Home Multimodal creativity and identity in digital discourse: meme practices in China
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Multimodal creativity and identity in digital discourse: meme practices in China

  • Freek Olaf de Groot ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: December 11, 2024

Abstract

This paper studies how internet memes in the context of China are the result of complex semiotic remixing practices and how these multimodal practices offer opportunities for identity work. It offers a situated perspective on the processes that underlie the creation of Chinese memes (Biaoqingbao), the ways in which these memes mediate the digital practices of members in a student community, and how these students find opportunities for identity work. This study takes a social semiotic (Kress, Gunther R. 2010. Multimodality: a social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Taylor & Francis) and Mediated Discourse Analysis approach (Scollon, Ron. 2001. Mediated discourse: The Nexus of practice. Routledge; Scollon and Scollon 2004; Norris, Sigrid & Rodney H. Jones. 2005. Discourse in action: introducing mediated discourse analysis. London: Routledge) to analyze biaoqingbao as the mediate the social interaction within a light community. The data was collected using a form of digital ethnography. The memes studied in the current paper are unique in two ways. First, they combine both local and global people, places, objects and discourses deploying both Chinese and English texts and effectively create semiotic trajectories between highly localized digital meme practices and more global mainstream meme practices. Second, the practices of producing, sharing and remixing these memes are exclusively situated in a distinct light community and offer important opportunities for multimodal identity performance.


Corresponding author: Freek Olaf de Groot, Department of Applied Linguistics, Xi’an Jiaotong Liverpool University, 111 Ren’Ai lu, 215000, Suzhoui, China, E-mail:

References

Barton, David & Mary Hamilton. 2005. Literacy practices. In Situated literacies, 25–32. London: Taylor and Francis.Search in Google Scholar

Bauman, Richard & Charles L. Briggs. 1990. Poetics and performance as critical perspectives on language and social life. Annual Review of Anthropology. 59–88. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.19.1.59.Search in Google Scholar

Blommaert, Jan. 2015. Chronotopes, scales, and complexity in the study of language in society. Annual Review of Anthropology 44(1). 105–116.10.1146/annurev-anthro-102214-014035Search in Google Scholar

Blommaert, Jan. 2018. Durkheim and the internet: On sociolinguistics and the sociological imagination. London: Bloomsbury.10.5040/9781350055223Search in Google Scholar

Blommaert, Jan & Dong Jie. 2020. Ethnographic Fieldwork: A Beginner’s Guide. Bristol & Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781788927147Search in Google Scholar

Blommaert, Jan, Ying Lu & Kunming Li. 2022. From the self to the selfie. In Byron G. Adams & Fons J. R. van de Vijver (eds.). Non-western identity: Research and perspectives, 233–245. Cham: Springer International.10.1007/978-3-030-77242-0_14Search in Google Scholar

Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen & Rick Iedema. 2007. Identity trouble: Critical discourse and contested identities. London: Palgrave.10.1057/9780230593329Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Yujie, Zhifei Mao & Jack Linchuan Qiu. 2018. Super-sticky WeChat and Chinese Society. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.10.1108/9781787430914Search in Google Scholar

Franzke, Aline Shakti, Anja Bechmann, Michael Zimmer & Charles Ess. 2020. Internet research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Association of Internet Researchers 4(1). 9–22.Search in Google Scholar

Gee, James Paul. 2008. Sociolinguistics and literacies: Ideologies in discourses, 3rd edn. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Gee, James Paul. 2014. Unified discourse analysis: Language, reality, virtual worlds and video games. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315774459Search in Google Scholar

Gong, Haomin & Xin Yang. 2010. Digitized parody: The politics of egao in contemporary China. China Information 24(1). 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0920203x09350249.Search in Google Scholar

de Groot, Freek Olaf. 2021. A multimodal analysis of digitally mediated service encounters using ‘super-sticky’ applications: Implications from the micro to the macro. Multimodal Communication 10(1). 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1515/mc-2020-0013.Search in Google Scholar

Iedema, Rick. 2003. Multimodality, resemiotization: Extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice. Visual Communication 2(1). 29–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002001751.Search in Google Scholar

Jacquemet, Marco. 2015. Language in the age of globalization. In The Routledge handbook for linguistic anthropology, 329–347. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Yaqian & Camilla Vásquez. 2020. Exploring local meaning-making resources: A case study of a popular Chinese internet meme (biaoqingbao). Internet Pragmatics 3(2). 260–282. https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00042.jia.Search in Google Scholar

