Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Emoji as an artificial digital language: a frame-semantic analysis of perception and interpretation Rusudan K. Makhachashvili1 , Svetlana I. Kovpik2 and Anna O. Bakhtina1 1 Borys Grinchenko Kyiv Metropolitan University, 18/2 Bulvarno-Kudryavska Str., Kyiv, 04053, Ukraine 2 Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, 54 Universytetskyi Ave., Kryvyi Rih, 50086, Ukraine Abstract Emoji are widely used in digital communication, but their linguistic status and meaning are not well understood. This study aims to investigate how emoji are perceived and interpreted by different groups of speakers, based on their age, profession, and knowledge of foreign languages. The study is based on an experiment that involved participants from various fields of education and other professions, who were asked to use emoji in the learning process. The study applies the concept of frame semantics to analyze the structure and semantics of emoji signs, and to explain the variation in their perception and interpretation. The results show that emoji are an artificial digital language that exhibits both a priori and a posteriori features, and that their meaning depends on the speaker’s mental frames, which are influenced by their professional activity and experience. The study also reveals the differences between representatives of the humanities and social sciences, and representatives of sciences, in their use and understanding of emoji. The study suggests that emoji have both advantages and disadvantages for the educational process and for the digitalization of society in general. Keywords emoji, artificial language, digital communication, frame semantics, perception, interpretation 1. Introduction Computational linguists (Anber and Jameel [1], Annamalai and Abdul Salam [2], Brody and Caldwell [3], Chichón and Jiménez [4], Schmidt et al. [5]) have explored the idea that emoji is a promising medium for pedagogical communication. Evans [6] argues that emoji have a great potential in conveying the meaning and the emotional nuances of the phrase [7]. In the context of modern globalization and digitization, which affect the philological sciences as well, the use of visual elements in messages has become a norm. This has changed the approach to interpret many of the problems of text linguistics. Recently, researchers have started to investigate the methods of transmitting and receiving information using semiotically complex or creolized text. We define semiotically complex text as a non-linear (palindrome in form and perception) text, whose content can be expressed by one or more visual signs. This type of text refers us to pictographic and hieroglyphic writing, which is characterized by an emphasis on visual reading of the content. However, we should note that the digitalization of the traditional text with the help of ICT introduces a new communicative barrier – the problem of sign interpretation. In our article [8] we presented the technology of visualizing the text of fiction (poetry) using emoji symbols on the Emoji-Maker platform. During the research we concluded that such an emoji ICT experiment stimulates students’ thinking, develops creative attention, and enables them to succinctly reproduce the meanings of poetry [9]. However, we also encountered the aforementioned problem of sign interpretation, since the generation of a visual sign involves the mental frames of a person, which depend directly on the genetic structure of thinking. This, in turn, leads to the fact that not only the perception but also the generation of the CoSinE 2024: 11th Illia O. Teplytskyi Workshop on Computer Simulation in Education, co-located with the XVI International Conference on Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (ICon-MaSTEd 2024), May 15, 2024, Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine " r.makhachashvili@kubg.edu.ua (R. K. Makhachashvili); kovpiks@ukr.net (S. I. Kovpik); a.bakhtina@kubg.edu.ua (A. O. Bakhtina) ~ https://eportfolio.kubg.edu.ua/teacher/1061 (R. K. Makhachashvili); https://kdpu.edu.ua/personal/sikovpik.html (S. I. Kovpik); https://eportfolio.kubg.edu.ua/teacher/2074 (A. O. Bakhtina)  0000-0002-4806-6434 (R. K. Makhachashvili); 0000-0001-6455-5572 (S. I. Kovpik); 0000-0003-3337-6648 (A. O. Bakhtina) © 2024 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). CEUR ceur-ws.org Workshop ISSN 1613-0073 Proceedings 146 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 sign will have differences (geometric shape, color, emotion, association). Makhachashvili and Bakhtina [10] consider this problem through the lens of L. Wittgenstein’s hypothesis about individual language (“Sprachspiel”): “Note that the human brain copies the structure of only one language (genetic), despite knowing two or more foreign languages. Therefore, if people communicate in one language, it does not mean that they reflect the structure of the symbolic system of communication. Genetically (mentally – in L. Wittgenstein) they structure and, accordingly, perceive and interpret the text differently. And this difference occurs due to the neural network formed in the structure of genetic language in the human brain” [10]. This digital technology is very relevant for the field of philological communication today, and we believe that the further development of text visualization technology will facilitate the effective learning of fiction by philology students. However, we think that it is important to pay more attention to the problem of sign interpretation, because it affects the level of understanding among humanity in a global sense. Therefore, after conducting an experiment with students generating visual text based on fiction [11], as reported in our article [8], we carried out another experiment. Its goal is to identify the features of posteriori construction of an artificial sign in digital communication, depending on the perception of both students and teachers. The objective of the paper. Systematic analysis of the empirical method in the study of interpretation of the visual emoji sign during its generation and perception, which will trace the semiotic transformation in the analysis of transgression of signs from natural languages into digital artificial (a posteriori) ones, especially emoji. Determining the pedagogical perception of the visual sign is made possible by the fact that the experiment involved not only teachers and students of philology, but also representatives of various fields: historians, economists, programmers, mathematicians and others, which allows to compare perceptions and interpretations of artificial emoji. First of all, let us explain what