Tattooing as a symbolic system of communication among young people

Borodina A.E.

Master's student majoring in Psychology«
Moscow City Pedagogical University (MCPU)
e-mail: ae-borodina@yandex.ru

Tattooing as a sociocultural phenomenon has existed for centuries and has been studied by many scholars. Over time, tattooing as a cultural aspect has undergone various changes, losing some functions and acquiring new ones. As tattooing in modern society has become demarginalized and ceased to be an aspect of the lives of certain social classes and stratifications, tattooing has lost one of its primary functions: stratification.

The relevance of this study lies in the growing popularity of tattoos among people who do not belong to defined and clearly defined social groups. However, how and for what purposes tattooing is used in modern society, and what functions modern artistic tattoos serve, remain unclear.

The process of demarginalization is most often observed among young people, that is, according to the Decree on Youth Policy of the Russian Federation, among people aged 14 to 30. This is confirmed by data from the German analytical center "Dalia Research": 33% Russians have permanent tattoos, 29% of whom are people under 24, 13% are people under 35 [11]. Despite the large number of studies on this topic, the layer of demarginalized artistic tattoos remains poorly studied. Modern artistic tattoos can be applied not only because of belonging to a group, but also to express individuality or self-identification as an individual, to reflect personal preferences, to commemorate significant events, or to express opinions on certain political, social, and other trends. Moreover, over time, both the sociocultural meaning of tattooing and the mechanisms of its perception change. This article attempts to examine the phenomenon of tattooing from a psycholinguistic perspective, as one of the symbolic means of transmitting and perceiving information between young people. Thus, this work is devoted to a theoretical analysis of the psycholinguistic aspects of tattooing.

The aim of this study is to determine whether contemporary artistic tattoos have meaning, whether they are used by young people to convey certain messages about themselves, or whether tattooing is simply another aspect of contemporary fashion. The key objectives for achieving this goal are: conducting a historical analysis of the tattooing phenomenon, analyzing the theoretical framework surrounding tattooing, developing a research program, and formulating tentative conclusions about the current functions of tattooing.

Tracing the chronology of the emergence and development of tattooing is a challenging task, as today this phenomenon is believed to have roots in several cultures, and therefore represents a synthesis of images and traditions from diverse ethnocultural backgrounds. The same applies to the chronology of tattoo research in the scientific world, which unfolds autonomously within each scientific community. Nevertheless, historians have been able to reconstruct the chronology of tattooing's development in European society [12, 13, 15]. Most agree that the development of tattooing can be divided into several stages. The first period dates back to the 18th century and is associated with the period of colonization, as it was during this time that tattooed people, brought as laborers from colonized countries, began to appear in Europe and the United States. The second stage in the development of tattooing in European culture is associated with the beginning of relations with Japan in the 19th century and the introduction of traditional Japanese tattooing. The next stage was the integration of tattooing into European society and its popularization among the local population at the beginning of the 20th century. It is worth noting that at this stage, tattooing assumed its stratifying and marginalizing functions and was used only by certain segments of the population (prisoners, military personnel) for the purposes of determinism and hierarchization. In the mid- to late 20th century, tattooing became even more popular and spread to certain other social groups, such as subcultures, while remaining a marginalized cultural phenomenon. At the beginning of the 21st century, tattooing began to demarginalize and popularize to such an extent that it began to be practiced by virtually all segments of the population, which may be related to the peculiarities of modern communication, which are embodied in the general tendency toward visualizing information [6, p. 90].

First of all, when studying tattooing in the psycholinguistic aspect as a symbolic means of interpersonal communication, it is necessary to take into account the theory of speech activity
A.A. Leontiev, according to which, speech activity is a type of activity characterized, like any other type, by an objective motive and purposefulness, and also consisting of successive phases of orientation, planning, implementation and control [3]. Also, aspects or functions necessary for solving certain communication tasks by speakers are distinguished in speech: informative, serving to convey information; perceptual, ensuring understanding of information; prescriptive, serving to influence the interlocutor; expressive, necessary for expressing emotions and assessments; interpersonal, regulating relationships between interlocutors; playful, appealing to the sense of humor and imagination of the interlocutor. Since a tattoo satisfies all of the above-mentioned tasks, for this work this theoretically justifies the use of tattooing as a sign system of communication among young people.

The question of whether tattooing as a sign system belongs to language also remains important. In many ways, this question is determined only by the content that is included in the definition of the term "language". Thus, if we take as a basis the definition that defines language as "a system of signs and rules for their use", tattooing satisfies this term and can well be equated with language [2, p. 54]. On the other hand, if we understand language as a specific sign system of communication, then tattooing obviously cannot be considered a language of communication [14, p. 7; 7, p. 50]. The approach that separates language from any other communication systems seems more correct, since language is a unique system of signs that requires separate study. The study of tattooing will be more successful if we consider a tattoo as a sign, since it satisfies the structure of a sign: it has an expression side, a content side, as well as a relationship between this expression and content [4, p. 54].

