This chapter summarizes the key conclusions of the book, which examines how the Internet has transformed human interaction by fostering virtual communities and reshaping knowledge, authority, and legitimacy. Through an analysis of discursive practices in digital spaces, the book reveals how democratic participation online challenges traditional institutions and disrupts established knowledge hierarchies. Central to this inquiry is the tension between increased access to information and the erosion of institutional trust, exemplified by case studies such as the Spanish Royal Academy (RAE) and the COVID-19 ‘infodemic.’ The book further investigates misinformation, political communication through memes, and the rise of online activism, showing how digital communities shape discourse and build connective identities. Critical issues such as online human rights, free speech, and legal regulation are explored, with a particular focus on the metaverse and digital vigilantism. By addressing these complex dynamics, the book highlights the evolving challenges and opportunities of online discourse and stresses the importance of ongoing research as society adapts to the rapidly changing digital landscape, including innovations in Generative AI.

This chapter looks at the syntactic, i.e. phrase-structural, definitions of grammatical functions put forward in Chomsky (1965), which we restate using X-bar theory. We then submit these definitions to the ‘relational-grammar critique’, to adopt a term coined by Baker (2001), which suggests not just that Chomsky’s definitions are incorrect, but that something closer to the traditional idea that grammatical functions are primitives of syntactic theory is the right approach. One aspect of this critique is that constituency tests do not give clear results in many languages (English being something of an exception). Instead, we propose that asymmetries in c-command relations can provide us with a more reliable and general guide to constituency, and hence phrase-structural relations. This allows us to maintain a configurational definition of grammatical relations. In the final section of this chapter, we look at a construction which appears to centrally involve grammatical functions: the passive. We will see how the passive can be elegantly and usefully defined in purely phrase-structural terms. The conclusion is that grammatical relations can be reduced to phrase-structural relations, and as such are not primitive elements of syntactic theory. This is an important step in establishing the primacy of configurational, hierarchical, phrase-structural relations.

This chapter and the next two focus on wh-movement and what it can tell us about locality. We look first at the basic properties of wh-movement, then at the evidence that this movement relation is apparently unbounded, followed by a discussion of the very important class of ‘island phenomena’, which lead to the conclusion that wh-movement is not in fact unbounded despite initial appearances. We next look at the subjacency condition, a condition intended to provide a unified account of island phenomena. Finally, we look at the theory of barriers, an important refinement of subjacency.

Chapter 5 is concerned with sequential aspects of health-oriented interactions and the challenges this poses for corpus research. Two case studies demonstrate how conventional corpus procedures can be augmented with other linguistic approaches to facilitate a critical examination of the relationships between parts of the data that might otherwise be separated in corpus analysis. The first study is an investigation of a thread from an online forum dedicated to cancer – one that is explicitly dedicated to irreverent verbal play. We show how a corpus approach enabled the identification of humourous metaphors and helped us reveal recurrent lexical and grammatical features that facilitate discussion around sensitive topics, enable a coherent identity, and contribute to a sense of community. In the second study we use an approach that was originally applied to the Spoken BNC 2014 corpus to examine interactional data in terms of functional discourse units. We apply this coding framework to a sample of anxiety support forum data in order to document, quantify, and evaluate how various communicative purposes are formulated in forum posts and are met with different types of response.

This chapter explores the dynamics of knowledge and authority within virtual communities, where participants contribute asynchronously to shape collective understanding around specific topics. Through the interactive sharing, modification, and recirculation of information, participants recognize cognitive authority in online interactions. The notion of authority is examined across various domains: in business, authority transcends expertise to include digital presence and persuasive influence, quantified by metrics such as follower counts. Similarly, in health communities like PatientsLikeMe, personal experiences often hold sway comparable to conventional medical advice, particularly in less-researched medical conditions. Such experiences contribute significantly to medical knowledge and research, bridging gaps left by formal studies. The chapter highlights qualitative aspects of authority, emphasizing active engagement and adept use of linguistic resources to establish credibility and influence. It underscores the negotiation of authority among participants, where legitimacy enhances the capacity to claim authority within hierarchical online structures. By analyzing interactions and recognition within these communities, the chapter elucidates how individuals emerge as authoritative voices, shaping the production and legitimization of knowledge in different fields.

