Academic Tweets in Applied Linguistics: An Intertextuality Odyssey through Forms and Functions in Five English-Speaking Countries

INTRODUCTION

Twitter, a widely used social networking platform, has become an essential tool for academics to share research, engage with peers, express ideas, and connect with a broader audience (Côté & Darling, 2018; Mohammadi et al., 2018). It allows scholars to produce and share content, often drawing from a variety of sources, which fosters a dynamic interweaving of textual elements (Puschmann, 2015). The inherent intertextuality and dialogic nature of tweets, characterized by the appropriation and recontextualization of diverse semiotic resources (Gillen & Merchant, 2013) make it crucial to investigate how academic tweets are both constructed and understood.

Twitter’s conversational design, along with its technological affordances such as interactivity, reach, and hyperlinking, creates unique opportunities for intertextual exchanges. Features like hashtags, @mentions, and retweets promote dialogic engagement and intertextual connections. Hashtags group tweets thematically, creating intertextual chains that link conversations across users and time (Bonilla & Rosa, 2015). @mentions allow users to reference others, enabling direct interaction and profile access (Honeycutt & Herring, 2009), while retweets help disseminate content to wider audiences (Puschmann, 2015). Additionally, hyperlinks extend the conversation by linking to external websites, enriching the tweets with additional layers of meaning. The platform’s multimodal affordances, such as images and videos, also enable what Zappavigna (2022) terms "multimodal quotation," allowing users to repurpose a variety of media elements to suit the communicative intent of their tweets.

Previous research has explored academics' motivations for tweeting, focusing on content sharing, self-promotion, and community engagement (Luzón & Pérez-Llantada, 2022; Puschmann, 2014; Veletsianos, 2012). However, there remains a significant gap in understanding the specific intertextual practices embedded within academic tweets. While studies such as Luzón (2023) have begun to explore how intertextuality functions within tweets by academic research groups, much of the existing research has primarily concentrated on how Twitter is used to cite scholarly publications or digital documents (Priem & Costello, 2010; Weller et al., 2011). What remains underexplored is how these citations and other intertextual references shape the communicative structure, meaning, and purpose of academic tweets. This study addresses that gap by focusing on the intertextual strategies academics use and the communicative functions these strategies serve.

As digital platforms like Twitter continue to transform communication practices, understanding intertextuality in academic tweets becomes increasingly important. While traditional theories of intertextuality have primarily focused on printed texts, studies like Luzón (2023) demonstrate the need to explore how intertextuality functions within the digital sphere. This study seeks to contribute to the theoretical discourse by expanding our understanding of how intertextuality operates in this rapidly evolving digital context. In addition to advancing theoretical perspectives, this research offers practical insights for academics engaged in digital communication and content creation. By highlighting the interplay between theory and practice, this study provides a comprehensive understanding of how intertextuality shapes discourse in the field of Applied Linguistics on digital platforms like Twitter.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Role of Academic Twitter: Purposes, Social Functions, and Emerging Genres

Twitter has become an essential tool for academics, primarily for sharing research, resources, and publications, and targeting peers for knowledge dissemination (Côté & Darling, 2018; Mohammadi et al., 2018). It also plays a role in enhancing academic visibility and self-promotion (Luzón & Albero-Posac, 2020; Luzón & Pérez-Llantada, 2022), while facilitating social interaction within academic networks, including discussions of emerging research and resource sharing (Choo et al., 2015; Veletsianos, 2012). During academic conferences, Twitter serves as a platform for communication, allowing attendees to engage in dialogue, discuss presentations, and share conference-related content (Luzón & Albero-Posac, 2020; Puschmann, 2014).

In addition to peer engagement, academics use Twitter to connect with a broader audience, including media outlets, educational organizations, and the public, thus fostering science dissemination and enhancing public engagement (Choo et al., 2015; Côté & Darling, 2018). This dual role of Twitter as both an academic and public communication tool highlights its importance in bridging the gap between academia and wider society.