we mean by the aposteriori nature of artificial languages. We follow the definition given by Piperski [7] in his work “Construction of languages: from Esperanto to Dothraki”, in which he distinguishes between a priori and a posteriori artificial languages: Most early artificial languages were created by philosophers and had an a priori nature; this means that they were not based on existing languages, but were created on arbitrary principles. . . Beginning in the XIX century, artificial languages were usually a posteriori, i.e. they were partly derived from existing languages. . . ‘’ [7]. However, we consider emoji language as a hybrid of apriori and posteriori types, because it originates in the computer being (hereinafter – CB) – a complex, multidimensional field of synthesis of reality of human experience and activity mediated by digital and information technologies; technogenic reality, a component of the technosphere of existence [12]. Thus, like a priori languages, emoji is classified as a logical language (loglang) – a programming language. This dual nature is due to the fact that emoji was first created by a Japanese designer Shigetaka Kurita [13], who designed the first 176 characters for Japanese users of the i-mode mobile platform. The pictures he created (12x12 pixels) reflected the lives of the inhabitants of his city (Gifu Prefecture, Japan), reproducing the most common discourses of real communication. Therefore, drawing on the idea of manga – one of the forms of Japanese art, Kurita depicted pictographically elements of Japanese culture, and the phonetic similarity of the word emoji was coincidental. Only later in Unicode Consortsium emoji acquired the meaning of emotional characteristics. In our study [9] we emphasize the role of the reader-interpreter, which led us to the following conclusion: recipient (reader-interpreter), using specific technological tools, a visual iconic sign (smile) reproduces the polylateral metalinguistic functionality of the meaning of the sign based on the artistic word. The results, on one hand, complicate the structure of semiotic field of artificial sign, on the other hand – expand mental frames of human thought, explicate the emoji sign as universal rather than local or mental (the latter, in turn, is confirmed by the fact that, once adopted by the Unicode Consortsium, emoji transgressed into the international language of characters, whose creation has become purely digital). Universality and digital conditionality of emoji provide multi-directional semantic load of the sign. Addressing this issue, Makhachashvili and Bakhtina [10] introduced the linguistic concept of “polylateralism” – (from the ancient Greek 𝜋𝑜𝜆𝜐 ´ – many; from the Latin latus – side) – a category that reflects in the digital emoji sign versatile, multi-vector reproduction of emotions 147 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 through logical-structural, lexical-grammatical, morphological, etc. means [10]. Therefore, based on the logic (a priori) and a posteriori aspects of the artificial digital emoji language, and building on previous research on this topic, we propose the design of the pedagogical experiment. We aim to examine how emoji is used in the learning process through digital communication, what criteria are used by educators and learners when constructing an artificial sign, which plays a special role in the interpretation of a specific emoji. 2. Research methodology To solve the delineated tasks, the following methods were used: analytical review – for the study and analysis of scientific and methodological literature, curricula, generalization of information to determine the theoretical and methodological foundations of the study; pedagogical modeling – for the study of pedagogical objects through the modeling of procedural, structural and substantive and conceptual characteristics and individual “aspects” of the educational process. Empirical method – in order to study the phenomenon through experiment and rational processing of the obtained data. Structural method – in order to identify and analyze structural elements, individual components, categories, etc., which form the emoji-sign. The method of component analysis – in order to identify the minimum semantic (semantic) elements that form the semantic component of the sign. Semiotic method – in order to study the sign from the standpoint of its organization, the properties of its elements and categories. Descriptive method – in order to describe in detail, the language units in the inventory and systematization. Dialectical method as a way to find a theoretical construction of the linguistic picture of the world, the study of the true criteria for the coexistence of language and the world, language and man, language and machine. Logical-analytical methods, namely the method of induction and deduction, which allows to consider the content of the object, specifying and generalizing its concept; the method of formalization as the study of an object by reflecting their structure in symbolic form. 3. Research results In order to identify differentiation in the interpretation of emoji, we conducted an experiment involving 110 respondents aged 10 to 70 years (figure 1). Such a large-scale coverage of the age category allowed to fundamentally reflect the picture of the world and digital literacy of mentally different representatives, and also allowed to distinguish groups of people whose linguistic pattern differs significantly from respondents of other age categories. All this is directly reproduced in the interpretation of the optical digital sign. Thus, the results of the experiment show that emoji is used more by respondents whose age range is from 10 to 20 years, and to a lesser extent – from 40 years (figure 2). Accordingly, such results explain the verbal skills of the recipients, depending on the professional and mental qualities, which will be discussed later. Since the experiment was conducted in order to identify functioning of digital emoji language in the pedagogical process, divided into various narrow fields, the part was taken by representatives of the following professions: philology (educators (lecturers, teachers) and students). However, the validity of the experimental field increases due to the participation in the experiment of representatives of the following fields: history, IT, mathematical modeling, publishing, choreography, psychology, economics, diplomacy, archaeology, IT, fine arts. The status of the respondent varies from student to habilitated doctor. The wide scale of profile differentiation fractalizes semantic shifts in the interpretation of a sign in more detail. This is characterized, in addition, by the choice of social network, where the respondent uses emoji (figure 3). We can see that most age groups of recipients use Facebook, Instagram, Twitter (X). However, the age group of up to 20 years tests artificial languages on other platforms (Tik-Tok, Discord, Tumblr), which is also reflected in the verbal skills of the recipients. In terms of professional affiliation, Facebook is more used by the teaching staff of various universities (59.1% of respondents); Instagram – by students of different universities – 67.3%, other social networks – by the lowest percentage of respondents, which is fractalized to all categories of respondents. 