One of the most important works on tattoo research in Russian psycholinguistics is V.F. Pirozhkov's book "Laws of the Criminal World of Youth." The work primarily addresses the historical development of both the term "tattoo" and the phenomenon itself. Regarding approaches to studying tattoos, the author argues that a personal approach is optimal, as tattoos represent signs of human communication, which, however, "are refracted through the internal conditions of the individual and are internalized, becoming entrenched in the characteristics and qualities of the individual" [10, p. 102].

V.F. Pirozhkov defines and reveals all the main functions of tattoos: the ethnic and cognitive functions indicating membership in a particular clan; the personality-attitude function indicating a person's name and age, place of birth, marital status, and profession; the stratification function indicating a person's position in the hierarchical system and their status; the religious function, the decorative and artistic function, the functions of stigmatization and encouragement, and the communicative function. The fact that tattoos are considered here not only as a stratification-stigmatizing, but also as a communicative element, playing the role of a means of communication, interpersonal and intergroup interaction, provides the theoretical basis for this work.

Another important work in the study of tattooing as a sociocultural phenomenon is the social psychology of B.N. Parygin. Social psychology is understood here as the science that studies the characteristics of the human psyche in society – its manifestations in the active interaction and communication of people with each other. The greatest interest of this work lies in the fact that B.N. Parygin attributes to the socio-psychological aspects of communication not only contagion, suggestion, persuasion, and imitation, but also fashion, since it represents "not only one of the specific forms of mass behavior of people, but also a unique socio-psychological mechanism of human communication" [8, p. 247]. Moreover, the author, also citing other scholars, attributes the use of tattooing as a communicative aspect specifically to fashion. This view defines tattoos as an element of communication and a means of transmitting information, but does not answer the question of why, from a psychological point of view, not all people choose tattoos as an element of self-expression, but are guided by fashion in clothing or interests (such as literary genres, cinema, hobbies, etc.). Therefore, the author argues that it is precisely certain psychological characteristics of a person that influence how fashion «manifests a person’s conscious choice of a particular material or spiritual value, which should be primarily oriented» [8, p. 249].

The fact that B.N. Parygin takes into account the importance of the role of a person's psychological characteristics in the decision to use tattooing as a symbolic means of communication provides the main theoretical benefit for this work.

The meaning of some symbols tattooed on modern bodies seems obvious, while the meaning of others is quite difficult to grasp. Therefore, the primary goal of the psycholinguistic experiment is to identify patterns in the psychological characteristics of tattoo wearers, as well as to determine whether there are linguistic patterns in their use of tattoos as a nonverbal communication system. The general concept of the planned experiment will be described below.

The psycholinguistic experiment examines tattooing from both a psychological and linguistic perspective. When examining tattooing from a psychological perspective, the communicative aspect of tattooing is most often studied. The use of certain methods of communication and self-expression is determined by certain psychological aspects of a person. This paper also examines the communicative function of tattooing, and therefore it makes sense to focus on communication in the psychological portion of the planned psycholinguistic study. The need for communication, as "the desire to understand and evaluate others, as well as self-knowledge and self-esteem," is present in all people, but the specifics of this need differ among individuals [4, p. 32]. Based on this, it can be assumed that it is the specifics of individuals' communicative needs that influence the choice of methods for verbal and nonverbal communication, including the use of tattooing as a means of conveying information about oneself and perceiving information about others. The experiment attempts to trace the relationship between the use of tattoos as a means of nonverbal communication and the psychological characteristics of a person's need for communication. To confirm or refute this hypothesis, E.S. Eliseev's Communication Needs Test was chosen, which will help identify the presence or absence of specific communication needs in tattoo wearers [1].

The linguistic aspect of tattooing lies in its semantic aspect. Like any other visual sign of appearance, a tattoo is a means of nonverbal communication, encompassing informational-communicative, regulatory-communicative, and affective-communicative functions. Consequently, tattoos are used by their wearers as an aspect of nonverbal communication. To understand whether tattooing can be considered a symbolic system of communication among young people from a linguistic perspective, it is necessary to determine whether tattoos actually have common meanings for all wearers. To test this hypothesis, an associative experiment was chosen to identify the presence or absence of a common associative set of the participants, as well as the associative relationships between tattoos.

The study will include a communication needs test and an association test among the participants. The tests will be administered to 45 participants, each of whom will meet the following criteria: being of the "youth" age group and having tattoos. Based on the data obtained, an analysis will be conducted to confirm or refute the hypothesis that, from a psycholinguistic perspective, tattoos are used as a symbolic system among young people.

In the preliminary phase, a pilot experiment was conducted to validate the proposed hypotheses. The primary goal of the experiment was to identify the use of tattooing as a functioning symbolic communication system. For this purpose, an association experiment was chosen to determine whether the associative meanings stated by tattoo wearers matched those of their recipients. In the first phase of the experiment, six contemporary artistic tattoos were selected. The tattoo wearers provided three personal definitions for their tattoos. The second phase consisted of a survey of respondents. Respondents were divided into two groups of five: Group 1—people who also had tattoos, and Group 2—people without tattoos. Both groups were asked to complete an association test using the same set of six tattoos (Table 2).