The platform has also fostered the development of new genres of academic discourse. For instance, Twitter-based journal clubs, like the International Urology Journal Club, have emerged as spaces for collective discussion of academic papers. Additionally, "tweetorials," long-form Twitter threads, allow experts to explain complex concepts and share research findings with a broader audience. These subgenres of tweetorials, including article reviews and literacy support, represent the evolving nature of academic discourse on Twitter (Graham, 2021; Tardy, 2023). Several studies have examined the multifaceted roles of academic Twitter, including its impact on scholarly citations and engagement dynamics. For example, Collins et al. (2016) and Choo et al. (2015) explored how Twitter facilitates scholarly networking, professional development, and knowledge dissemination. Their findings highlight Twitter’s diverse social functions within academic communities.

Twitter citation practices have also been a focus of research. Scholars often share publications by linking to URLs, primarily for promotion and networking rather than supporting scholarly arguments (Jung et al., 2016; Priem & Costello, 2010). Academic citation practices on Twitter vary across disciplines, with both external citations (links to publications, blogs, and media) and internal citations (retweets) playing key roles in content sharing (Holmberg & Thelwall, 2014; Weller et al., 2011).

Overall, academic tweets enhance visibility, facilitate knowledge exchange, and support global scholarly collaboration. By engaging in real-time dialogue, sharing research, and fostering professional networks, academics harness Twitter as a valuable tool for disseminating scholarly information (Côté & Darling, 2018; Mohammadi et al., 2018). Additionally, Twitter has proven effective as a learning tool, particularly in medical education. Forgie et al. (2013) highlighted its potential in promoting informal learning, enhancing access to information, and encouraging academic discussions.

Intertextuality and Recontextualization in Digital Discourse

The foundational concepts of dialogism and heteroglossia (Bakhtin, 1981) and intertextuality (Kristeva, 1980) provide a lens to examine how texts reference and reshape one another. Kristeva's notion that “any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations” (p. 66) laid the groundwork for understanding intertextuality as a process where texts absorb and transform each other. Fairclough (2003) further developed this idea by defining intertextuality as the inclusion of elements from other texts, potentially embedding different voices. He also introduced "interdiscursivity," the integration of conventions from multiple genres (Fairclough, 1992), though this study focuses on intertextuality in digital discourse.

Social media amplifies intertextual dynamics due to its participatory nature. Users not only consume but also create content, incorporating and transforming existing texts—whether through memes, hashtags, or retweets—thus engaging in collective meaning-making (Shifman, 2014). Shifman’s (2014) study of memes exemplifies intertextuality in digital culture, where users reference and repurpose elements from popular culture, politics, and daily life, contributing to a dynamic tapestry of shared cultural expressions. Similarly, Jenkins (2006) highlighted how media convergence facilitates complex intertextual relationships by enabling user-generated content to flow across platforms, blurring the lines between media producers and consumers.

Research on intertextuality has identified various modes of representation, such as direct quotation, summary, evaluation, irony, and text reuse within organizations (Bazerman, 2004; Fairclough, 1992; Shaw & Pecorari, 2013). These modes are integral to understanding how academic Twitter functions, as tweets often reference, remix, or respond to other texts, creating intricate intertextual connections. Bazerman (2004) emphasized that intertextuality shapes how writers position themselves and interact with texts, influencing their social actions and rhetorical choices.

A key aspect of intertextuality in digital spaces is recontextualization—where a text or text fragment is taken from its original context and adapted to serve new communicative purposes (Bazerman, 2004; Fairclough, 1992; Linell, 1998). Digital platforms allow for practices like remixing, embedding, and crossposting, where text segments are edited and repurposed for new settings, thereby acquiring new meanings (Adami, 2012, 2014; Johansson, 2019). Adami (2014) noted that online affordances enable the networked distribution of content, facilitating novel meaning-making processes through recontextualization across platforms.

Studies such as Parra et al. (2016) and Lee et al. (2017) examined Twitter's evolving role in academic discourse, particularly at conferences. Parra et al. observed a shift toward more informational content and less conversational engagement, reflecting broader trends in how Twitter is used in academia. Lee et al. highlighted Twitter’s ability to transcend time and space, allowing for continuous scholarly dialogue and community building beyond physical conference settings.