148 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 1: Frequency of emoji usage in digital communication. Figure 2: Age brackets for emoji users in digital communication. Another important characteristic of differentiation and fractalization of answers is mastery of foreign languages. Among the respondents were experts in the following languages: Russian (99%), English (98%), Spanish (74%), Italian (49%), French (49%), German (23%), Chinese (4%), Japanese (2%), Korean (1%), Czech (1%), Polish (1%), Georgian (1%), Armenian (1%), Hebrew (1%), Turkish (1%). Therefore, the results concluded that the use of emoji in digital communication (both in everyday life and in the professional sphere) is more pertinent to recipients with knowledge of two or more foreign languages (table 1). However, the interpretation of a particular sign varies and depends on a particular foreign language (and / or on professional skills). Emoji is a typical visual complement to the content of text / speech in digital communication for experts in Oriental languages, including Mandarin Chinese, Japanese and Korean, which, in turn, refers us to the mental frames of Oriental language structures. Fillmore [14] classifies frames as P-semantics, which operates with the concept of interpretive description of the semantics of tokens, grammatical categories and text. Such semantics includes three components: compositional semantics (frame structure of the text), practical reasoning based on the use of frame knowledge (knowledge of reality) and provides identification of implicit semantic connections between utterances in the text; reasoning based on knowledge of communicative intentions represented in frame form. In the situation of reasoning, natural-linguistic inference is considered as a set of operations on the elements of frames [14]. Reliance on the frame structure also applies to experts in the Spanish language (74%). However, it’s worth noting that in Hispanic communication emoji has emotional presupposition: Spanish language professionals a priori interpreted emoji of a psycho-emotional 149 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 3: Choice of social network, where the respondent uses emoji. meaning, mostly adiaphorizing rational structure components of the sign. The positive attitude and use of emoji is also observed in the professional specifics, in particular, artists who, unlike experts in Romance languages, appeal to real causal (implicit and semantic) connections both between utterances in digital communication (emoji) and between components of one sign. Table 1 Distribution of native languages spoken by emoji users. What languages do you speak? % of respondents Ukrainian 100% Russian 99% English 98% Spanish 74% Italian 49% French 49% German 23% Chinese 4% Japanese 2% Korean 1% Czech 1% Polish 1% Georgian 1% Armenian 1% Hebrew 1% Turkish 1% The most unexpected among the results of the survey were the responses of computer science specialists, whose attitude to emoji was twofold. However, we can assume that experts in the field of IT completely include emoji in the loglan, which apriori cannot have an emotional substrate. Computer science specialists, in turn, perceive not so much a language as its matrix. Under such conditions, the logical indicator is that the most extensive use of emoji is in the humanities (philologists, historians, philosophers), the specifics of whose profession refers to information as a tool of influence, which is directly inferred from the emotional substrate. To a lesser extent, emoji is used by the exact sciences specialists, the results of whose activity are represented by numerical data. The smallest percentage – computer science specialists, where the result is a matrix. The same effectiveness, as in the above case, 150 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 applied to the interpretation of the concept of emoji (table 2). Artists and / or Oriental and Romance languages professionals emphasized the iconicity / ideography of the sign in digital communication, the graphic visualization of which is independent of the narrative form, but performs the contractual function of an auxiliary non-verbal explicant. Specialists in the humanities focused on the emotional characteristics of the sign, which is designed to enhance the effect of the communicative act in digital medium. Table 2 Interpretation of the concept of emoji by respondents. How do you understand what emoji is? Emoticons Facial expressions in social networks Emoticons A kind of graphic language Emoticon Mood display Smileys Face sticker to emphasize or express your emotions in the message Expressing emotions with pictures The language of various graphic signs Small pictures used to indicate emotions A picture that reproduces feelings, understandable to both the re- cipient and the author of the statement Signs A graphic sign, an illustration that conveys a certain concept, is used when communicating online A symbol for conveying the emotional Psychological state that reflects the instantaneous reaction to ex- side of communication ternal factors Graphic symbol for emotions and states Coloring of the written text and accessible expression of emotions A picture depicting a certain emotion Emotions that help to convey more clearly our emotions, state, attitude to the situation, feelings, and sometimes due to emotions you cannot even write a text. Emoticons designed to facilitate com- Mini drawings to indicate emotions, objects through which it is munication and convey different states possible to convey information / emotions Expression of emotions with the help of Use of digital symbols to demonstrate emotions, feelings, personal visual images reaction to messages, photos in online communication A picture that helps you show your own Auxiliary ideographic record emotions in text messages We mentioned above the verbal skills of the recipients, which, like the previous features, depend on age, professional activity and knowledge of foreign languages. In order to