ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION THROUGH THE USE OF EMOJIS IN RELATION TO COMPUTATIONAL AND INTERNET SEMIOTICS
Keywords:
artificial intelligence, knowledge representation, emojis, computational semiotics, Ferdinand de SaussureAbstract
The proliferation of emojis in digital communication has sparked interest in their potential for knowledge representation in artificial intelligence (AI) systems. This study explores the role of emojis in conveying meaning and their implications for AI-driven communication. The aim is to examine how emojis can enhance knowledge representation in AI, with objectives to analyse emoji usage patterns, identify cross-cultural variations, and assess their semantic implications. Grounded in Ferdinand de Saussure's semiotic theory, this research views emojis as signifiers with culturally-dependent signified, allowing for an intensed understanding of their meaning and context. Using a mixed-methods approach, we analysed emoji usage data from diverse online platforms and cultures. Eight major emojis were identified and examined for cross-cultural variations in meaning. Findings reveal significant differences in emoji interpretation across cultures, highlighting the need for context-aware AI systems. The smiley face, for instance, conveys happiness in Western cultures but can signify embarrassment in Japan. The study's implications for linguistics include the need for more nuanced understandings of digital communication and the development of AI systems that account for cultural variations in emoji usage. Emojis offer a rich source of knowledge representation for AI, but their meaning is culturally-dependent. We recommend developing AI systems that incorporate emoji semantics and cultural context for more effective human-computer interaction.References
Culler, J. (1981). The pursuit of signs: Semiotics, literature, deconstruction. London: Routledge & Regan Paul.
Chandler, D. (2002). Semiotics: The basics. London: Routledge.
Eco, U. (1976). A theory of Semiotics, Indiana University Press.
Hou, M. (2013). The semiotics of internet celebrity: Gergman style case. Paper 82. Tilburg University.
Leeds-Hurwitz, W. (1993). Semiotics and communication: Sign, codes, cultures. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Maryam, F. Mustaq, F., Sumaira and Shahzadi, H. (2020). Culturally ostracized Emoji: A Semiotic Analysis of Emojis and Emotions in Review of Education, Administration and Law (REAL). 3, 457-469.
Oloruntoba-Olu, T. (1999). Understanding Semiotics. In Efurosibina Adegbija (1989), (ed.) The English Language and Literature in English: An introductory book. https://books.google.com.ng?books.
Oswald, L.R. (2015). The structural semiotics paradigm for marketing research: Theory, methodology and case analysis. Semiotica, 205, 1-4.
Piaget, J. (1971). Structuralism (Trans Chaninah Maschler). London: Routledge &Kegan.
Saussure, F. (1983). Course in general linguistics (Trans Roy Harris). London: Duckworth.
Sotusa, M. (2009). Literary – semiotic analysis of Drum poetry. A PhD Thesis submitted to the University of Ibadan.
Sturrock, J. (1986). Structuralism. London: Paladin, p. 22.
Zoest, A.V. (1996). Interpretasi dan semiotika. In Panuti Sudjiman & Zoest, A.V. Serba-Sserbi semiotika. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.