Intertextuality in digital discourse also encompasses ironic and parodic quotation practices, where users engage in ambient affiliation by ridiculing figures or stances, invoking shared social meanings (Zappavigna, 2018). This form of “parodic resonance” is particularly evident in political discourse on social media, where embarrassing gaffes or public statements are rearticulated and recontextualized for new audiences (Zappavigna, 2017). Johansson (2019) extended this understanding by analyzing "digital quotations" in online political reviews, where elements like tweets or videos are integrated into new texts. Adami’s (2014) concept of "crossposting" further illustrates how digital recontextualization allows content to move between platforms, leveraging their multimodal affordances.

Together, these studies highlight the evolving nature of digital discourse, where intertextuality and recontextualization are central to how users create, share, and reinterpret content across various platforms, particularly on Twitter.

Quotation Practices in Social Media

Retweeting is a key feature of digital discourse and has been extensively analyzed in computer-mediated communication. Gruber’s (2017) research on quoting and retweeting practices highlights their functional similarities and differences in online contexts. Retweeting serves both interactional and informational purposes, playing a pivotal role in shaping discourse and facilitating knowledge exchange on social media.

In academic Twitter communities, retweeting acts as a form of "internal citation," amplifying scholarly information and building reputations (Puschmann, 2015). Retweeting is prevalent during academic conferences, serving as a tool for disseminating knowledge and fostering engagement among participants (Letierce et al., 2010). Herring (2013) and Puschmann (2015) examined retweeting as a quotation practice specific to Twitter, emphasizing its social functions, such as reinforcing professional ties and increasing visibility within academic circles.

Multimodal quotation practices in social media further illustrate the evolving landscape of intertextuality. Studies by Honeycutt and Herring (2009), Fetzer and Weiss (2020), and Boyd et al. (2010) examined how users employ mentions (@username), images, videos, and emojis to quote and reference others, adding complexity to digital interactions. For instance, mentions serve as tools for addressivity and intertextual reference, while multimodal elements enrich the communicative dynamics of digital discourse.

Research on memes and quote cards by Vandelanotte (2020), Zappavigna (2022), and Pfurtscheller (2020) demonstrates how intertextuality is reconfigured in the digital medium. Memes offer humorous responses that remix existing texts, while quote cards blend visuals and written quotations, showcasing new forms of interaction between texts. These studies underscore how social media’s affordances facilitate intricate intertextual relations, transforming how quotations are used and interpreted.

In Applied Linguistics, studies by Côté and Darling (2018) and Mohammadi et al. (2018) shed light on how scholars use Twitter for self-promotion, networking, and knowledge dissemination. These studies explored the diverse audiences academic Twitter users engage with, illustrating how applied linguists and others enhance the visibility of their research. Moreover, research by Jung et al. (2016) and Priem and Costello (2010) explored how scholars share various types of content on Twitter, while new Twitter genres such as "tweetorials" (Graham, 2021; Tardy, 2023) have emerged as a popular way to convey complex research to wider audiences. These genres highlight the evolving nature of scholarly communication on social media platforms, reflecting the ongoing changes in how knowledge is disseminated in digital environments.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study builds on Luzón’s (2023) analytical framework for intertextuality in academic tweets, applying it to a broader corpus of tweets from applied linguists across five English-speaking countries. By examining how intertextuality operates within these tweets, we seek to understand the nuances of intertextuality in relation to the platform’s affordances and digital communication practices. Investigating the interaction between digital textual features and the communicative goals embedded in academic tweets will provide insights into the diversity of texts and voices involved in these digital exchanges. The following research questions guide this inquiry:

RQ1: What types of intertextual representations are present in the academic tweets of applied linguists, and how do these tweets incorporate or reference other texts?

RQ2: What functions do these intertextual representations serve, and how are they recontextualized to fulfill the tweet's communicative purpose?

METHOD

Corpus

In this research, a dataset of 300 tweets was compiled from the Twitter accounts of five major applied linguistics associations representing English-speaking countries. The associations studied included AAAL (American Association for Applied Linguistics), BAAL (British Association for Applied Linguistics), ALAA (Applied Linguistics Association of Australia), CAAL (Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics), and IRAAL (Irish Association for Applied Linguistics). These accounts were identified, using targeted Google searches, such as "Twitter + association of applied linguistics."

To qualify for inclusion, the Twitter accounts of these associations had to meet two criteria: (i) they had to be actively tweeting and have a substantial follower base (at least 1,000 followers; collectively, the five associations had around 234,000 followers), and (ii) the tweets had to be primarily in English. The diversity of these associations, across multiple regions and linguistic contexts, was expected to provide a broad spectrum of intertextual practices within the tweet dataset.