trace the differentiation of the perception and interpretation of the emoji sign, 10 most used emoji in different operation systems and digital platforms were added to the survey in order to trace how the respondent understood each sign. In addition to the characteristic of popularity, the dual or polylateral nature of the sign was an important factor in choosing emoji for the experiment, which hypothetically refers to the conclusion about the differentiation of the perception of signs by each recipient. Thus, the sign #1 (figure 4) for 99% of respondents is interpreted unambiguously, with deviations of the semantic load in 1%: ok, good, cool, great, well done, good job, very good, super, perfectly etc. However, from recipients aged 10 to 20 we have answers that reflect age-related deviations in perception, for example, “I like it (smiley is not very much, my grandmother throws me and teenagers use for this )”. A similar perception applies to the sign #2 (figure 5), the interpretation of which is 100% synthesized with a negative connotation and explicated within one semantic field. However, given the scale to differentiate the characteristics of respondents, the verbal definitions of the sign can be traced to the structure of the linguistic ousia of answers, hypothetically deducing the nature of the category / profession / status / experience of a particular answer (table 3). The sign #3 (figure 6) in digital communication embodies the polylateral structure of perception and interpretation. The answers to this sign are radically different (table 4). Perception and interpretation of the sign varies within the concepts of “horror”, “shock”, “fear”, “surprise”. Accordingly, it will be appropriate to emphasize the characteristics of the recipient to trace 151 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 4: Emoji sign #1. Figure 5: Emoji sign #2. Table 3 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #2. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Surprise Means surprise, used as a reaction to a message, be it a photo, video or news Shock When I realized that 1 course had already ended Oh really! You can go crazy, but really Wow Surprise. Hidden irony (rare) To indicate surprise / astonishment, but mostly with a Incredible! positive connotation Surprise, admiration Surprise from the written (description of actions in the message) Horror! Shock! What is happening! Surprise from the situation or from the words spo- ken the frame structure of speech and verbal skills of respondents. Thus, the sign #3 is interpreted and perceived as horror in the category of 20 to 40 years (60%), shock – from 10 to 20 years (15.5%), fear – from 40 to 65 years (22.7%), as well as 66 years (1%) and 70 years (1%), surprise – from 40 to 65 years (22.7%). According to professional characteristics, the answers are fractalized into all categories evenly. The situation with the sign #4 is more unambiguous (figure 7). However, it should be noted that the age categories 10 to 20 and 20 to 40 years in most cases interpreted the sign in terms of CB exclusively, emphasizing the digital continuum, in contrast to other categories that described the sign purely emotionally in the real ontological dimension (table 5). The sign #5 (figure 8) expresses an error in interpretation and perception of 2%. Among the most typical – “sadness”, “tears”, “sadness”, “fiasco”, “pain”. The sarcastic connotation of the use of the sign in digital communication (age category from 40 to 65 in the humanities) (table 6) has to be emphasized, as well as despair, depression, fatigue (age category 10 to 20 years – students) – with appropriate explanation by the recipients of their interpretation and perception: term finals at the university). The sign #6 (figure 9) is identically interpreted and perceived by the respondents, but there is a 152 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 6: Emoji sign #3. Table 4 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #3. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? What a horror! Omg! Strong surprise with hints of feelings for the interlocutor Stupefaction Horror; surprise in a negative context Cannot be Madre mia! in a bad way “Horror” – wrote a work on one topic, and it was necessary Drip! It is too much! I’m shocked! on another)) Horror! / Reaction to something very unpleasant Oh my God! To indicate surprise / shock, but not only with a positive Reaction to unexpected news, surprise connotation. Sometimes as a synonym for the expression “Oh, only!” Oh no! What? Something fascinating People are good, the house is white Surprise. Negative or jokingly negative context. Figure 7: Emoji sign #4. differentiation in the verbal reproduction of the sign. Thus, respondents with an age category ranging from 10 to 20 years, as well as specialists in Germanic languages have the signification “kiss”; from 20 to 40 years (respondents of the humanities) – “flirtation”, “love”, and respondents of exact sciences – “Air kiss”, “I kiss and love”. “You are very dear to me”. Respondents between the ages of 40 and 65 provide a more detailed lexical field, giving the signifier an explicit character: “You are my good, thank you. A sign of support, gratitude, approval, support”. The results showed that such an explication would be more typical for teachers with sufficient experience in educational institutions, mainly in the humanities. It is noteworthy that IT professionals do not visually perceive the sign for two reasons: 1) this symbol can be used only with the close social circle; 2) visually do not like the symbol. This perception once again concludes the structure of thinking of specialists in the exact sciences, the result of which is a number / calculation / matrix. An ambiguous picture is observed with the sign #7 in digital communication (figure 10), because 153 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Table 5 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #4. