I treat them as a separate element to the text, and as such aren't really part of the punctuation or grammar, so I try to keep any at the end of the entire message to convey the actual expression I had making it. ๐
IMO, they generally replace a period, comma or exclamation when used. In the cases where it's a necessary question mark or something like that, I'd put the emoji after๐
Before (unless intended otherwise). Imagine the case in which the paragraph continues...
Roy fell when we were walking. ๐ It was kind of worrying.
vs
Roy fell when we were walking ๐. It was kind of worrying.
In the first one, it seems that you are laughing about the fall being worrying. In the second, the laugh is about Roy, and then the next sentence reads in a more neutral tone, which was my intent.
Maybe it doesn't look as nice, but to me it makes more sense.
An emoji is roughly equivalent to body language, facial expressions, and/or audible cues. They should be inserted wherever the intended action would occur.
An example: man, I laughed my ass off. ๐คฃ
Would be acceptable, but: man, I laughed my ass off๐คฃ. would be better because the laughter is integral to the sentence.
However; man, I laughed ๐คฃ my ass off. would also be acceptable because it is being used to demonstrate the action.
Something like: cats make my heart happy. ๐ ๐
Would need it to be outside the sentence because it reinforces the message instead of being part of the message.
Emojis can be the equivalent of hand movements in a way, so where they get placed is about where you would place a gesture.
Before :). Otherwise I am getting angry เฒ _เฒ .
Smilies add context to the current statement. So a smilie afterwards just catches the overall vibe. ๐๐ค๐
And this may be rude to someone. ๐
It sounds like you donโt consider emojis appropriate. How come?
Have an urgent message you want to send to someone who is not uptight or a snob? In the same way in which people smile to be kind or be welcoming, I use emojis:
โThanks for the file โบ๏ธโ
In the same way that people mirror emotions, I use emojis:
โIโm sorry about the presentation ๐ขโ
โYeah. Those reports can take quite a while to digest ๐ โ
In the same way that emotionally intelligent people are candid and therefore vulnerable and able to connect with others, I use emojis*:
โItโs taking forever to load ๐ญโ
โIโm kinda nervous about tomorrowโs meeting ๐ฌโ
*Of course, my dumb ass is far from emotionally intelligent. I just strive to create connection.
I recognize that, at times, a social situation could seem to demand deference beyond emojis. At the same time, there are many situations where emojis could be appropriate. I am trying to let you see why and in what contexts someone would use emojis โบ๏ธ.
Also, thereโs the whole Poeโs Law issue. Emojis can help with clarity.
So do you also expect everyone over 12 to always keep a pokerface in real life conversations, or is this rule confined to virtual spaces for some arbitrary reason?
Well you're also not going around holding written pieces of text to someone's face to talk to them in real life, yet that's how we're communicating here, and you don't seem to find that weird. It doesn't need to be the same to be a helpful analogue. Sounds from your mouth -> written text, facial expressions and gestures -> emoji/emoticons. There's actual research demonstrating that people actually do parse and react to emojis and emoticons in the same way they would to real facial expressions.
We went from cavemen communicating through crude paintings on rock walls. We evolved complex speech over hundreds of thousands of years; leading to commerce, culture and civilisation itself.
We created great works of literature and began using language to carry our knowledge forward to each new generation, accelerating our growth...
...just to end up right back at fucking cave paintings.
Abraham Lincoln supposedly used an emoticon in one of his speeches from 1862 (though there is debate about whether it was an accident or added by the typesetter), and the guy who is credited with officially inventing the emoticon was a Carnegie Mellon Comp Sci professor. In introducing it, he explained that it could help clarify sarcasm versus serious comments in digital communications.
Tone isn't conveyed easily through the written word, sometimes an emoji helps to clarify how something is being said. ๐
You phrase all this as a negative but I think it is in fact a very beautiful way to look at it. A true shift going back to our bare roots of human literature.๐
I am not pulling your leg here. I do think it is actually a really interesting thought you put here. I just don't see it in a negative sense.
In fact, what are words if not deep-rooted human expressions? What would that make emojis in the first place?
We did not invent words to carry knowledge and improve oir culture, we invented writing, and guess what, alphabets and words only came in thousands of years after that. Before it we had cuneiforms and various forms of pictograms, so don't assume the superiority of strictly alphabetic languages over other forms of communications.
Let's take english as a language, its capacity to convey emotion is quite limited as it was not born a language for literature. Language evolve, new forms of communication are born and merge with existing ones and together they are more powerful. It's not like we will switch to emoji only, altough if an emoji only culture existed, they would frown upon our "inexpressive, needlessly verbose weird letters" just like you are doing. Don't underestimate the scare of cultural changes over convention choices
Cuneiform was a syllabic language. It had words and structure. It wasn't just "impressions of ideas" like pictographs. (Source: Near Eastern Archaeology was quite literally my university major)
So in no way am I referring only to "alphabetic" languages as you seem to imply. And Cuneiform is included in what I was talking about...language. Whether that's writing the epic of Gilgamesh or giving someone the worlds first bad yelp review.
Saying words didn't exist until indo-european alphabets emerged is frankly ridiculous.
Emojis generally replace the period but come after a question mark or exclamation point.
Can I borrow your pen? ๐
I borrowed your pen ๐
You little shit! ๐ฟ
This looks best to me.
What if there are multiple sentences?
After... I've said what I have to say, now I'm making a face at you. See?
After. It's a visual commentary on the text you just wrote. It's not part of that text.
I treat them as a separate element to the text, and as such aren't really part of the punctuation or grammar, so I try to keep any at the end of the entire message to convey the actual expression I had making it. ๐
๐Around๐everything๐.๐
I just treat them like the floating pics in a word documentation. So ba๐sically anywhere.