Data Collection Procedure

To gather a representative sample, the most recent 60 tweets from each association, posted prior to December 31, 2023, were collected in reverse chronological order. This method allowed for a substantial dataset conducive to the qualitative and exploratory nature of this research, drawing on similar research designs, such as Tardy's (2023) examination of academic tweets using a smaller dataset, and Luzón’s (2023) study on intertextuality in academic Twitter. The dataset consisted of both original tweets and retweets (with or without added comments). All tweets were publicly available and were manually collected and stored as PDF files for analysis.

Data Analysis

To analyze the types of intertextual representations in academic tweets, this study adopted an intertextuality analysis approach based on Bazerman’s (2004) framework applied by Luzón (2023) in the context of academic tweets (Table 1). The process was carried out in three stages: first, identifying textual traces within the tweet corpus; second, classifying the forms these intertextual references took, such as direct quotations, paraphrases, or multimodal elements; and third, interpreting their role and function within the tweet’s broader message. Atlas.ti, a qualitative content analysis tool, was used to facilitate this process.

Intertextual instances were systematically coded according to their form, the specific content being referenced, and the origin of the material. Each tweet’s intertextual components were classified into categories such as direct quotations, paraphrases, or visual representations, with a further distinction between internal (from the group itself or its affiliated institutions) and external (from other researchers, groups, or organizations) sources. This distinction was particularly important, as research groups often amplified their own content through retweets, or they referenced their previous work to boost dissemination.

Table 1: A framework for the Analysis of Intertextuality in Academic Tweets

Adapted from Luzón, M. J. (2023),

Functions of Intertextuality

To address the second research question concerning the functions of intertextual representations in academic tweets, the analysis examined the overall intent behind each tweet, focusing on how intertextual elements contributed to the tweet’s communicative goals. Drawing on Bazerman's (2004) approach to contextual and functional analysis, each intertextual element was scrutinized to understand how it was embedded within the tweet and how it served specific purposes. Building on previous research by Luzón and Pérez-Llantada (2022), tweets were classified according to their function, including (i) community building and networking, where tweets shared resources, disciplinary information, or positively evaluated others in the field; (ii) self-promotion and dissemination of research, where tweets highlighted new publications or recognized the achievements of group members; (iii) calls to action, where the tweets encouraged involvement in activities or research; and (iv) public dissemination and outreach, where tweets aimed to share academic knowledge with a broader audience.

RESULTS

Intertextuality Representations and Source Types

In the analysis of 300 tweets from the Twitter accounts of five prominent Applied Linguistics associations, a total of 578 intertextual representations were identified. These representations were utilized for various purposes, which can be categorized based on previous research by Luzón and Pérez-Llantada (2022). The purposes include: (i) community building and networking (e.g., tweets used to share resources and disciplinary information or to evaluate other researchers positively); (ii) self-promotion and publicizing of their research output (e.g., tweets used to notify that a new paper has been published or inform of the members’ achievements); (iii) calls to action (i.e., tweets encouraging various stakeholders to do something); and (iv) public dissemination and outreach (i.e., tweets intended to disseminate academic knowledge to wider audiences). The distribution of intertextual representations among the associations was as follows: 204 from AAAL, 97 from BAAL, 109 from CAAL, 81 from ALAA, and 87 from IRAAL. Overall, all types of intertextual representations were utilized, though not every type was identified in each group. The breakdown of the intertextual representations is as follows: there were 81 instances of retweets, 17 instances of written quotations, 181 instances of multimodal quotations, 107 instances of hyperlinks to other sites, 120 instances of digital mentions (hashtags and @mentions), and 72 instances of template reuse. The most frequently identified type of intertextual representation was multimodal quotations, with 181 instances, whereas written quotations were the least identified, with only 17 instances.

Table 2: Type of Intertextual Representation

Of the 300 tweets analyzed, 240 were categorized as internal sources, coming from within the group or affiliated people or groups, and 60 were categorized as external sources, originating from other researchers, groups, or institutions. This indicates a predominant focus on internal content across the analyzed tweets, highlighting the associations' emphasis on promoting their activities, members, and research outputs.