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Love I really like it, I support it very much, thank you very much I like something I like you I love you! Support, admiration Wonderful “Magical!” (positive warm attitude, especially to something sweet, sweet) “With love” – especially a warm relationship, thank you What I see is beautiful Fascination with news / comments from a close person / When I saw the puppy child / friend See something cute, beautiful Friendship compassion Fascination with news / comments from a close person / It has many meanings: it conveys pleasant amaze- child / friend ment, joy, admiration for beauty, love Figure 8: Emoji sign #5. Figure 9: Emoji sign #6. according to previous experimental empirical data, it was stated that the sign has a latent negative connotation. In order to confirm or refute the station, the mentioned sign was placed in the questionnaire. The results showed a proportion of 60/40: 60% of respondents, whose age category is mainly from 20 to 40 (23%) and from 40 to 65 (37%), perceive and interpret the sign, emphasizing the neutral and / or positive connotation that explains approval of something (“okay”, “good”, “super”, “yes” etc.). However, 40% of respondents (mostly humanities students – age group 10 to 20 years, as well as representatives of creative professions – artists, writers) see in the sign a negative connotation, which is characterized by several expressions: either sarcasm, or contempt for the interlocutor, or attempt to maintain one’s opinion (table 7). It was experimentally interesting for the authors of the study to trace the emotional characteristics of the sign #8 (figure 11). Undoubtedly, the sign is an identifier of the global civilizational phenomenon of modernity, which led to the global pandemic – the coronavirus in COVID-19 [15, 16, 17]. Specified sign, in fact, with appeared 154 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Table 6 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #5. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? I’m crying When I want to emphasize my fatigue from some- thing, irritation, helplessness Very sad Difficult situation Sadness / crying Sorry, pain, injustice Tears, sadness, can be sarcastic Notification of bad news, reaction to something sad “Sorry” – disappointment, sadness I forgot to attach the file to work Disappointment when something failed, but this smiley still Something tragic has a humorous connotation. In my opinion, it cannot be used as a reaction to the news related to the deterioration of human health, or, God forbid, death. frustration in life “but not what the stars are so united, I will not give up” + hyperbolization of real disappointment frustration in life When something is difficult / impossible to change, but I would like to. sadness or tears with irony / sarcasm (any context) Personal correspondence or friendly, reaction to the message Figure 10: Emoji sign #7. Figure 11: Emoji sign #8. in digital communication usage at the beginning of the quarantine, which covered virtually the whole world. However, computer being eliminates any locality, leaving in the substrate a psycho-emotional factor of sign perception. Thus, according to the results, we obtained the following disclosure: 70% of respondents of all categories explained the sign as “disease”, “epidemic”, “temperature”. However, the answers of humanities teachers, as well as students aged 20 to 40, were typical. The signifier of the #8 sign of the mentioned respondents is “silence” or “I do not use”. Representatives of exact and natural sciences mostly emphasized that the sign does not belong to their digital continuum (table 8). The sign #9 (figure 12) is not characterized by popularity in use in computer being, therefore a priori 155 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Table 7 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #7. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Like Keep it up, super Super Short answer to the sign of approval, support, ac- ceptance of information OK Very good, or sarcastic “good idea” “approval” (neutral) Well done! – approval Means that the above seen cool (accompanied by other emojis can mean causticity, on the bag, gen- erally expressing both good and evil) Well done / class! / Great job! / OK Approval of user message (actions described in mes- sage) Class, great, thanks! All is well! Most likely, it is a response Again, it can mean either satisfaction and approval, / reaction to someone’s fulfilled request or reaction to the or I use it in an ironic sense news and carries approval, or sometimes this smiley is a neutral response. postironia good job; consent Table 8 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #8. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Quarantine Warning or description of the current situation I’m sick I’m in a mask))) I do not use Mask on the face, silence Coronavirus Wearing a mask is mandatory, something related to the hospital Laughter under a mask COVID-19 I’m sick. But I would call such an emoji would not use Self-isolation I’m silent Limitations of opportunities I’m silent I’m sick or I’d better keep quiet She fell ill. But in the conditions of quarantine - observance Someone is sick and has to SIT AT HOME. (obvious of safety rules. influence of recent events) Keep your distance I would have written earlier: I can’t speak! now it is possible: we adhere to a mask mode. Didn’t use this emoji. Safety measures during the epidemic I do not use this, but now it is relevant, fashionable to use as a reminder of protection it was placed for the purpose of revealing of differentiation of a lexical field of respondents that is projected on perceptual sensations. A remarkable point is that the less popular (almost unknown emoji sign) was 100% interpreted unam- biguously and with one (in this case – negative) connotation. This is important information, because popular characters have many semantic branches in recipients of different categories, which again confirms the open aposteriority of artificial emoji language with the emergence of new connotations in digital communication and expansion of the lexical field of the respondent (table 9). The sign #10 (figure 13) in our experiment is the key optical sign in digital communication. The sign is quite popular, however, as the results of the experiment showed, it is popular not for the denotation, but for the psycho-emotional characteristics of the respondent. 99% of respondents answered that the sign has a negative connotation and optically reflects the state of anger, rage and rage. In fact, this sign is mental in location – a sign of Japanese origin to express a sense of triumph (in Unicode Consortium – “Face with Look of Triumph”). Thus, we conclude that the mentioned mental 156 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 12: Emoji sign #9. Table 9 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #9. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Head turn In alcohol intoxication tired, broken, confused This is my face every morning Amazingly I do not use it because it is disgusting incomprehension An unusual, extraordinary situation; uncertainty “Hangover” / “sleep deprivation” – a reaction to questions Expresses stupidity, play, intoxication about the condition Fatigue, inability to concentrate Confused condition of students after the session Crazy situation I don’t even know. when I swelled dumplings... I have never seen such a thing, he is a bit drunk Figure 13: Emoji sign #10. frame was not read by computer science specialists, artists or connoisseurs of oriental languages. The sign was interpreted and perceived according to the universal psycho-emotional state – the state of anger, rage, anger (table 10). The respondent who provided the only correct answer is a historian by profession. Hypothetically and deductively, we can conclude that in this case the emotional nature of the artificial language emoji prevailed, which, in fact, is one hundred percent embedded in the concept of Unicode Consortium. Correct disambiguation of this sign is an exception to appeal to the respondent’s profession when it comes to text as information. For linguists the text was perceived as a structure for computer science specialists – a matrix, representatives of the exact sciences – hypothesis. Perceiving the text as information, the representative of the historical profession did not notice the emotional nature of the sign, relying in general on the information about this sign, which is its (sign) English name “Face with Look of Triumph”. The final stage of the survey was the question “Can emoji replace natural language?”. In fact, the last question is an additional result of previous conclusions on the use of emoji in the pedagogical process, depending on the different categories of respondents. The results of the survey show the following picture: 5.5% (6 respondents) answered “Yes, in full”; 29.1% (32 respondents) – “50/50”; 59.1% (65 respondents) – “No, they can’t” (figure 14). 157 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Table 10 Generalized definitions of Emoji sign #10. What does the following emoji mean to you? In what context could you use it? Malice Lots of work, boring, maybe annoying Malice “evil”, “dissatisfied”, “not in humor”, “offended” I’m angry I’m outraged Fatigue I would kill! Very emotional Horror I’m boiling the last stage before anger, I can barely restrain myself from breaking Anger, resentment, but again, I would use it to denote my “God forbid she’s still something” XD (stock up on reactions in not very serious situations. In addition, I read patience) that this smiley is not an expression of dissatisfaction, but has a different connotation, but for me it is an expression of these emotions. Dissatisfaction, anger, the tram was late overflowing with negative emotions, I want to let off steam Figure 14: Interchangeability of emoji sign system and natural language. Note that the answer “Yes, in full” belongs to the respondents, whose age category is mostly from 10 to 20 years, to a lesser extent – from 20 to 40 (students and teachers of philology and artists). In the first case, such results are explained by the nature of the humanities (mostly literary studies), where emoji is an a priori fact of the aposteriori continuum (for example, a work of fiction), and therefore is one hundred percent significant and signifier at the same time. In the second case, the object of fine art is essentially synonymous with emoji pictographic (visual, optical) result of creative activity. The answer “50/50” belongs to philologists (linguistics), as well as representatives of sciences (economists), social sciences (psychologists), humanities (archaeologists, publishers). Philologists- linguists appeal to the nature of their profession, considering the text (including art) as a structure – in particular in syntagmatics and paradigmatics, and thus, this explains the interest in the differential verbalization of the polylateral emoji sign as an apriori-posteriori system of thinking [10]. Hypotheti- cally, we explain the position of the representatives of economic sciences, appealing to the ergonomic ousia of language and speech resources in digital communication. In the case of the social sciences and humanities, a fundamental factor is the understanding of emoji as a supplement to the basic layer of information in digital communication. The answer “No, they can’t” belongs more to the humanities, in particular to philologists, whose age category is from 40 to 60, as well as 66 years. This is probably explained by the temporal limits of the emergence of the digital continuum in the former Soviet republics, which in the long run prolonged the universality, ideality and completeness of natural languages. 158 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 A big surprise was the position of computer science specialists, which expresses the impossibility of artificial languages (including emoji) to be a substitute for natural. We have already emphasized this unexpectedness above. Thus, we finally conclude that computer science specialists, studying language as a digital palindrome and an atemporal matrix, classify emoji as a loglan, which a priori cannot have an emotional substrate. 7 out of 110 respondents expressed a desire to express their opinion on the question “Can emoji replace natural language?”: 1. They can only supplement / diversify. 2. Replace no, but they give the correspondence cool emotions. One emoji can convey your mood. 3. It is only a supplement to the written conversation, although it can be a substitute for emotions in the same conversation. 4. For me, emoji is more of a complement to ordinary language, but not a replacement for it. It’s like a picture book. Without pictures it is not so colorful and fun. 5. They create an analog language, but natural language is better, because you can operate live with a newly created expression of emotions. Emoji create boundaries within which you can express yourself, but it is often impossible to find an exact match for your emotions. 6. Partly, but it is worth the vicinity ’ favorites, each emoji treated every person differently. And this can lead to misunderstandings. And natural language cannot be completely replaced, it is rather a supplement to the expression of emotions. 