This chapter looks at the overall goals of generative syntax. It then moves on to a discussion of levels of adequacy for linguistic theory. This leads to a very brief discussion of the development of generative theory since its inception in the 1950s, up to its current version, known as the Minimalist Programme. Finally, we begin the discussion of hierarchy with an exposition of the X-bar theory of phrase structure and the notion of constituency tests as a probe for hierarchical structure.

In this final chapter we look at three main topics. First, we summarise and give an overview of the parameters we have seen in the preceding chapters, to some extent revising them as we go along. Second, we look at the theory of parameters and introduce the notion of parameter hierarchy. Third, we consider some future questions and directions for the theory.

Chapter 13 presents a synthesis of the previous chapters, beginning by asking the question – what have our experiences taught us about health communication that we didn’t know? We go on to examine lessons we learnt about carrying out corpus-based research on health communication, offering practical advice and tips for people who might be carrying out similar kinds of studies to the ones described in this book. We then consider the limitations of a corpus-based approach and end by looking to the future – what changes have taken place since we completed our analyses? What kinds of developments in the field of healthcare and in corpus linguistic analysis have occurred recently? And what avenues of research into health care do we believe are potentially interesting to investigate next?

This chapter introduces the theory of abstract Case. Case theory provides an account of what causes A-movement and predicts that many infinitival subject positions cannot be filled with overt arguments, although several types of infinitives have to be distinguished. This leads to a discussion of control phenomena and the movement theory of control.

As a “convergence culture” (Jenkins, 2006), virtual spaces amplify underrepresented voices, fostering debates on human rights and influencing policies. This chapter examines gender equity, focusing on the #MeToo movement and non-binary gender identities, including gender-neutral pronouns. Online anonymity provides vulnerable populations with a supportive network in virtual communities, enabling them to engage in debates on protective policies. These virtual discussions hold transformative potential for advancing recognition and protection for marginalized communities despite challenges posed by digital inequalities and polarized debates.

Indeed, digital activism can fuel reactionary movements. The discussion on representing gender identities through language pronouns has led YouTube and YouTubers to disable comments, aiming to protect free expression and prevent harassment. Prominent conservative figures oppose gender-neutral pronouns, claiming it infringes on free speech, a stance that has garnered significant controversy online. Videos supporting these views contribute to hostility against gender minorities. In Spanish contexts, discussions on inclusive language face additional challenges, with resistance from bodies like the Royal Spanish Academy. Public language forums often censor these discussions, violating freedom of expression. Antagonistic behaviors like trolling and cyberbullying further stifle essential conversations, raising questions about the need for regulatory interventions to protect vulnerable populations and uphold democratic discourse.

This chapter addresses the legal challenges of the virtual world, with a particular emphasis on the role of identity in its new configurations in the contemporary virtual environment. Specifically, we consider the changing nature of regulation, law and crime in an online context that has seen the emergence of the metaverse, which has made connecting the physical with the virtual persona more complex. Avatars and other personae have made it challenging to align identity with prior understandings and perceptions. Digital personae and virtual representations of selves require theoretical reconsiderations of identity and a set of norms that regulate interaction, and human relations in general within this world. Indeed, a discussion on identity rationalizes the need for new laws. The chapter considers these emerging challenges and explores the role that democratic governments and other gatekeepers can play in regulating digital communication and discourse, balancing the protection of freedom of speech with the persecution of hate speech. The perceived state of lawlessness that inhabits the online space suggests the need for clear criteria and terms of use, in addition to establishing a mechanism of accountability for those involved in virtual crimes, due to the lack of governmental guidelines for crimes in virtual universes.