Table 3: Source Type

The extensive use of multimodal elements and digital mentions suggests a strategic approach to enhancing engagement with visual and interactive content. The lower frequency of written quotations may reflect the concise nature of tweets, which might not always be conducive to extended textual quotations. The significant use of internal sources underscores the associations' focus on their internal activities and members, while the external sources demonstrate the importance of acknowledging and interacting with the broader academic community.

Content Types and Their Functions

The analysis of content types revealed a total of 437 instances where specific types of content were shared. These were categorized as follows: 58 instances of information on research activity or outcomes (e.g., new publication, conference presentation), 85 instances of positive information on/evaluation of the group, 61 instances of positive evaluation of other researchers/groups, 35 instances of expressions of thanks or congratulation, 117 instances of announcements of new positions or calls (e.g., conference calls, calls to participate in a project), 33 instances of useful resources for the audience (e.g., publications, reports, videos), 45 instances of requests to take action, and 3 instances of discipline-related humor (e.g., discipline-related memes).

Table 4: Content Type

The most common content type was announcements of new positions or calls, with 117 instances, reflecting the associations' role in promoting opportunities within the field. Positive information on/evaluation of the group was also prevalent, with 85 instances, indicating a strong focus on highlighting the achievements and activities of the associations. Conversely, discipline-related humor was the least common content type, with only 3 instances, suggesting that humor is not a primary focus in these academic tweets. These content types play a crucial role in understanding the functions of the intertextual representations used in the tweets. For example, the frequent use of announcements of new positions or calls highlights the associations' efforts to engage their community with relevant opportunities. Similarly, the emphasis on positive information about the group helps build a positive image and fosters a sense of community among members.

Intertextual Representations in Academic Tweets

In analyzing academic tweets, it becomes clear that a single tweet can encompass multiple types of content, serve various purposes, and employ different intertextual representations. For instance, consider a tweet from the American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL):

A tweet encompassing different intertextual representations and contents serving various purposes

This tweet incorporates several intertextual elements. First, hyperlinking is used to direct followers to the full article, providing easy access to the resource. Additionally, digital mentions are included through hashtags such as #GraduateStudents, #Award, and #AAAL, which engage broader conversations, increase visibility, and facilitate community building. Furthermore, a multimodal quotation in the form of a quote card is featured, highlighting key points of the article and making the tweet more engaging and visually appealing.

In terms of content, this tweet covers both information on research activity or outcomes by introducing a new article by Dudley Reynolds, and useful resources for the audience by sharing a valuable resource that benefits graduate students and other followers interested in the award. The tweet serves the purposes of self-promotion and publicizing research output by showcasing Dudley Reynolds' article, which enhances the organization’s reputation and visibility. It also aims at public dissemination and outreach by making academic knowledge accessible to a broader audience. The intertextual functions in this tweet are varied. It presents and summarizes the group’s own research by highlighting the article's significance and relevance. It also shares the group’s or others’ resources by providing a hyperlink to the full article, facilitating easy access. Additionally, the tweet engages in a broader conversation through the use of hashtags that connect with broader discussions and communities interested in graduate studies and academic awards. Lastly, the quote card and the hyperlink work together to draw attention to the hyperlinked text, making the article more noticeable and engaging.

Template reuse for the quote card is another significant aspect of this tweet. AAAL commonly uses standardized quote cards in their tweets to facilitate recognition and branding and increase consistency. By maintaining a uniform design for quote cards, AAAL ensures that their tweets are easily recognizable and professional, reinforcing their brand identity across their Twitter feed. This example demonstrates how a single tweet can effectively utilize multiple forms of intertextuality to achieve diverse purposes, showcasing the multifaceted nature of academic communication on social media.

Function of Intertextuality in Applied Linguists' Tweets

Twitter's potential for self-branding has been widely recognized, with intertextuality serving as a key tool for achieving this goal (Page, 2012). Applied linguistics research groups leverage intertextuality to craft and project a collective identity by incorporating a range of voices and references that align with their objectives. Following Bakhtin's (1981) perspective, these groups "populate" others' texts with their own intentions, using intertextual elements to share academic interests, research achievements, and collaborative connections, thus shaping their multifaceted group identity. In this study, four main purposes of intertextuality were identified: self-promotion and research dissemination, community engagement and networking, mobilization through calls to action, and public outreach. Each of these purposes employed distinct types of intertextual content, illustrating how intertextuality is strategically used in academic Twitter communication.