Table 2 Association test results

The results of the experiment showed that the associations of both groups mirrored the definitions given by the tattoo wearers themselves. For example, as the table shows, for tattoo #1, the associations of group 1 and group 2 mirrored two of the wearer's three definitions.

Based on the completed study, the following conclusions can be drawn. A historical analysis of the phenomenon confirmed that the stratification function is more characteristic of earlier stages of tattooing's development and is not the determining factor for artistic tattooing in modern society. A theoretical analysis of related studies revealed that tattooing can be considered a communication sign, as it addresses all communication needs and has a distinct communicative function. A pilot experiment confirmed that modern artistic tattooing can be considered a symbolic communication system, conveying specific information about the wearer to others. Therefore, the developed experiment will utilize appropriate methods to identify the current functions of tattooing as a symbolic communication system among young people.

Literature

1. Eliseev O.P. The need for communication / Workshop on personality psychology. St. Petersburg, 2003.
2. Karpov V.A.Language as a system, Mn: Higher School, 1992.
3. Leontiev A.A. Word in speech activity: Some problems of the general theory of speech activity. Moscow: Nauka, 1965; reprinted 2006
4. Lisina M.I. Problems of the ontogenesis of communication / Research Institute of General and Educational Psychology of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences. Moscow: Pedagogika, 1986.
5. Literary language. // General linguistics: forms of existence, functions, history of language. / Ed. B. A. Serebrennikov. Moscow: "Nauka", 1970.
6. Matveev M.O. The relationship between speech and cognitive processes // Organizational psycholinguistics. 2019. No. 2(6). P. 89-103.
7. Moskovich V.A. On the Limits of Complexity in the Structure of Units in Various Sign Systems. In: "Proceedings for the Conference 'Language as a Sign System of a Special Kind'." Moscow, 1967.
8. Parygin B.D. Social Psychology. Problems of History, Methodology, and Theory. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University of Printing Arts, 1999.
9. Parygin B.D.. Social Psychology. Origins and Prospects. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University of Printing Arts, 2010.
10. Pirozhkov V.F. Laws of the criminal world of youth. Criminal subculture. Moscow: Priz, 1994.
11. Athena L. Who has the most tattoos? Berlin: Dalia Research, 2018: https://daliaresearch.com/blog/who-has-the-most-tattoos/, 24.03.2020.
12. Ebin V: The body decorated. Thames and Hudson, London, 1979.
13. Caplan J: Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American History. Reaction Books, London, 2000.
14. Hockett Ch. The problem of universals in language. — «Universals of Language». Cambridge (Mass.), 1966.
15. Rubin A: The Tattoo Renaissance. Museum of Cultural History, University of California, Los Angeles, 1988.

Regulatory acts

1. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 29, 2014 No. 2403-r "On approval of the Fundamentals of the State Youth Policy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025.".

Reference

1. Eliseev OP. The need for communication / Practical course on personality psychology. St. Petersburg, 2003.
2. Karpov VA. Jazyk kak sistema, Mn: Vyshjejshaja shkola, 1992.
3. Leont'ev AA. Word in speech activity: Some problems of the general theory of speech activity. Moscow: Nauka, 1965; reprinted 2006.
4. Lisina MI. Problemy ontogeneza obshhenija / Nauch.-issled. in-t obshhej i pedagogical psychology Akadem. ped. nauk SSSR. M.: Pedagogika, 1986.
5. Literary language. // General language knowledge: forms of existence, functions, history of language. / Ed. B. A. Serebrennikov. Moscow: Nauka, 1970.
6. Matveev MO. The relationship between speech and cognitive processes // Organizational psiholingvistika. 2019. No. 2(6). P. 89-103.
7. Moskovich VA. On the Limits of Complexity of the Structure of Units of Different Sign Systems. In: «Materials for the Conference «Jazz as a Sign System of a Special Kind»». Moscow, 1967.
8. Parygin BD. Social'naja psihologija. Problemy istorii, metodologii i teorii. SPb.: SPbGUP, 1999.
9. Parygin BD. Social'naja psihologija. Istoki i perspektivy. SPb.: SPbGUP, 2010.
10. Pirozhkov VF. Laws of the criminal world of youth. Criminal subculture. Moscow: Priz, 1994.
11. Athena L. Who has the most tattoos? Berlin: Dalia Research, 2018: https://daliaresearch.com/blog/who-has-the-most-tattoos/, 03/24/2020.
12. Ebin V: The body decorated. Thames and Hudson, London, 1979.
13. Caplan J: Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American History. Reaction Books, London, 2000.
14. Hockett Ch. The problem of universals in language. — «Universals of Language». Cambridge (Mass.), 1966.
15. Rubin A: The Tattoo Renaissance. Museum of Cultural History, University of California, Los Angeles, 1988.

Regulatory acts

1. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 29, 2014 No. 2403-r "On approval of the Fundamentals of State Youth Policy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2025"«