The Internet was initially established as a mode of communication among computers and their users.
However, it has since evolved into a dynamic platform where languages are born, reshaped, endangered and even revived. More than just a tool for communication, the Internet has become a marketplace for languages—a space where linguistic practices are constantly negotiated and redefined.
Historically, languages were shaped by geographic regions, ethnicities and social groups. Today, these traditional boundaries have been blurred. The Internet enables unprecedented interaction across borders, giving rise to new linguae francae, while simultaneously offering marginalized languages a platform for revival and visibility. Despite English’s dominant status, stemming from its colonial legacy, the digital space has fostered the democratization of language. Social media platforms such as Twitter, YouTube and Instagram Reels have seen a notable increase in the use of regional languages like Urdu, Punjabi and Saraiki. This surge illustrates how once-marginalized languages are now flourishing online. This digital linguistic diversity is reshaping how people express themselves.
The freedom to use different languages, dialects and accents has transformed the Internet into a linguistic common—a space where users are theoretically free to choose the mode of expression that best suits them. However, this common is not neutral. The visibility and virality of language use are often dictated by market forces, algorithmic preferences and cultural trends. As a result, certain languages, expressions and narratives are amplified, while others are suppressed or rendered invisible. Furthermore, the English used online often diverges from standard grammar and syntax. It has evolved into multiple localized variants such as “Paklish”, “Hinglish” or “Arabizi,” reflecting hybrid identities and communicative needs. These varieties challenge traditional notions of “correct” English and highlight the adaptive, creative use of language in digital spaces.
The politicization of online discourse is another critical dimension. Digital platforms and media corporations often promote content that aligns with dominant ideologies or market interests. Memes, slogans and hashtags that challenge power structures are frequently censored or deprioritized. Consequently, the Internet’s linguistic landscape becomes a site of struggle—governed not by linguistic freedom alone, but by economic and political forces. In the context of Pakistan, this struggle presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The need to reclaim the Internet as a space for pluralistic linguistic expression is urgent. Academic institutions must engage with the emerging digital vernaculars seriously. Scholars should study evolving communication patterns, digital grammars and the emergence of new Englishes and regional dialects. Writers must learn to treat memes, reels and tweets as valid literary forms. Policymakers, in turn, must begin to view the Internet not only as a tool for surveillance but also as a vital site of cultural and linguistic production.
French philosopher Michel Foucault’s assertion that “Discourse is not simply that which translates struggles or systems of domination but is the thing for which and by which there is struggle,” is particularly relevant here. The Internet is not merely a neutral platform—it is a battleground where language serves both as a weapon and a prize. Algorithms determine what can be said, how it can be said and who gets to speak. Virality tends to favor repetition, simplicity and visual impact, often privileging English or reductive expressions over nuanced, layered prose. Considering these transformations, Noam Chomsky’s Universal Grammar theory may need to be reimagined in the context of a universal digital grammar—one that includes emojis, abbreviations, memes and hashtags as legitimate elements of communication. The Internet embodies Dell Hymes’ concept of communicative competence, where both surface and deep structures of language are available to users. People now express complex thoughts not only through linguistic structures but also through visuals, symbols and emotive digital cues.
In conclusion, the Internet has become a complex, contested linguistic commons. It is not merely a space for speaking, but a space where the right to speak is negotiated. It reflects cultural tensions, power structures and shifting linguistic identities. The question now is not just what is being said—but who gets to say it and how. Universities, policymakers and digital citizens alike must recognize that the Internet is not just a technological tool; it is a cultural battlefield, a story, a song and, above all, a space of linguistic transformation. Another way out of resolving this emerging language era is that universities must come forward and initiate healthy and quality research on the democratization of a formerly colonizer’s language and the impact of the same on the previously marginalized and less dominant languages and measure the communicative competence role of internet. This would provide an opportunity for linguistic decolonization along with the chances of survival for the languages which had lost the status of being national languages.
—The writer is a Professor of English at Emerson University, Multan, and has a vast international exposure.
(zeadogar@hotmail.com)