Intertextuality plays a significant role in showcasing the research activities of these groups. Tweets often highlight recent research outputs, acknowledge others' evaluations of the group, or express gratitude for support. The use of written quotations, visual elements, quote cards, and hyperlinks allows the groups to promote their work and attract attention to their research publications. Retweets amplify these messages, while hashtags and recurring templates strengthen the group's visibility and reinforce their branding.

Community building and networking are facilitated by intertextual elements such as written references, visuals, and retweets that acknowledge and disseminate others' research. Retweeting others' announcements, linking to external content, and endorsing their perspectives help solidify connections with broader academic communities. Memes and hashtags are often employed humorously to foster a sense of solidarity, while mentions and retweets signal affiliation and encourage conversations within the academic network.

Intertextuality also supports mobilization efforts by reposting calls to action, such as job announcements or event invitations, enabling the groups to engage their audience and promote participation. Lastly, public outreach is achieved through the dissemination of useful resources via retweets and hyperlinks, which expand the reach of both the group's and others' work, facilitating knowledge sharing and contributing to wider public engagement.

Table 5 provides an overview of how different forms of intertextuality fulfill these various functions, illustrating the strategic use of intertextual elements in promoting applied linguistics research groups, fostering community engagement, and expanding their digital presence.

Table 5: Functions of the Intertextual Representations in Academic Tweets

Discussion

The analysis of intertextual representations in the tweets of Applied Linguistics associations reveals a strategic use of various forms to achieve multiple objectives, aligning with several findings in the existing literature. Twitter, as noted by Page (2012), is ideally suited for self-branding, and intertextuality serves as a powerful tool for this purpose. This is echoed in these findings, where research groups use intertextuality to create a multifaceted group identity by integrating various voices and adapting them to their objectives, as suggested by Bakhtin (1981). By embedding diverse voices into their tweets, research groups not only convey their own messages but also align themselves with broader academic and public discourses, thus reinforcing their identity and authority in the field of applied linguistics. This practice is consistent with Shifman (2014) and Jenkins (2006), who highlight the role of convergence culture in fostering rich intertextual engagements. The predominance of multimodal quotations, digital mentions, and hyperlinks underscores their importance in enhancing engagement, extending reach, and providing additional context. A probable reason for this alignment is the participatory culture of Twitter, which encourages users to integrate and repurpose content from various sources to enhance their messaging.

One notable alignment is the use of intertextuality for self-promotion and publicizing research outputs. Scholars like Luzón & Albero-Posac (2020), Luzón & Pérez-Llantada (2022), and Luzón (2023) have highlighted that academics leverage Twitter for self-promotion and increased visibility. These findings support this, showing that multimodal quotations, digital mentions, and hyperlinks are frequently employed to enhance engagement and extend reach. This suggests a consistent strategy across different academic groups for maximizing visibility and engagement on Twitter. Multimodal quotations, which combine text with images or videos, draw more attention and engagement than plain text. Digital mentions and hyperlinks create networks of intertextual references, connecting tweets to a wider array of sources and enhancing the credibility and reach of the original content. This strategic use of intertextual elements aligns with the growing emphasis on visual and digital literacy in academic communication, which recognizes the importance of appealing to a diverse and multimedia-savvy audience.

While there are similarities between these findings and those of Luzón (2023), key distinctions highlight different approaches to intertextuality. Luzón emphasized the use of retweeting, tweet threads, and multimodal elements for research dissemination and community building. In this study, the role of hashtags and template reuse emerged as significant in fostering a consistent group identity and enhancing visibility, aspects less explored in Luzón’s analysis. Additionally, whereas Luzón discussed the creative use of tweet threads for summarizing research, this study identified a broader set of intertextual strategies employed for branding and public engagement. Both studies, however, reinforce the pivotal role of intertextuality in academic Twitter, but with unique insights into how applied linguistics groups tailor these strategies to meet their specific academic and social objectives.

