Emoji History: The Missing Years
blog.gingerbeardman.com
blog.gingerbeardman.com
I wonder to what extent emoji use might evolve so that people without a common spoken language can use them to communicate with each other, the way classical Chinese has historically been used in East Asia. Judging from some emoji-filled comment sections I’ve seen on streaming platforms, it seems that that evolution may have already begun.
Your example expands well to old-school emoticons. Where I live, an "xD" serves as a laugh and is used in rather general way. Meanwhile in the Anglosphere it's stereotypically associated with specific demographics
I’m guessing the availability and quality of automatic translators is the limiter in this kind of emoji evolution.
Most of the popular social media platforms already allow their users to translate content (posts, comments, subtitles in video, etc) into their language.
Emojis (絵/e = picture, 文字/moji = character) refer to characters that represent a picture of something as a single character.
What makes an emoji different than an emoticon is mostly that some official body gave official recognition to the emoji's existence by adopting it in Unicode and didn't do so for the emoticon.
1: :seedling:, :eyes:, :bow:, :ok_woman:, ...
2: 顔文字, "face-moji", e.g. `(๑•̀ㅂ•́)و`
Emoji were easy to implement in Japanese because they already had an input system, and all the UI to turn phonetic into single characters: はなー>花. From there it's trivial to implement はなー> as well.
They become easier to implement in European languages as we got predictions, and touch screens, but until then implementing emoji would have been much more complex.
"Emoji present on the Sharp PI-4000 (1994)" from the article shows 20+ animals(12 from Chinese calendar), 9 relatives(grandpa, baby, so on), 3 types of alcohol(beer, sake, cocktail), and two smileys, one happy and one angry, out of 160 symbols. That's quite unlike typical non-Japanese emoticon sets before iOS emoji.
Granted, the Sharp pocket computer emoji wouldn't have been designed for chat, so there would have been less need for emoticons - but if you look at the list of emoji implemented in phones from NTT doCoMo and J-PHONE had back then linked in the article, there are just 5 each, neither even having a single circular smiley.
Also, IMO emojis are too small. I've been wanting a 4x size for emoji (double width and height). With more compact writing systems you can make everything bigger.
You'd probably find that this is precisely where linguistic evolution is fastest (kids, teens, etc.) and it would quickly get out of step with other modes.
I think that western world held a very arrogant view that alphabets are somehow inherently better than ideograms. Even when we started using letters to create simple drawings that would be put inside text, most people still completely denied the possibly of using ideograms. "It's just a small fad on this small little thing called 'computer', nobody actually does this". When you stop thinking this way then it becomes obvious that, if the Japanese decided to keep ideograms, even though they already have not one but two ways of writing phonetically, then there must be some advantage of using ideograms, they don't keep kanji around just for shits and giggles.
>I wonder to what extent emoji use might evolve so that people without a common spoken language can use them to communicate with each other
I can't see this happening. The way we construct sentences makes us think of letters first, and then tune the meaning using emojis. In order for such communication to occur, we'd need to invert this process: communicate with emojis first, and then use letters on top of that. Our language is simply not compatible with that way of thinking. It's easier for everyone to just learn English.
At present date there is no way to say "gun" in emoji, and even worse so the phrase "Bob brought a to work" would mean two different things at different time points - in 2013 Bob brought a gun to work, and in 2023 Bob brought a water gun to work. Drastically different meanings, that are changed not because the author changed the text - but font designers changed how "U+1F52B" is rendered.
https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/k1xxio/evolutio... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pistol_emoji
With that said, alphabetic writing is an indirection whereby the writing stands for sounds which stand for the objects. Logographic writing can copy grammars but the symbols can be read as the objects themselves.
I think it’s a simpler form of communication in some ways and if you were ever going to invent new characters when your language is “complete” you would probably do it in this manner.
What do these mean? What is this book? What is the story here?
> 渡辺和博の『金魂巻』で、「丸金」(㊎、金持ち)と「丸ビ」(ビ⃝、貧乏)が使用され、これは流行語大賞を受賞した。
They mean rich and poor
Most commonly they are typed as a circle followed by the character as in ○ビ and ○金 (used in my blog post) or enclosed in brackets to approximate a circle as in(金)and(ビ)or you can type unicode joining character to have the characters overlap each other as at https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/囲み文字#仮名文字
- https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/金
- https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/び
The characters that are circled are:
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/金#Japanese
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ビ#Japanese
This is somewhat related to the paragraph about Wikipedia that I put in the blog post. 1984 was very pre-internet and this stuff only happened in Japan. So, there are many references to Maru-kin ○金 and Maru-bi ○ビ in the book, and on the internet, and they're mentioned on Japanese wikipedia. But whether or not there's enough quality citations from verifiable sources to please English Wiktionary or Wikipedia is a battle I simply don't have the energy to get into these days. I'd encourage you to ask any sufficiently old Japanese person and they will let you know all about this era, and then gather enough quality cites.
Unicode comes close for kin (metal/rich):
- Circled https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+328E
- Parenthesized https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+322E
...but not for bi (poor)
After the book, and the 84年の日本流行語 (Japanese Buzzwords Award 1984), these symbols also featured in a movie based on the book
I'd be interested to read a similar deep dive into forum/ICQ/AIM emoticon history. I only remember them from around year 2000 though I'd been an internet user since 1995.
I don't recall seeing much, if any, discussion of emoji until they rose to power towards the end of the 00s.
Another difference is that emoticons blend in to the text visually. Your eyes aren’t draw to them like they are when you have a paragraph of text with colorful emoji sprinkled in-between, which can be much more jarring.
The thread started out with:
> This doesn't discuss Internet forum software which allowed including "emojis" in text, via small predefined GIF images.
Which I claimed were not termed emoji at the time. Those were all called emoticons or smileys in that time frame. At least in my neck of the woods.
I'm not well versed in those part of cultures, but IIUC, yellow smileys and semirealistic humans weren't focus of Japanese emoji implementations, whereas it is in Apple iOS emoji set.
I applaud David for going to Japan, great to see such dedication. My issue with the video is that it simply retreads the accepted timeline rather than doing any critical research. He was in Japan and could have done some real digging, you know? What was he doing for four months? Just editing the video? I don't know. So, I think the content of the video is not a deep dive at all, as it doesn't uncover anything new. None of the stuff I uncovered for my blog post is covered. And we can now see more clearly than ever that Shigetaka Kurita is not the creator of emoji, but rather the creator of the most well-know set of emoji that was perhaps the first use of the sparkle emoji. That's a pretty big difference.
BTW my research was conducted in my free time over less than two weeks. It consisted of some googling, talking with Japanese friends, reading Japanese wikipedia (with browser translation, as can't read it natively) and that is all from the comfort of my own desk. So I would say anybody is capable of having done this.
Of course, I had the bonus of being clued in that earlier history existed thanks to the device I had in my hands. But my point is that we should always question sources and accepted history, because more often than not there's additional story to be told.
Plus, there's a question of how people use them, but that distinction I think came later