This paper examines the distributional patterns of ‘swearing’ expressions produced in cyberspace in response to NAVER internet news articles. A range of contextual features associated with the use of swearing expressions are identified in terms of their tendency to be formulated as response cries produced as part of affectively-loaded assessments. Serving as a resource for managing face through footing shift, the ways in which swearing expressions are formulated and deployed embody the writer's orientation to treating the cyberspace where they are situated as a form of ‘social situation’ where at least some form of face/impression management is required. The predominant use of their variant forms is analyzed not simply as an attempt to outsmart the institutional attempt at controlling their use but as a collusive act through which the fellow participants are co-implicated in a collective word play organized as a cyberspace-specific form of language game. The tendency of the swearing expressions to cluster and resonate with each other suggests that swearing in cyberspace should be treated not simply as an unconstrained individualized act but as an act embedded in interactively-organized ‘word play’ activities that are obliquely, but crucially, geared to enhancing consensual grounds for shared affective stance among the members of the cyber-community of practice.

The purpose of this study is to categorize intention of comment writers by analyzing frame of swearing comments in response to internet news articles. To accomplish this purpose, this study looks into the general trend of the studies regarding swearing comments and finds out the concepts of frame and framing especially useful for the news comments studies. And then, a model for frame analysis and intention categorization about the comments are made. This study particularly focuses on the comments about the internet news articles for “animal welfare” and “climate and weather” and uses the frame of the swearing comments provided by NAVER are analyzed. The findings show that the fame of “family, life respect, social welfare, economic feasibility” is evoked in the animal welfare, and the frame of “hardship of life, regional emotion, weather agency, money loss,” in the climate and weather. This study also shows the intention category of comment writers, “blame, disgust, curse, grumble, ridicule,” grounded in respective frame analysis.