7. To some extent. But some have already replaced The respondents’ detailed answers were subject to digital content analysis via an open source Voyant corpus/text mining toolkit (https://voyant-tools.org/). Two instruments were used specifitaly for 1) key words identification (quantitavely calibrated word cirrus, featuring foregrounded concepts and notions) – figure 15, and 2) key words frequency estimation (key words trending in the horizontally segmented corpus of responses) – figure 16. The key words of the respondents’ detailed answers in equal proportions are “language”, “emotions”, “emoji”, “expression”, which hypothetically appeals to the conceptualiazation of natural languages as perfect, and therefore artificial languages, in particular emoji, are an optical supplement to the expression of a particular context. Consequently, emoji becomes not so much an artificial language as a form of language, a frame of writing that enhances and / or explains human feelings and emotions, but at the same time can create misunderstandings of the explication of the signifier, which depends on many factors: conditions, modality of expression etc. Figure 15: Digital content analysis: calibrated word cirrus. All the stated above, given the specifics of the respondents’ answers, allows to conclude that in terms of expression emoji is not an independent language. Despite a clear and logical algorithm for generating and codifying artificial language in computer being, the perception and interpretation of a particular emoji sign varies depending on its use by a particular person. However, it is this feature of 159 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 Figure 16: Digital content analysis: key words frequency. the emoji language that involves updating the content and form of academic writing in the pedagogical educational process with the involvement of the ICT generated and implemented emoji language in a specific context. After all, the use of graphic signs will promote the development of visual (photographic) memory in students, as well as the development of emotional intelligence (EQ), necessary for awareness and understanding of one’s own emotions and the emotions of others [18]. According to theory of Bar-On [19], emotional intelligence is defined as a set of various abilities that provide the ability to act successfully in any situation [20]. In addition, under lockdown through COVID-19 timespan [21, 22, 23], the use of emoji in the pedagogical process can prevent stressful situations, and therefore provide for better and more effective learning, because emotional intelligence involves the activation of the following functions: interpretive, regulatory, adaptive, stress-protective, activational. Thus, summarizing all the empirical data collected through the survey, we can trace the effectiveness of the use of artificial languages in the pedagogical process, taking into account the specifics of the professional activities of the respondent. However, we should note that, summarizing the experimental data, we get another question: why use the emoji language in the pedagogical process? As the survey showed, emoji are an integral part of modern digital communications. Moreover, the digitalization of the educational process by its nature appeals to the codification of the semantic field of the communicative act [24]. Therefore, we consider emoji not so much a new as a newer, modernized format of the sign system, which allows different systems in its structure (cuneiform – hieroglyphics – Morse code) in digital communication. 4. Conclusions We conducted a survey of participants in the educational process to investigate the following: 1. The artificial digital emoji language exhibits polylaterality in its structure (sign generation elements) and semantics (multi-directional perception and interpretation of the sign). This accounts for the diversity of emoji signs, which reflect both mental frames and universal features. 2. The polylateral perception and interpretation of emoji depends on the characteristics of the speaker, which we classified into the following categories in our study: • Age • Profession • Foreign language proficiency • Social network preference. Our empirical experiment was initially designed for teachers and educators in the pedagogical field. Our aim was to examine the speed and direction of the integration of the digital continuum into 160 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 the pedagogical activity (artificial languages, especially emoji) in order to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of learning at the intersection of natural and artificial languages and digital communication. However, we also received responses from other professionals, such as computer scientists, economists, artists, poets and writers, which enabled us to broaden the scope of our study, considering not only antithetical professions (humanities and sciences), but also the nature and specifics of each profession. The latter, in turn, is encoded in the structure of the speaker’s thought by mental frames that shape the verbal language system and the speaking behavior of the respondents, as well as the ideographic visual pattern embedded in the artificial language of emoji. Based on the results of the experiment, we also conclude that all respondents (110 people) use emoji in both their personal and professional lives. However, the essence of emoji in digital communication has significant nuances for each profession (not excluding age and language skills). Thus, the representatives of the humanities and social sciences use emoji to convey the psycho-emotional aspect of the sign, considering it as an addition to the text to express emotions in digital communication. Therefore, emoji can replace natural language up to 50% for these respondents, as shown by the experiment to reproduce poetic content using Emoji-Maker platform. Only a small percentage of respondents believe that natural language can be fully replaced by artificial language. These respondents include philologists and linguists. However, it should be noted that linguists provided detailed answers regarding the perception and interpretation of emoji signs, which confirms their view of emoji language as an a priori-a posteriori system. Therefore, emoji can be either a supplement or a substitute for natural language with a complete meaning representation. Representatives of sciences (mathematicians, economists, programmers) regard emoji as an inde- pendent language to a lesser extent, which is explained by the frame P-semantics of their thinking structure, which is as follows. For these speakers, natural language itself is an auxiliary element for their professional performance, which a priori places artificial languages in the position of auxiliary symbols to obtain the work result in the form of digital content and matrix grid. Therefore, most of these respondents use emoji without assigning clear and unambiguous connotations to the sign during digital communication. 5. Future work For future research, we need to extend the classification of respondents by their professional activity, by including the following groups in the experiment: 1. Teachers: specialists in physics, biology, law, political science and others who were not involved in the experiment. 