Additionally, the analysis indicates a strong focus on internal sources for self-promotion, which is consistent with the findings of Côté & Darling (2018) and Mohammadi et al. (2018). These studies point out that academics primarily target their peers for knowledge dissemination, and the data corroborate this by highlighting the predominance of tweets presenting and summarizing the group’s own research activities. This focus on internal sources suggests that applied linguistics groups are keen on building their reputations within their immediate academic circles before reaching out to broader audiences. By frequently referencing their own work, these groups reinforce their scholarly contributions and establish a consistent narrative around their research agendas. This practice also serves to consolidate their academic authority and influence, making their voices more prominent in the ongoing academic discourse. One possible explanation for this focus is the increasing reliance on altmetrics, which measure the influence of research through its visibility and engagement on social media. Altmetrics incentivize academics to promote their work actively, as higher visibility can lead to greater recognition and impact within the academic community and beyond.

The role of intertextuality in community building and networking is another area where the findings align with existing literature. Studies by Choo et al. (2015) and Veletsianos (2012) emphasize the importance of social interaction within the academic community facilitated through tweets. The analysis similarly reveals that tweets acknowledging other researchers or groups, spreading information and announcements, and endorsing others' stances help establish connections within the academic community. This is achieved through retweets, mentions, and the use of hashtags, which create a sense of solidarity and mutual support among scholars. These interactions not only foster a sense of community but also enhance the visibility and impact of the tweets by extending their reach to the networks of the mentioned or endorsed individuals. By engaging in such practices, academic groups can build and maintain robust professional networks, facilitate collaborations, and stay informed about the latest developments in their fields. This function of intertextuality aligns with the observations of Forgie et al. (2013), who note that Twitter facilitates informal learning and academic engagement, thereby fostering scholarly networks.

However, there are some areas where the findings diverge from previous research. For example, while Puschmann (2014) and Weller et al. (2011) highlight the role of Twitter during academic conferences, enabling users to connect and discuss presentations, the analysis shows a more diverse use of intertextuality beyond just conferences. This includes broader engagement with the general public and practitioners, as noted by Tardy (2023), which expands the traditional scope of academic tweeting to include public dissemination and outreach. This broader engagement reflects a strategic shift by academic groups to not only communicate within their professional circles but also to reach out to a wider audience, including non-academic stakeholders. By doing so, they can increase public understanding and appreciation of their research, attract potential collaborators from different sectors, and influence policy and practice beyond the academic sphere.

One possible explanation for the broader use of intertextuality in these findings compared to the narrower focus of previous studies could be the evolving nature of academic communication on social media. As Twitter's functionalities and user base have expanded, so too have the strategies employed by academics to leverage the platform for diverse purposes beyond mere conference engagement. The introduction of features such as threads, moments, and live video has allowed for more dynamic and interactive forms of communication. Academics are increasingly using these features to create richer, more engaging content that can capture the attention of a broad and varied audience. This evolution mirrors broader trends in digital communication, where the lines between different forms of media and genres are increasingly blurred, leading to more integrated and multifaceted approaches to content creation and dissemination.

Another probable reason for the emphasis on internal sources in these findings, compared to a balanced use of internal and external citations noted by Weller et al. (2011), might be the strategic intent of applied linguistics groups to consolidate their academic identity and reinforce their research outputs. This internal focus serves to enhance their credibility and authority within the academic community. By repeatedly highlighting their own research, these groups can create a strong, cohesive narrative around their work, making it more memorable and impactful. This strategy also helps to establish a clear brand identity, which is crucial in an increasingly competitive academic environment where visibility and recognition can significantly influence funding, collaborations, and career advancement.

Furthermore, the increasing prevalence of multimodal quotations, such as memes and quote cards, in the analysis reflects the findings of Pfurtscheller (2020) and Vandelanotte (2020). These studies highlight how digital affordances enable novel forms of intertextuality, which the data corroborate by showing the frequent use of visual elements to enhance the impact and engagement of tweets. The use of memes and quote cards leverages the visual and often humorous nature of these formats to make academic content more engaging and relatable. This not only helps to capture the attention of a broader audience but also facilitates the communication of complex ideas in a more accessible and memorable way. By incorporating these multimodal elements, academic groups can make their tweets stand out in the crowded social media landscape, increasing the likelihood that their content will be shared and discussed.

