Phatic

Phatic (pronounced fat-ik)

In linguistics (as phatic communication), denoting speech used to convey any kind of social relationship (of speech, especially of conversational phrases) used to establish social contact and to express sociability rather than any substantive or even specific meaning.

1923: From the Ancient Greek φατός (phat, phatós) (spoken; capable of being spoken) from φημί (phēmí or phánai) (I speak; I say).  Phatic is a verbid of phánai, from the primitive Indo-European root bha (to speak, tell, say), the construct being phat + -ic.  The suffix –ic is from the Middle English -ik, from the Old French -ique from the Latin -icus from the primitive Indo-European -kos, formed with the i-stem suffix -i- and the adjectival suffix -kos.  It was related to the Ancient Greek -ικός (-ikós), the Sanskrit श (śa) & क (ka) and the Old Church Slavonic -ъкъ (-ŭkŭ) and was a doublet of -y.  It attached to noun-stems to convey the meanings “characteristic of; like; typical & pertaining to”; on adjectival stems it acted emphatically.  The term phatic communion (bonding by language) was coined by Polish-born British anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski (1884-1942) in his essay The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages (1923).  Phatic is an adjective and phatically is an adverb (the rare phaticesque is non-standard); in the technical use of structural linguistics, phatic can be a noun; the noun plural  being phatics.

Phatic communication at the bar table: Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

In linguistics, phatic communication is that which pertains to words in a perfunctory or procedural manner in accordance with social convention rather than to impart information or to convey some specific or explicit meaning.  Anthony Burgess (1917–1993) in his novel 1985 (1978) used an unusual structure in that the first section contained a number of essays and dialogues discussing George Orwell's (1903-1950) Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and the deconstruction of some relevant etymology and as a period-piece from "winter of discontent" England, it remains an interesting read.  Burgess suggested the classic example of phatic communication was the frequent and familiar exchange "How are you?" & "Fine", the question not literally disclosing and interest in the well-being of another but merely an acceptable form of greeting.  The response is often far from true but is the correct social convention and merely an acknowledgement of the greeting.

Phatic communication at the bar.  Lindsay Lohan, Lohan Nightclub, Athens, 2017.

In the English-speaking world, phatic communication varies in form between social classes but is almost universally perfunctory.  In other cultures it is more formal and sometimes a part of social rituals.  The Persian تعارف‎ (Taarof or Tarof) is a quasi-codified system of etiquette which, ad hoc, creates social relationships based usually on social rank.  The Japanese use a collection of phatic expressions which, unlike in English, tend more frequently to re-occur during conversations; In Japan they fulfill an essentially structural role and are known as the aizuchi.

Malinowski, Phatics and Social Media

Anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski introduced two concepts for the study of language: context of situation and context of culture onto which he mapped the three strands of his semantic theory.  The first was the context of linguistic data; the second concerns the range of meaning and the third the context of situation which may allow one to disambiguate semantically unclear sentences.  Malinowski’s theories were for decades controversial in both anthropological and linguistic circles but enjoyed a revival of interest with the rise of social media.  What was identified as phatic communication on these platforms turned out to be the remarkable volume of micro-posts which appear to have their origins in the human need for social upkeep.  Unlike earlier forms of digital messaging such as eMail or SMS, a much higher proportion of messaging imparted no substantive information and had no practical value beyond its symbolic value of maintaining social contact.

In Malinowski’s model, the three phatic functions are (1) a social function to establish and maintain social connections, (2) a communicative function to demonstrate that the channel of communication is open and present oneself as a potential communication partner and (3) a validation and recognition function to indicate recognition of one’s interlocutor as a potential communicative partner.  None of this was unique to social media but cotemporary theorists added layers.  There is now (4) indexical information for social categorization (ie to signal different aspects of social identity), (5)  to negotiate the relationship, especially particular relative status, roles and affectivity (manifesting clearly in the forms of greetings and address used according to social or affective relationships) and (6) to reinforce social structure.

Bronisław Malinowski (1884-1942).

In linguistics, this construct came to be known as phatic culture, its social implication in everyday life being phatic function.  As has long been the nature of academic linguistics, something elegant and comprehendible (like Malinowski’s model) soon became a framework for smaller and smaller refinements including (7) the metalinguistic (verifying the code), (8) the emotive (expressing the sender’s state), (9) the conative (inciting the receiver’s response), (10) the phatic (maintaining contact with the receiver), (11) the referential (relating to a context) and (12) the poetic (existing as a construct for its own sake).

It does seem convincing the particular nature of phatic communication on the social is technologically deterministic.  In computing, the defining protocols used in messaging, notably SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) and SIMPLE (Session Initiation Protocol for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions) create the idea of “presence” as a signal to networks of users that communication is possible.  Historically, in social discourse, “presence” of someone which whom one has a relationship of some kind was physical and communication, phatic or otherwise, almost inevitable.  On the social, “presence” becomes both virtual and omnipresence.