SEMIOTICS OF MODERN INTERNET COMMUNICATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/folium/2026.9.24Keywords:
social semiotics, multimodality, Internet communication, digital discourse, emojis, memes, digital pragmatics, graphic-lexical hybrids, online communication, Ukrainian languageAbstract
This article examines the semiotic organization of contemporary Ukrainianlanguage Internet communication, focusing on the interaction of verbal, visual, graphic, and platform-specific resources in the construction of meaning within digital discourse. The study is grounded in the principles of social semiotics and multimodality, treating online communication as an integrated semiotic system rather than a sequence of isolated linguistic units. Particular attention is paid to emojis, non-numeric use of digits, graphiclexical hybrids, playful phonetic spelling, English borrowings, digital slang, abbreviations, punctuation variation, and meme-based communication as interconnected components of contemporary digital semiosis. The empirical material consists of a corpus of 360 publicly available Ukrainian-language digital communication units collected from Telegram, Instagram, X, and Facebook between January 2024 and March 2025. The research employs multimodal semiotic analysis, discourse analysis, pragmatic analysis, and contextual interpretation to identify the communicative functions of different semiotic resources and the principles governing their interaction within authentic digital environments. The findings demonstrate that meaning in contemporary Ukrainian online communication is rarely generated by verbal language alone. Instead, communicative interpretation emerges through the coordinated interaction of linguistic, visual, graphic, and interface-based signs. Emojis function not merely as emotional markers but as pragmatic devices that modify illocutionary force and regulate interpretation. Graphic transformations, playful orthography, English lexical borrowings, digital abbreviations, and punctuation deviations perform important identity-building, expressive, and interpersonal functions rather than representing departures from linguistic competence. Meme-based communication operates as an efficient mechanism of semantic compression, activating shared cultural knowledge and facilitating rapid meaning construction within online communities. The analysis further indicates that the semiotic organization of Ukrainian digital discourse reflects broader cognitive transformations associated with multimodal information processing and clip-like perception, where different communicative modes are interpreted simultaneously rather than sequentially. The study contributes to contemporary research in social semiotics, digital discourse studies, and multimodal linguistics by providing an integrated description of the mechanisms through which meaning is distributed across multiple semiotic layers in Ukrainian-language Internet communication. It also expands current understanding of how digital environments reshape communicative practices without undermining the adaptive potential of the Ukrainian language.
References
Kovalchuk, L., & Litkovych, Y. (2022). Psycholinguistic aspects of representing aggression in wartime media discourse. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 9(2), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.29038/eejpl.2022.9.2.kov
Шевченко І. (2024). Мультимодальна концептуальна метафора в політичному медійному дискурсі. Мовознавчий вісник. Черкаси. ЧНУ імені Богдана Хмельницького. (36), 132–138. https://doi.org/10.31651/2226-4388-2024-36-132-138
Barinaga-López, B., Puente-Bienvenido, H., & Navarro Newball, A. A. (2022). A systematic review of trends and gaps in the production of scientific knowledge on the sociopolitical impacts of emojis in computer-mediated communication. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), Article 2151096. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2151096
Bjola, C., & Coplen, M. (2025). The Ukrainian meme machine: digital diplomacy and ‘quantum humour’. European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 25, No. 1. P. 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661251382854
Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487002
Dainas, A. R., & Herring, S. C. (2021). Interpreting emoji pragmatics. In C. Xie, F. Yus, & H. Haberland (Eds.), Approaches to Internet pragmatics: Theory and practice (pp. 107–144). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.318.04dai
Danesi, M. (2009). Explaining change in language: A cybersemiotic perspective. Entropy, 11(4), 1055–1072. https://doi.org/10.3390/e11041055
Dancygier, B., & Vandelanotte, L. (2025). The Language of Memes ([edition unavailable]). Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.perlego.com/book/5321719/the-language-of-memes-patterns-of-meaning-across-image-and-text-pdf (Original work published 2025).
Dynel, M. (2025). Beyond social polarisation: Memetic (de)legitimisation and quasi-legitimisation of non-fungible tokens. European Journal of Communication, 40(1), 37–54. doi: 10.1177/02673231241300903.
Ge, J., & Herring, S. C. (2018). Communicative functions of emoji sequences on Sina Weibo. First Monday, 23(11). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i11.9413
Herring, S. C., & Dainas, A. R. (2020). Gender and age influences on interpretation of emoji functions. ACM Transactions on Social Computing, 3(2), Article 10, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375629
Holtgraves T. (2024) Emoji, Speech Acts, and Perceived Communicative Success. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. January 2024. 43(1):83-103 DOI:10.1177/0261927X231200450
Jones, R. H., Chik, A., & Hafner, C. A. (Eds.). (2015). Discourse and digital practices: Doing discourse analysis in the digital age. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315726465
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203354889 [1]
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2021). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003099857
Mahuriak, I., & Voitovych, N. (2025). Ukrainian memes during the full-scale war: Social and informational aspects. Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Journalism, 57, 239–249 https://doi.org/10.30970/vjo.2025.57.13309
McCulloch, G. (2019). Because Internet: Understanding the new rules of language. Riverhead Books. ISBN-13: 978-0735210936
Nazarenko O., Rebenok V. (2024). Features of using lexical innovations and slang in international memes (on the example of social networks). Advanced Linguistics, 14, ISSN2663-6646(Online)12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20535/.2024.14.315940
Rathnayake, C., and Suthers, D. (2025). Towards a pluralist approach for examining structures of interwoven multimodal discourse on social media. New Media and Society, 27(2), 1172–1192.https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231157668
Tagg, C. (2015). Exploring digital communication: Language in action. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315727165
Tieu V, Sotillo E, Bjelajac at al.(2024) A versatile CRISPR-Cas13d platform for multiplexed transcriptomic regulation and metabolic engineering in primary human T cells. Cell. Feb 29;187(5):1278-1295.e20. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.035. Epub 2024 Feb 21. PMID: 38387457; PMCID: PMC10965243.
Yus, F. (2011). Cyberpragmatics: Internet-mediated communication in context. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.213
Zappavigna M. (2012) Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. Bloomsbury. Continuum International Publishing Group, 240 p. DOI: 10.5040/9781472541642