Jones, Rodney H. & Christoph A. Hafner. 2021. Understanding digital literacies: A practical introduction. London: Taylor and Francis.10.4324/9781003177647Search in Google Scholar

Knobel, Michele & Colin Lankshear. 2007. Online memes, affinities, and cultural production. A New Literacies Sampler 29. 199–227.Search in Google Scholar

Knobel, Michele & Colin Lankshear. 2016. Language, creativity, and remix culture. In The Routledge handbook of language and creativity, 398–414. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, Gunther R. 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Taylor & Francis.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, Gunther R. and Theo van Leeuwen. 2020. Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781003099857Search in Google Scholar

Kubanyiova, Magdalena. 2008. Rethinking research ethics in contemporary applied linguistics: The tension between macroethical and microethical perspectives in situated research. The Modern Language Journal 92(4). 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00784.x.Search in Google Scholar

Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oup.10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Lemke, Jay. 2009. Multimodality, identity, and time. Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis, 140–150. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Leppanen, Sirpa, Elina Westinen & Samu Kytola. 2017. Social media discourse, (dis) identifications and diversities. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315624822Search in Google Scholar

Liang, Yixin. 2017. If one thing can be resolved with biaoqing bao, then don’t use words!: The genealogy of biaoqing bao in the Chinese internet culture. Doctoral dissertation. University of Pittsburgh.Search in Google Scholar

Lu, Ying & Jan Blommaert. 2020. Understanding memes on Chinese social media: Biaoqing. Chinese Language and Discourse 11(2). 226–260.10.1075/cld.20009.luSearch in Google Scholar

Milner, Ryan. 2013. Pop polyvocality: Internet memes, public participation, and the occupy wall street movement. International Journal of Communication 7(34). 2357–2390.Search in Google Scholar

Milner, Ryan & Paul Wolff. 2023. On the meme train to Sylt: Memetic becoming and ambivalent identification online. Social Media + Society 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231158825.Search in Google Scholar

Nooney, Laine & Laura Portwood-Stacer. 2014. One does not simply: An introduction to the special issue on internet memes. Journal of Visual Culture 13(3). 248–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412914551351.Search in Google Scholar

Norris, Sigrid. 2004. Analyzing multimodal communication: A methodological framework. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203379493Search in Google Scholar

Norris, Sigrid. 2011. Identity in (inter)action: A methodological framework. London: Routledge.10.1515/9781934078280Search in Google Scholar

Norris, Sigrid & Rodney H. Jones. 2005. Discourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203018767Search in Google Scholar

Scollon, Ron. 2001. Mediated discourse: The Nexus of practice. Routledge.10.4324/9780203420065Search in Google Scholar

Scollon, Ron. 2008. 15 Discourse itineraries. Advances in Discourse Studies 233.Search in Google Scholar

Scollon, Ron & Suzie Scollon. 2003. Discourses in place: Language in the material world. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203422724Search in Google Scholar

Scollon, Suzie Wong & Suzie Scollon. 2004. Nexus analysis: Discourse and the emerging internet. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203694343Search in Google Scholar

Shifman, Limor. 2013. Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 18(3). 362–377. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12013.Search in Google Scholar

Varis, Piia & Jan Blommaert. 2015. Conviviality and collectives on social media: Virality, memes, and new social structures. Multilingual Margins: A Journal of Multilingualism from the Periphery 2(1). 31. https://doi.org/10.14426/mm.v2i1.50.Search in Google Scholar

Wertsch, James V. 1997. Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195117530.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Guobin & Min Jiang. 2015. The networked practice of online political satire in China: Between ritual and resistance. International Communication Gazette 77(3). 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048514568757.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Haiqing & Xu Jian. 2016. E’gao as a networked digital leisure practice in China. Digital leisure cultures. 164–177.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, Hiaqing & Jian Xu. 2016. E’gao as a networked digital leisure practice in China. Digital leisure cultures, 164–177. Abingdon: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Yus, Francisco. 2021. Incongruity-resolution humorous strategies in image macro memes. Internet Pragmatics 4(1). 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00058.yus.Search in Google Scholar

Zou, Sheng. 2020. Beneath the bitter laughter: Online parodies, structures of feeling and cultural citizenship in China. Global Media and Communication 16(2). 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766519900303.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-11-05
Accepted: 2024-11-11
Published Online: 2024-12-11

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 29.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mc-2024-0101/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button