Linguistic Features of Podcasts in the Bulgarian Digital Ecosystem

Authors:
Mavrodieva I.Т.
Abstract:

This article examines the linguistic features of podcasts within the Bulgarian digital ecosystem. The podcasts and episodes analyzed were selected according to the theme, media type and creator, as well as the interactional behavior of podcast hosts and their guests. The corpus comprises 50 podcasts and 200 episodes spanning the period from January 2024 to June 2026. The research methodology adopts an interdisciplinary approach, necessitated by the multilayered and complex nature of the objects under study — Bulgarian podcasts — and encompasses linguistic, discourse, and visual analysis alongside cyberethnography. The study hypothesizes that podcast language is characterized by heterogeneity and dynamic development; podcast hosts and their guests express themselves clearly and frequently incorporate professional terminology and even jargon, alongside moderate elements of figurative language. The aim of the study is to establish podcasts within the Bulgarian digital ecosystem as a parallel, and indeed alternative, channel of communication. The linguistic analysis proceeded along four dimensions. The first focused on lexical features, the specific use of words and expressions, and adherence to or deviation from language norms. The second addressed the modes of dialogue and self-presentation employed by participants. The third examined the formulation of episode and podcast titles, as well as the verbal and visual means by which they are presented on social media. The fourth focused on the analysis of visual intertextuality as manifested in podcast logos and episode thumbnails.

Key words:
podcastdigital ecosystemdiscoursedialoguelanguage normsvisual languagevisual intertextuality
  • References

    [1] Subramaniam M., Digital ecosystems and their implications for competitive strategy, Journal of Organization Design, 9 (2020) 12. DOI: 10.1186/s41469-020-00073-0

    [2] Sales Baptista C., Nunes D., Digital ecosystems and their influence on business relationships, Review of Managerial Science, 20 (2026) 29–51. DOI: 10.1007/s11846-025-00865-2

    [3] Hammersley B., Audible revolution, The Guardian, (2004). [online] Available: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/feb/12/broadcasting.digitalmedia?CMP=share_btn_url (Accessed 02.10.2026)

    [4] McKean E., The New Oxford American Dictionary, 2nd ed., NY: Oxford University Press, 2005.

    [5] Morlandstø L., Mathisen R.B., Podcast – Commentary Journalism as a Digital Public, Journalistica, 16 (1) (2022) 61–83. DOI: 10.7146/journalistica.v16i1.128840

    [6] Katzenberger V., Keil J., Wild M., The Podcast Revolution? Exploring Journalistic Pioneers Beyond Legacy Media, Journalism and Media, 6 (1) (2025) 20. DOI: 10.3390/journalmedia6010020

    [7] Rizwan N., Deb N., Roy S., Solanki V.S., Garimella K., Mukherjee A., Toxicity Begets Toxicity: Unraveling Conversational Chains in Political Podcasts, Proceedings of the 33rd ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’25) (2025) 11776–1184. DOI: 10.1145/3746027.3754553

    [8] Rodríguez-Ortiz R., Fernández-Sande M., Analysis of Narrative Strategies in Independent Non-Fiction Narrative Podcasts in Ibero-America, Media and Communication, 13 (2025) 9096. DOI: 10.17645/mac.9096

    [9] Kondratenko P.I., How German TikToks represent linguistic knowledge: linguistic resources and multimodal communicative practices, Terra Linguistica, 16 (1) (2025) 30–46. DOI: 10.18721/JHSS.16103

    [10] Rybas N., Gajjala R., Developing Cyberethnographic Research Methods for Understanding Di-gitally Mediated Identities, Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 8 (3) (2007) 35. DOI: 10.17169/fqs-8.3.282

    [11] Akturan U., A review of cyber ethnographic research: A research technique to analyze virtual consumer communities, Boğaziçi Journal, 23 (1–2) (2009) 1–18. DOI: 10.21773/boun.23.1.1

    [12] Hine C., Ethnographies of Online Communities and Social Media: Modes, Varieties, Affordances, In: The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods (eds. N.G. Fielding, R.M. Lee, G. Blank), (2017) 401–413. DOI: 10.4135/9781473957992.n23

    [13] Ardévol E., Gómez-Cruz E., Digital Ethnography and Media Practices, The International Encyclopedia of Media Studies, (2014) 498–518. DOI: 10.1002/9781444361506.wbiems193

    [14] Van Dijk T.A., Discourse, context and cognition, Discourse Studies, 8 (1) (2006) 159–177. DOI: 10.1177/1461445606059565

    [15] Van Dijk T.A., Critical Discourse Analysis. In: The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (eds. D. Tannen, H.E. Hamilton, D. Schiffrin), (2015) 466–485. DOI: 10.1002/9781118584194.ch22

    [16] Chernyavskaya V.E., Image and Visuality in Sociocultural Dimension, ΠΡΑΞΗMΑ. Journal of Visual Semiotics, 2 (28) (2021) 96–109. DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2021-2-96-109

    [17] Gorshkova N.E., Chernyavskaya V.E., Visual intertextuality as a method for meaning generation, Communication Studies (Russia), 8 (4) (2021) 689–700. DOI: 10.24147/2413-6182.2021.8(4).689-700

    [18] Kushneruk S.L., Conflictogenicity of Intercultural Interaction on Telegram Channels: Discour-se Analysis of Visual Frames, Terra Linguistica, 16 (4) (2025) 74–91. DOI: 10.18721/JHSS.16405

    [19] Borbotko L.A., Theatre Telegram channel as a digital tool for creating critic’s digital identity, Terra Linguistica, 15 (4) (2024) 19–33. DOI: 10.18721/JHSS.15402

    [20] Kristeva J., Σημειωτική. Recherches pour une sémanalyse, Paris: Édition du Seuil, 1969.

    [21] Kristeva J., Sèméiotikè. Recherches pour une sémanalyse, Paris: Édition du Seuil, 1974.

    [22] Kakungulu S.J., The Role of Podcasts in Shaping Public Discourse, Research Invention Journal of Research in Education, 5 (1) (2025) 60–66. DOI: 10.59298/RIJRE/2025/516066

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Previous articleNext article