjective for a title that just might have the most appropriate title (although perhaps "phatic utterance" would be more in line with our standards). -- Jmabel 07:42, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
I've only just read this article for the first time, prompted by the recent BBC news article on phatic language [1], and I experienced the rare (and unwelcome) situation of being slightly more confused after reading Wikipedia than I had been before doing so! In particular I think the ordering is unhelpful - the Jakobson citation, for instance, seems to define a specific, non-standard usage even before the standard meaning has been fully explored. Would it not be better to merge the whole with Small talk (phatic communication)?. Thanks. CharlesSpencer ( talk) 06:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
"In the modern context, this usage appears in online communities and more specifically on micro-blogging" < what usage? The reference isn't clear. Slac speak up! 09:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Along with my group members, Bailee and Bailey, I have the article of phatic expressions and the way that I plan on making contributions to the wiki page is going to be by checking citations and seeing if I can have better resources for the article as well as making sure there isn't any bias within the writings of others on the wiki page. Making sure that if there's anymore information that I can find in the resources that I can use and able to contribute more useful information for the general public to understand phatic expressions better. 19:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
These are the references that I am going to use throughout editing the page.
Zimmerman, L. W. (2011). Using Phatic Expressions in Introductions in Intercultural Online Discussions. Journal On English Language Teaching, 1(3), 53-59. Porter, James E. 2017 Professional Communication as Phatic. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, p232949061667170. doi:10.1177/2329490616671708 Radovanovic, Danica and Ragnedda, Massimo Small talk in the Digital Age: Making Sense of Phatic Posts., 2012 . In 2nd Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts, Lyon (France), 16-20 April 2012. [Conference paper] Ntijerina (talk) 20:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ntijerina ( talk • contribs)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for merging with Small talk on 28 June 2011. The result of the discussion was Not to merge. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BobLee4, Baileymichaelis, Ntijerina. Peer reviewers: Jmartinez4316, CA108017.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 06:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wow, an article with an adjective for a title that just might have the most appropriate title (although perhaps "phatic utterance" would be more in line with our standards). -- Jmabel 07:42, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
I've only just read this article for the first time, prompted by the recent BBC news article on phatic language [1], and I experienced the rare (and unwelcome) situation of being slightly more confused after reading Wikipedia than I had been before doing so! In particular I think the ordering is unhelpful - the Jakobson citation, for instance, seems to define a specific, non-standard usage even before the standard meaning has been fully explored. Would it not be better to merge the whole with Small talk (phatic communication)?. Thanks. CharlesSpencer ( talk) 06:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
"In the modern context, this usage appears in online communities and more specifically on micro-blogging" < what usage? The reference isn't clear. Slac speak up! 09:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Along with my group members, Bailee and Bailey, I have the article of phatic expressions and the way that I plan on making contributions to the wiki page is going to be by checking citations and seeing if I can have better resources for the article as well as making sure there isn't any bias within the writings of others on the wiki page. Making sure that if there's anymore information that I can find in the resources that I can use and able to contribute more useful information for the general public to understand phatic expressions better. 19:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
These are the references that I am going to use throughout editing the page.
Zimmerman, L. W. (2011). Using Phatic Expressions in Introductions in Intercultural Online Discussions. Journal On English Language Teaching, 1(3), 53-59. Porter, James E. 2017 Professional Communication as Phatic. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, p232949061667170. doi:10.1177/2329490616671708 Radovanovic, Danica and Ragnedda, Massimo Small talk in the Digital Age: Making Sense of Phatic Posts., 2012 . In 2nd Workshop on Making Sense of Microposts, Lyon (France), 16-20 April 2012. [Conference paper] Ntijerina (talk) 20:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ntijerina ( talk • contribs)