This chapter presents a discussion about the interconnection between the proliferation of sources of information in a “post-truth” era. In particular, it considers the question of what the concept of “post-truth” actually means in the context of prevailing understandings of veracity and sincerity in discourse and communication. It also places this notion against the broader discursive practice of (de)legitimization and how the digital environment has added layers of complexity to how users – citizens – negotiate information and the idea of truth. In particular, attention is given to how mis- and disinformation in a post-truth context can be proliferated and disseminated in the online context and the specific features of communication the users might utilize to do so. Overall, this chapter explores current understandings of the notion of post-truth in public discourse before focusing more explicitly on how it is used in public discourse by influential actors such as Donald Trump. It will also consider the role that post-truth discourse plays in populist discourse as well the issues posed in broader online communication in the virtual context.

Chapter 2 is concerned with research questions. We discuss the different processes through which research questions can be identified and developed in corpus-based research on health communication. Three case studies are considered. The first study involved the analysis of press representations of obesity. In this study, the researchers developed their own research questions in a variety of ways, including by drawing from the non-linguistic literature on obesity. The second study focused on the McGill Pain Questionnaire – a well-known language-based diagnostic tool for pain. A pain consultant asked the researchers if they could help understand why some patients find it difficult to respond to some sections of the questionnaire. In response, the researchers formulated a series of questions that could be answered using corpus linguistic tools, and identified some issues with the questionnaire that address the pain consultant’s concerns. The third study involved the analysis of patient feedback on the UK’s National Health Service. The researchers were approached by the NHS Feedback Team and given 12 questions that they were commissioned to answer by means of corpus linguistic methods.

Chapter 12 discusses the potential opportunities and challenges associated with disseminating the findings of corpus-based approaches to health communication, which also apply more generally to interdisciplinary research and collaborations between researchers and non-academic stakeholders. We include two case studies. The first case study involves work on patient feedback with members of the NHS who had provided a list of questions for us to work on. We discuss the importance of and challenges around building and maintaining relationships with members of this large, changing organisation, as well as outlining how we approached dissemination of findings, both in academic and non-academic senses, and the extent that we were able to carry out impact. The second case study considers our experiences of disseminating findings from a project on metaphors and cancer, focussing particularly on writing for a healthcare journal, dealing with the media, and going beyond corpus data to create a metaphor-based resource for communication about cancer.

As the online environment furthers its development, spaces for new conceptualizations and configurations of what might be termed traditional “authority” continue to emerge. This is observable in the fact that throughout history, the notion of authority has held a tenuous or contentious relationships with communication technologies and the new affordances they continue to offer. Virtual spaces are crucial for delving into the concept of authority, a term notoriously challenging to define, encompassing dimensions such as status, power, expertise, and experience, among others. Coupled with the fact that the online context remains extremely fluid and continues to evolve, there are many moving parts that warrant consideration in any substantial discussion of authority in the online context. Furthermore, for an individual or a group to be successful in attaining an authoritative status, a process of legitimization cannot be avoided as one simply cannot successfully hold a position of authority without having demonstrated legitimacy. This chapter explores these notions and provides examples through discussion of the context of health discourse as well as Internet memes, parody social media accounts, and deepfakes.

The interactive construction of authority and expertise in online platforms around a topic (e.g., history, standard language, etc.) has challenged the way knowledge has been traditionally channeled through official institutions. The Internet has become a platform for recurrent consultation in relation to checking norms and rules or seeking advice or information through electronically mediated communication in which quasi-anonymous participants discuss, question, define, and re-construct knowledge. This chapter examines the competition between official institutions and these noninstitutional spaces for authority and legitimation in the creation of knowledge in a particular area or discipline. The chapter will explore the shift in the creation of knowledge, historically monopolized by institutional and official organizations and now facing significant challenges from online discussions. Further, it explores how institutional trust has been challenged and eroded due to the influence of digital communication and discourse. Discussions and debates such as these that have, paradoxically, fostered a more democratic exchange of information through participatory culture, are threatening the status, for instance, of democracy in countries with a long-stablished democratic tradition (US Capitol assault on January 6, 2021). This competition between official and unofficial discourses stands as a struggle for power and legitimacy in our current society.