Cristina Vela Delfa

Reseña de Penas, M.ª Azucena. 2018. El cibertexto y el ciberlenguaje. Madrid: Editorial Síntesis.

Introduction

Reseña de penas, m.ª azucena. 2018. El cibertexto y el ciberlenguaje. Madrid: editorial síntesis.. Reseña crítica del libro 'El cibertexto y el ciberlenguaje' de M.ª Azucena Penas. Analiza la obra que explora la evolución y naturaleza del lenguaje en entornos digitales.

Abstract

Review

The provided title indicates a review article focused on M.ª Azucena Penas's 2018 book, *El cibertexto y el ciberlenguaje*, published by Editorial Síntesis. The very act of reviewing a scholarly work like this underscores the enduring academic interest in the evolving landscape of digital communication. Penas's book, by its intriguing title, appears to delve into two fundamental concepts crucial for understanding contemporary linguistic and textual practices: the nature of "cybertext" and the characteristics of "cyberlanguage." A critical review of such a work is invaluable for guiding readers through its arguments and contributions to fields like digital humanities, linguistics, and communication studies. Given the book's subject matter, a comprehensive review would ideally explore several key areas. It should critically assess Penas's definitions and theoretical frameworks for cybertext and cyberlanguage, evaluating their coherence, originality, and applicability. Furthermore, an effective review would analyze the book's methodology, the range of examples used, and its engagement with existing scholarship in this rapidly developing field. For instance, it would be important to know if Penas tackles the fluidity of online communication, the interplay of multimodality, or the societal implications of these digital linguistic shifts. A thorough review would also highlight the book's strengths, such as its clarity of argumentation or the depth of its analysis, while also pointing out any limitations or areas where further exploration might be warranted. However, a comprehensive evaluation of *this review article itself* is significantly hampered by the absence of its abstract. Without this crucial summary, it is impossible to ascertain the specific scope, key arguments, or critical perspective taken by the reviewer. An abstract would typically outline the reviewer's main points, their overall assessment of Penas's work, and perhaps highlight particular aspects of the book that are either lauded or critiqued. Consequently, while the title suggests a timely and potentially insightful academic contribution, its actual value as a piece of scholarly analysis cannot be properly judged without the accompanying abstract. This omission prevents any assessment of the review's depth, critical engagement, or its ability to effectively guide potential readers of Penas's original work.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.