Great question. ๐ค
I think so as well ๐.
IMO, they generally replace a period, comma or exclamation when used. In the cases where it's a necessary question mark or something like that, I'd put the emoji after๐
yep, to me emojiis and emoticons act as punctuation. helps keep things more casual :3
Before (unless intended otherwise). Imagine the case in which the paragraph continues...
Roy fell when we were walking. ๐ It was kind of worrying.
vs
Roy fell when we were walking ๐. It was kind of worrying.
In the first one, it seems that you are laughing about the fall being worrying. In the second, the laugh is about Roy, and then the next sentence reads in a more neutral tone, which was my intent.
Maybe it doesn't look as nice, but to me it makes more sense.
๐ยฟQue?๐
If one is going to use emojis, it is contextual.
An emoji is roughly equivalent to body language, facial expressions, and/or audible cues. They should be inserted wherever the intended action would occur.
An example: man, I laughed my ass off. ๐คฃ
Would be acceptable, but: man, I laughed my ass off๐คฃ. would be better because the laughter is integral to the sentence.
However; man, I laughed ๐คฃ my ass off. would also be acceptable because it is being used to demonstrate the action.
Something like: cats make my heart happy. ๐ ๐
Would need it to be outside the sentence because it reinforces the message instead of being part of the message.
Emojis can be the equivalent of hand movements in a way, so where they get placed is about where you would place a gesture.
Never, is the appropriate answer.
Theyโre for languages when mood cannot be derived from wording alone. So, sometimes? ๐คทโโ๏ธ
๐ข
๐คฏ
Either after or as a replacement, when appropriate XD
Before :). Otherwise I am getting angry เฒ _เฒ . Smilies add context to the current statement. So a smilie afterwards just catches the overall vibe. ๐๐ค๐ And this may be rude to someone. ๐
If youโre over the age of 12, they shouldnโt be placed at all.
It sounds like you donโt consider emojis appropriate. How come?
Have an urgent message you want to send to someone who is not uptight or a snob? In the same way in which people smile to be kind or be welcoming, I use emojis:
โThanks for the file โบ๏ธโ
In the same way that people mirror emotions, I use emojis: โIโm sorry about the presentation ๐ขโ โYeah. Those reports can take quite a while to digest ๐ โ
In the same way that emotionally intelligent people are candid and therefore vulnerable and able to connect with others, I use emojis*: โItโs taking forever to load ๐ญโ โIโm kinda nervous about tomorrowโs meeting ๐ฌโ
*Of course, my dumb ass is far from emotionally intelligent. I just strive to create connection.
I recognize that, at times, a social situation could seem to demand deference beyond emojis. At the same time, there are many situations where emojis could be appropriate. I am trying to let you see why and in what contexts someone would use emojis โบ๏ธ.
Also, thereโs the whole Poeโs Law issue. Emojis can help with clarity.
โ๏ธ๐
So do you also expect everyone over 12 to always keep a pokerface in real life conversations, or is this rule confined to virtual spaces for some arbitrary reason?
Show me how someone could emphasize a real life conversation with childish cartoons, and Iโd probably suggest thatโs for children as well.
Well you're also not going around holding written pieces of text to someone's face to talk to them in real life, yet that's how we're communicating here, and you don't seem to find that weird. It doesn't need to be the same to be a helpful analogue. Sounds from your mouth -> written text, facial expressions and gestures -> emoji/emoticons. There's actual research demonstrating that people actually do parse and react to emojis and emoticons in the same way they would to real facial expressions.
If you're an adult, neither.
Use your words.
We went from cavemen communicating through crude paintings on rock walls. We evolved complex speech over hundreds of thousands of years; leading to commerce, culture and civilisation itself.
We created great works of literature and began using language to carry our knowledge forward to each new generation, accelerating our growth...
...just to end up right back at fucking cave paintings.
๐คโ๏ธ.
Abraham Lincoln supposedly used an emoticon in one of his speeches from 1862 (though there is debate about whether it was an accident or added by the typesetter), and the guy who is credited with officially inventing the emoticon was a Carnegie Mellon Comp Sci professor. In introducing it, he explained that it could help clarify sarcasm versus serious comments in digital communications.
Tone isn't conveyed easily through the written word, sometimes an emoji helps to clarify how something is being said. ๐
You phrase all this as a negative but I think it is in fact a very beautiful way to look at it. A true shift going back to our bare roots of human literature.๐
I am not pulling your leg here. I do think it is actually a really interesting thought you put here. I just don't see it in a negative sense.
In fact, what are words if not deep-rooted human expressions? What would that make emojis in the first place?
Wait till he figures out some languages still use pictographs...
We did not invent words to carry knowledge and improve oir culture, we invented writing, and guess what, alphabets and words only came in thousands of years after that. Before it we had cuneiforms and various forms of pictograms, so don't assume the superiority of strictly alphabetic languages over other forms of communications.
Let's take english as a language, its capacity to convey emotion is quite limited as it was not born a language for literature. Language evolve, new forms of communication are born and merge with existing ones and together they are more powerful. It's not like we will switch to emoji only, altough if an emoji only culture existed, they would frown upon our "inexpressive, needlessly verbose weird letters" just like you are doing. Don't underestimate the scare of cultural changes over convention choices
Cuneiform was a syllabic language. It had words and structure. It wasn't just "impressions of ideas" like pictographs. (Source: Near Eastern Archaeology was quite literally my university major)
So in no way am I referring only to "alphabetic" languages as you seem to imply. And Cuneiform is included in what I was talking about...language. Whether that's writing the epic of Gilgamesh or giving someone the worlds first bad yelp review.
Saying words didn't exist until indo-european alphabets emerged is frankly ridiculous.