Cover not available
Article published In:
Cognitive Perspectives on Genre
Edited by Carla Vergaro
[Pragmatics & Cognition 25:3] 2018
► pp. 515–542

Building brand narratives with hashtags on Twitter

A cognitive-pragmatic analysis on the emergence of a new advertising subgenre

| Universidad de La Rioja
This paper investigates the use of hashtags in the building of brand narratives (i.e. the open-ended, unfolding and participative depiction of a company’s core ideology and beliefs). A collection of over 700 hashtags involved in the creation of the advertising narratives of the four leading soft drinks brands in 2017 (i.e. Coca-Cola, Pepsi, RedBull, Nescafé) has been analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively to unveil their functions and formal characteristics, as well as the cognitive processes that underlie their interpretation and operate on the framing and dissemination of brand narratives. Ultimately, by categorizing and explaining the roles of hashtags in the construction of a brand narrative, as well as the potential correlations between their formal and functional traits and their retweeting rate and digital lifespan, this paper shapes a preliminary description of the characteristics of the subgenre of hashtag-based brand narratives and spells out some of the factors that should be considered in the choice of hashtags for advertising purposes.
Keywords: advertising, brand narratives, conceptual metaphor and metonymy, framing, genre, illocutionary constructions, hashtags
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous literature and specific research objectives
  • 3.Theoretical framework
    • 3.1Framing
    • 3.2Cognitive operations
      • 3.2.1Conceptual metonymy
      • 3.2.2Cueing
  • 4.Corpus and methodology
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1Communicative functions and associated constructions of commercial hashtags
    • 5.2Cognitive operations, framing, and cueing in the building of brand narratives
    • 5.3Effectiveness of hashtags: Brand identification, retweeting, and lifespan
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 10 January 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.18020.per
References (35)
References
Armstrong, J. Scott. 2010. Persuasive advertising: Evidence-based principles. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carretero, Marta, Carmen Maíz-Arévalo & M. Ángeles Martínez. 2015. An analysis of expressive speech acts in online task-oriented interaction by university students. Procedia 1731. 186–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cayla, Julien & Eric J. Arnould. 2008. A cultural approach to branding in the global marketplace. Journal of International Marketing 16(4). 86–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalli, Daniele & Simona Romani. 2012. From rural Mediterranean to global markets: Realism and diversity in the Camper experience. In Lisa Peñaloza, Nil Toulouse & Luca M. Visconti (eds.), Marketing management: A cultural perspective, 43–60. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
eMarketer, 2015. Social network ad spending to hit $23.68 billion worldwide in 2015. Retrieved from [URL]; Accessed June 17th, 2019.
Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner. 1996. Blending as a central process in grammar. In Adele Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse, and language, 113–130. Stanford, CA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fenson, Larry, M. Suzanne Cameron & Mark Kennedy. 1988. Role of perceptual and conceptual similarity in category matching at age two years. Child Development 59(4). 897–907. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1977. The case for case reopened. In Peter Cole (ed.), Syntax and semantics 8: Grammatical relations, 59–81. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freedman, Aviva & Peter Medway (eds.). 1994. Genre and the new rhetoric. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1973. Explorations in the functions of language. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Elizabeth C. 2010. Evolutionary branding. Psychology and Marketing 27(6). 568–583. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Jeff, Katherine Thornton & Efthimis Efthimiadis. 2010. Conversational tagging in Twitter. Paper presented at the 21st ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia . Toronto, Canada. DOI logo
