ABOUT THE TERMS “WRITTEN COLLOQUIAL SPEECH” AND “CASUAL WRITTEN SPEECH”

The widespread use of electronic communications has signifi cantly changed the nature of everyday speech communication. In addition to communication on social networks, which is widespread but not mandatory, various messengers have entered our lives, without which modern communication is diffi cult to imagine. 
Scholars defi ne this phenomenon diff erently, e. g. M. A. Krongauz speaks of a “new intermediate form of language”, S. F. Barysheva suggests calling it “an oral-written form of speech”, E. I. Litnevskaya uses the term “written colloquial speech”, N. I. Klushina talks about the emergence of the phenomenon of “new orality”. The most accurate term seems to be “spontaneous written speech,” which is found in the work of Anna A. Zaliznyak and I. Mikaelyan, or even rather “casual written speech.” 
These two types of communication — casual oral and casual written communication have many similarities and undoubtedly infl uence each other. However, at all levels of the language system there are a number of signifi cant diff erences between them, which are primarily explained by the conditions of communication and the diff erence in the channel of perception (hearing vs vision). Thus, in casual written speech, to increase the speed of writing many stable abbreviations are used, consisting of consonants only: sps (thank you), mb (maybe), chb (to), as well as many spontaneous abbreviations of words the meaning of which is clear from the context. Those words are not used in oral speech. Many syntactic features of spoken language (for example, nominative case expansion) are not found in casual written speech.