2. Non-teachers: other professions that are not related to education and pedagogy. Such a large and diverse sample of respondents will allow us to obtain a Gaussian curve with a normal (statistical) distribution of the essence of emoji language, fractalizing the effect of the exponential function of artificial language into a quadratic function. This way, we will have a deductive hypothesis of the role, function and impact of emoji language on teachers and non-teachers, which will reveal the pros and cons of digitalization of society both in the educational process and beyond. Moreover, this approach will enable us to examine the linguistic construction of individual “Sprachspiel” (term by Wittgenstein [25]) using natural and artificial languages with an emphasis on the apriori-posteriori nature of emoji in digital communication. Acknowledgments The research was conducted within the framework project of the Department of Romance Philology and Typology (Borys Grinchenko Kyiv Metropolitan University, Kyiv) “Development of European languages and literatures in the context of intercultural communication” (registration code 0116U00660) and the 161 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 framework project of the Department of Ukrainian and World Literatures (Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, Kryvyi Rih) “Poetics of the text of a work of art”. References [1] M. M. Anber, A. S. Jameel, Measuring University of Anbar EFL Students’ awareness of emoji faces in WhatsApp and their implementations, Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences 47 (2020) 582–593. [2] S. Annamalai, S. N. Abdul Salam, Undergraduates’ interpretation on WhatsApp smiley emoji, Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication 33 (2017) 89–103. doi:10.17576/ JKMJC-2017-3304-06. [3] N. Brody, L. Caldwell, Cues filtered in, cues filtered out, cues cute, and cues grotesque: Teaching mediated communication with emoji Pictionary, Communication Teacher 33 (2019) 127–131. doi:10.1080/17404622.2017.1401730. [4] J. L. E. Chichón, M. O. Jiménez, Assessment of the possibilities of writing skills development in English as a foreign language through the application of emoji as conceptual elements, Texto Livre 13 (2020) 96–119. doi:10.17851/1983-3652.13.1.96-119. [5] M. Schmidt, J. C. de Rose, R. Bortoloti, Relating, orienting and evoking functions in an IRAP study involving emotional pictographs (emojis) used in electronic messages, Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 21 (2021) 80–87. doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.06.005. [6] V. Evans, We communicate with emojis because they can be better than words, 2015. URL: https: //qz.com/556071/we-communicate-with-emojis-because-they-can-be-better-than-words/. [7] A. Piperski, Construction of languages: From Esperanto to Lekh Dothraki, Alpina non-fiction, Moscow, 2020. [8] R. K. Makhachashvili, S. I. Kovpik, A. O. Bakhtina, E. O. Shmeltser, Technology of poetry pre- sentation via Emoji Maker platform: Pedagogical function of graphic mimesis, CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2643 (2020) 264–280. [9] R. Makhachashvili, A. Bakhtina, I. Semenist, G. Prihodko, O. Prykhodchenko, Emoji Explication in Digital Communication: Logical-Phenomenological Experiment, in: Digital Humanities Workshop, DHW 2021, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2022, p. 191–197. doi:10. 1145/3526242.3526259. [10] R. K. Makhachashvili, A. O. Bakhtina, Empirical method in the study of polylaterality of emoji, Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanities University 4 (2019) 141–144. doi:10.32841/ 2409-1154.2019.43.3.34. [11] J. Fane, Why i use emoji in research and teaching, 2017. URL: https://theconversation.com/ why-i-use-emoji-in-research-and-teaching-75399. [12] R. K. Makhachashvili, Dynamics of English-language innovative logosphere of computer existence, Dissertation of Dr. Philol., Odessa I. I. Mechnikov National University, Odessa, 2013. [13] M. Negishi, Meet Shigetaka Kurita, the Father of Emoji, 2014. URL: https://www.wsj.com/articles/ BL-JRTB-16473. [14] C. J. Fillmore, Frames and the semantics of understanding, Quaderni di semantica 6 (1985) 222–254. URL: http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/ai/framesand85.pdf. [15] M. Velykodna, Psychoanalysis during the COVID-19 pandemic: Several reflections on countertrans- ference, Psychodynamic Practice 27 (2021) 10–28. doi:10.1080/14753634.2020.1863251. [16] N. Pinchuk, O. Pinchuk, O. Bondarchuk, V. Balakhtar, K. Balakhtar, N. Onopriienko-Kapustina, M. Shyshkina, O. Kuzminska, Personal indicators of occupational stress of employees working remotely in a pandemic quarantine, Educational Technology Quarterly 2022 (2022) 129–142. doi:10.55056/etq.8. [17] A. L. Miller, Adapting to teaching restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japanese universities, Educational Technology Quarterly 2022 (2022) 251–262. doi:10.55056/etq.21. [18] N. Volkova, O. Tarnopolsky, O. Lebid, K. Vlasenko, Students’ computer-based workshops in mandatory classes of English for students majoring in psychology and linguistics: A comparative 162 Rusudan K. Makhachashvili et al. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 146–163 experimental study, Educational Technology Quarterly 2021 (2021) 274–292. doi:10.55056/etq. 55. [19] R. Bar-On, Emotional intelligence: An integral part of positive psychology, South African Journal of Psychology 40 (2010) 54–62. doi:10.1177/008124631004000106. [20] D. Goleman, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, Bantam, New York, 2005. [21] M. Velykodna, I. Frankova, Psychological Support and Psychotherapy during the COVID-19 Outbreak: First Response of Practitioners, Journal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment 9 (2021) 148–161. doi:10.6000/2292-2598.2021.09.02.1. [22] I. Trubavina, V. Vorozhbit-Gorbatyuk, M. Shtefan, K. Kalina, O. Dzhus, From the experience of organizing artistic and productive activities of older preschool children by means of distance education in the conditions of quarantine measures for the spread of COVID-19, Educational Technology Quarterly 2021 (2021) 51–72. doi:10.55056/etq.56. [23] V. I. Kovalchuk, S. V. Maslich, L. H. Movchan, Digitalization of vocational education under crisis conditions, Educational Technology Quarterly 2023 (2023) 1–17. doi:10.55056/etq.49. [24] F. Pettersson, Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept, Education and Information Technologies 26 (2021) 187–204. doi:10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8. [25] L. Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Cosimo Classics, New York, 2007. URL: https: //standardebooks.org/ebooks/ludwig-wittgenstein/tractatus-logico-philosophicus/c-k-ogden. 163