Imai, Mutsumi, Dedre Gentner & Nobuko Uchida. 1994. Children’s theories of word meaning: The role of shape similarity in early acquisition. Cognitive Development 91. 45–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Indurkhya, Bipin & Amitash Ojha. 2013. An empirical study on the role of perceptual similarity in visual metaphors and creativity. Metaphor and Symbol 28(4). 233–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerns, Chris. 2014. Understanding brands on Twitter. In Chris Kerns (ed.), Trendology: Building an advantage through data-driven real-time marketing, 39–85. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Carolyn. 1984. Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70(2). 151–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Page, Ruth. 2012. The linguistics of self-branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags. Discourse and Communication 6(2). 181–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. & Alicia Galera. 2014. Cognitive modeling: A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. & Francisco Santibáñez. 2003. Content and formal cognitive operations in construing meaning. Rivista di Linguistics 15(2). 293–320.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg & Franziska Günther. 2016. Towards a unified socio-cognitive framework for salience in language. Frontiers in Psychology 71. 1110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, Kate. 2015. The pragmatics of hashtags: Inference and conversational style on Twitter. Journal of Pragmatics 811. 8–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seargeant, Philip & Caroline Tagg (eds.). 2014. The language of social media: Identity and community on the internet. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1976. A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society 5(1). 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, Bryant. 2009. Everything but the coffee: Learning America from Starbucks. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soboleva, Alena, Suzan Burton & Aila Khan. 2015. Marketing with Twitter: Challenges and opportunities. In Janée Burkhalter & Natalie Wood (eds.), Maximizing commerce and marketing strategies through micro-blogging, 1–39. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soboleva, Alena, Suzan Burton, Girijasankar Mallik & Aila Khan. 2017. ‘Retweet for a chance to…’: An analysis for what triggers consumers to engage in seeded eWOM on Twitter. Journal of Marketing Management 33(13–14). 1120–1148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, Gerard. 2011. Genre between the humanities and the sciences. In Marcus Callies, Wolfram Keller & Astrid Lohöfer (eds.), BiDirectionality in the cognitive sciences, 24–41. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stukker, Ninke, Wilbert Spooren & Gerard Steen (eds.). 2016. Genre in language, discourse and cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Weelden, Lisanne, Reinier Cozijn, Alfons Maes & Joost Schilperoord. 2010. Perceptual similarity in visual metaphor processing. Cognitive Shape Processing, 50–55.Google Scholar
Vosniadou, Stella & Andrew Ortony. 1983. The emergence of the literal-metaphorical anomalous distinction in young children. Child Development 54(1). 154–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wesch, Michael. 2009. Youtube and you: Experiences of self-awareness in the context collapse of the recording webcam. Explorations in Media Ecology 8(2). 19–34.Google Scholar
Wikström, Peter. 2014. #srynotfunny: Communicative functions of hashtags on Twitter. SKY Journal of Linguistics 271. 127–152.Google Scholar
Woodside, Arch G. 2010. Brand-consumer storytelling theory and research: Introduction to a Psychology & Marketing special issue. Psychology and Marketing 27(6). 531–540. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele (ed.) 2012. Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the Web. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
. 2015. Searchable talk: The linguistic functions of hashtags. Social Semiotics 25(3). 274–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Love, Robbie, Erika Darics & Rudi Palmieri
2023. Engaging the public: English local government organisations’ social media communications during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Applied Corpus Linguistics 3:3 ► pp. 100060 ff. DOI logo
Smith, Kareema M., Alexis Jones & Evelyn A. Hunter
2023. Navigating the multidimensionality of social media presence: ethical considerations and recommendations for psychologists. Ethics & Behavior 33:1 ► pp. 18 ff. DOI logo
Dai, Hang, Tianyu Zhao & Praveen Kumar Reddy Maddikunta
2022. Intelligent Analysis Strategy of Pragmatic Failure in Cross-Cultural Communication Based on Convolution Neural Network. Mobile Information Systems 2022 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Sun, Ya, Yang Hu, Dicong Gou & Qiong Wang
2022. To orient and to engage: Metaphorical hashtags in Weibo posts of Chinese banks. Journal of Pragmatics 194 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Sun, Ya, Limei Zhai, Wenbin Liu & Kaiwen Yang
2022. Corporations' Owned Social Media Narrative. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 65:2 ► pp. 280 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.