HomeJournal of Interdisciplinary Perspectivesvol. 4 no. 5 (2026)

Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Slang: Analyzing Oral Communication Attitudes Within Philippine Higher Education

Robert Salvador | Donna Mae T. Parrar | Lerma P. Yapiso

Discipline: Linguistics

 

Abstract:

This mixed-methods study examined the sociolinguistic perspectives on slang in oral communication within a Philippine state university. It sought to identify and classify the most prevalent slang terms, assess their effectiveness across various demographic groups, and explore attitudes toward slang within social and academic contexts. Employing an explanatory sequential design, the research used descriptive statistics to categorize slang terms by their linguistic formation, origin, and contextual meaning. Through Lichtman's 3Cs method— coding, categorizing, and concept formation—the researchers unearthed complex attitudes toward slang, emphasizing its deep roots in gay lingo and Internet culture. Findings revealed that while slang is widely recognized as a powerful tool for enhancing social cohesion and bridging communication gaps, its effectiveness varies significantly by age, gender, and residence. Despite its widespread use, concerns were raised about its potential to hinder clear communication, particularly in formal academic settings. The study concluded that while slang is integral to identity formation and social interaction, its use should be carefully moderated to ensure clarity and effectiveness in communication. To address these challenges, it was recommended that educational institutions incorporate discussions on the sociolinguistic implications of slang into curricula, establish guidelines for its appropriate use, and promote cross-generational dialogue to bridge communication gaps. This balanced approach may help maintain the cultural relevance of slang while upholding academic discourse standards.



References:

  1. Abdullah, N.N., & Mohd Ghazali, N. (2021). Slang language use in social media among Malaysian youths: A sociolinguistic perspective. International Young Scholars Journal of Languages, 4(2), 68–79. http://irep.iium.edu.my/95013/
  2. Cabantac-Lumabi, B.M. (2020). The lexical trend of backward speech among Filipino millennials on Facebook. International Journal of English and Comparative Literary Studies, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.47631/ijecls.v1i1.148
  3. Ciccarino, I., & da Silva, J. (2024). A mixed-methods strategy for small samples in ill-structured literature. 23, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecrm.23.1.2477
  4. Dimaculangan, N. (2022). Speakers’ ambivalent attitude toward Philippine English: An issue for integrating the variety into ESL instruction. Journal of World Englishes and Educational Practices, 4(2), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.32996/jweep.2022.4.2.8
  5. Dreisbach, J.L., & Demeterio, F.P., III. (2021). Language use and preference in the multilingual context of Davao City, Philippines. Studies in English Language and Education, 8(1), 313–327. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v8i1.18454
  6. Germe, A.A., & Carado, C. (2025). Factors influencing the use of slang language among Generation Z students. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 30(3), 15–25. https://tinyurl.com/3bjcmam8
  7. Gimadieva, E. (2024). The potential of the linguistic and information technology of the GLIGLISH neural network in teaching foreign language oral communication to students of a language university. Philology and Culture, 2, 272-280. https://doi.org/10.26907/2782-4756-2024-76-2-272-280
  8. Giles, H., Edwards, A., & Walther, J. (2023). Communication accommodation theory: Past accomplishments, current trends, and future prospects. Language Sciences, 99, 101571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2023.101571
  9. Gregorio, J.F., Briol, S.R., Miraflores, R.B., & Biray, E.T. (2022). Swardspeak as a communication medium among education students in a state university. The Research Probe, 2(2), 20–24.
  10. Guzman, J. (2017). Slang as a means of language in low-socioeconomic status individuals: A cross-comparison of multicultural individuals in the United States. International Journal of Language and Linguistics. https://ijllnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_4_December_2017/5.pdf
  11. Haro Álvarez, G. (2024). Cohesión social en cooperativas del municipio de San Andrés Cholula, Puebla [Social cohesion in cooperatives of the municipality of San Andrés Cholula, Puebla]. Economía, Sociedad y Territorio, 24(75), e1986. https://doi.org/10.22136/est20241986
  12. Hendrajati, E., Zahrok, S., Subali, E., Agustin, D.S.Y., & Wahyuddin. (2023). The impact of slang usage on Indonesian from a sociolinguistic perspective. Journal of Development Research, 7(1), 104–109. https://doi.org/10.28926/jdr.v7i1.302
  13. Jebaselvi, C.A.E., Mohanraj, K., Thangamani, A., & Kumar, M.R. (2023). The impact of social media on the evolution of language and communication trends. Shanlax International Journal of English, 12(1), 41–44. https://doi.org/10.34293/english.v12i1.6725
  14. Jeresano, E., & Carretero, M. (2022). Digital culture and social media slang of Gen Z. United International Journal for Research & Technology, 3(4), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36361.93285
  15. Lesada, J. (2017). Taglish in Metro Manila: An analysis of Tagalog-English code-switching. University of Michigan Library. https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/139623
  16. Lichtman, M. (2014). Qualitative research for the social sciences. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544307756
  17. Liu, J.Y., Zhang, X.Y., & Li, H.X. (2023). Analysis of language phenomena in internet slang: A case study of internet dirty language. Open Access Library Journal, 10: e10484. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1110484
  18. Matias, F.M. (2023). Impact of internet slang on the academic writing of computer science students. American Research Journal of Humanities Social Science (ARJHSS), 6(7), 44–54. https://tinyurl.com/5n78t5ue
  19. Munalim, L., Genuino, C., & Tuttle, B. (2022). Turn-taking model for Filipino high-context communication style from no-answered and non-answered questions in faculty meetings. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 28(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2801-04
  20. Puspitasari, I., & Setiawan, S. (2023). Critical discourse analysis on Banyumas tourism promotion media. Tell: Teaching of English Language and Literature Journal, 12(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.30651/tell.v12i1.20430
  21. Purwati, D. (2020). The effects of lecturers' formal and informal talks on students' understanding of the material in the language learning process. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v8i1.1315
  22. Quimosing-Ocay, A., & Ocampo, D. (2024). Decoding gay lingo: A morpho-sociolinguistic analysis of swardspeak among college students. Issues in Language Studies, 18(3), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.5850.2024
  23. Rafiqoh, A. (2023). The effect of using slang among students towards the Indonesian language. Aladzkiya International of Education and Social (AIoEs), 4(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.55311/aioes.v4i2.201
  24. Rosales, H. (2019). Stylistics variation: Understanding gay lingo in social perspectives. The Normal Lights, 13(1), 179–202. https://doi.org/10.56278/tnl.v13i1.1240
  25. Sathiyaraj, A., Deivam, M., & Arul Kavya, T. (2025). Navigating multilingual classrooms: Expectations, opportunities, and challenges in inclusive pedagogy. FORTELL: A Journal of Teaching English Language and Literature, 50, 135–140.
  26. Sicam, F.P., & Lucas, R.I. (2016). Language attitudes of adolescent Filipino bilingual learners towards English and Filipino. Asian Englishes, 18(2), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2016.1179474
  27. Sikandar, M.H., Riaz, A., & Mah-e-Nao. (2022). The impact of slang on the academic writing of undergraduate students in Pakistan. Webology, 19(3), 1115–1127. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2692267020
  28. Thuy, V.L.T. (2021). The phenomenon of standard deviated language of student communication and the purity preservation issue of Vietnamese. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 15(3). https://ijicc.net/images/Vol_15/Iss_3/15319_Vinh_2021_E1_R.pdf
  29. Trimastuti, W. (2017). An analysis of slang words used in social media. Jurnal Dimensi Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 5(2), 64–68. https://doi.org/10.24269/dpp.v5i2.497
  30. Ulla, M.B., Macaraeg, J.M., & Ferrera, R. (2024). ‘What’s the word? That’s the word!’: Linguistic features of Filipino queer language. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), 2322232. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2322232
  31. Vacalares, M., Salas, A.F., Babac, B.J., Cagalawan, A., & Calimpong, C. (2023). The intelligibility of internet slangs between millennials and Gen Zers: A comparative study. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 9(1), 400–409. https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2023.9.1.0456
  32. Yap, E.J., & Saludez, L.M. (2022). Students’ morpho-pragmatic awareness of the codified Philippine English and millennial slang as input to teaching vocabulary in junior high school. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 3(8), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7003656