In summary, while the findings align with much of the existing literature on the use of Twitter for self-promotion, networking, and public engagement, they also highlight an expanded use of intertextuality that reflects the evolving nature of academic communication on social media. These differences can be attributed to the changing dynamics of digital discourse and the strategic intent of academic groups to leverage Twitter's affordances for a multifaceted communication approach. The broader use of intertextuality observed in these findings suggests that academic groups are becoming more sophisticated in their use of social media, employing a range of strategies to maximize their visibility, impact, and engagement. This reflects a growing recognition of the importance of digital literacy and strategic communication skills in the contemporary academic landscape.

This study expands traditional theories of intertextuality by incorporating the digital dimension, highlighting how academic communication on Twitter involves text, visuals, and interactive elements. Unlike Bakhtin's (1981) focus on written texts, this study demonstrates how applied linguists use multimodal quotations, digital mentions, and hyperlinks to create engaging narratives and construct scholarly identities. This aligns with Shifman (2014) and Jenkins' (2006) convergence culture, where different media forms blend to create new communication modes, showing how researchers adapt various textual forms to serve their purposes.

Furthermore, the study underscores intertextuality's dynamic aspect in real-time, participatory environments like Twitter. Tweets serve not only for self-promotion and publicizing research but also for community building and networking. The immediate feedback and interaction on Twitter reveal a facet of intertextuality less evident in traditional texts, highlighting its role in fostering scholarly engagement and collaboration. For academics, understanding intertextuality on Twitter can enhance their scholarly communication. Strategic use of hashtags can link tweets to broader conversations, increasing their discoverability and engagement. By selecting relevant hashtags, researchers can reach wider audiences, positioning themselves within ongoing academic discussions and fostering a sense of community.

Incorporating multimodal elements like quote cards, visuals, and hyperlinks can make complex academic information more accessible and engaging. These elements attract attention and facilitate deeper engagement with research, broadening its reach. Additionally, Twitter's design supports active engagement through retweets, mentions, and replies, crucial for building professional networks and collaborative opportunities. Live tweeting during conferences enhances real-time scientific communication, inviting broader participation. Twitter also plays a vital role in public outreach, allowing academics to share resources, engage with the public, and demonstrate the societal impact of their work. By strategically engaging with intertextuality, academics can significantly enhance their visibility and impact in the academic community and beyond.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of intertextuality in academic tweets, highlighting both the theoretical and practical implications for digital scholarly communication. By bridging the gap between traditional intertextual theories and contemporary digital practices, the research offers significant contributions to the field of Applied Linguistics and beyond. The findings emphasize the importance of visual and digital elements in academic communication, offering new perspectives on how scholars can effectively use social media to engage with their audience and promote their work. The study underscores the role of Twitter in facilitating self-promotion, community building, and networking, while also identifying areas for future research to further explore the evolving nature of intertextual practices in digital academic discourse.

          Despite its detailed design, this study has several limitations. The dynamic nature of digital platforms like Twitter means that findings are time-specific, with intertextual practices potentially evolving since data collection. Additionally, the focus on applied linguistics groups limits the generalizability of the findings to other academic disciplines. The geographic scope of five English-speaking nations further narrows this generalizability. The sample size of 300 tweets, while insightful, may not capture the full diversity of intertextual practices in applied linguistics. Manual data collection and coding involve subjectivity, and the exclusion of tweet threads may have overlooked richer intertextual contexts. The study’s focus on prominent intertextual representations may also miss some nuances, such as categorizing tweets expressing condolences under “Positive Information/Evaluation of the Group,” highlighting the challenges in categorizing complex content.

          To address these limitations, future research should expand the scope and depth of analysis. Conducting longitudinal studies would help observe how intertextual practices on Twitter evolve over time, offering insights into the dynamic nature of scholarly communication. Including a broader range of academic disciplines, languages, and national contexts would enhance the generalizability of the findings. Increasing the dataset size and employing automated methods for data collection and analysis could reduce subjectivity and provide a more robust understanding. Moreover, incorporating tweet threads and refining the analytical framework for content categorization would allow for a deeper and more nuanced exploration of interconnected academic discourse. Finally, examining the relationship between intertextual strategies and tweet engagement could yield valuable insights for academics seeking to optimize their communication practices on digital platforms.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID