Cover not available

In:Metapragmatics of Humor: Current research trends
Edited by Leonor Ruiz-Gurillo
[IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 14] 2016
► pp. 127–143

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

A look at metalinguistic jokes based on intentional morphological reanalysis

 | University of Alicante
Published online: 24 November 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.14.07bal
Abstract
This chapter analyses metalinguistic jokes produced by intentional morphological reanalysis, particularly, those which involve intentional morphological misinterpretations of morphemes or word parts. One single morpheme or word may be decomposed into pseudo-morphemes, through what Guiraud (1976) calls “defunctionalization” of language, which most often become fully meaningful and transparent due to their formal identity with an already existent free morpheme. Consequently, new, potential and highly motivated words are created with humorous purposes. In our sample, the manipulation and reinterpretation of the a priori indivisible word structures are supported by the existence of, mainly, homophones and paronyms, graphic marks and, less frequently, by slight spelling changes, e.g. Q: What do you give a skeleton for Valentine’s Day? A: Bone-bones in a heart-shaped box.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.(Meta)linguistic Jokes: Puns and/or Word Play
  • 3.Objectives and methodology
  • 4.Intentional morphological reanalysis as a metalinguistic Joke/Pun-making strategy
    • 4.1Upgrading word boundaries and other non-morphological alterations
    • 4.2On the interpretation of semantic ambiguity or wordplay
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
  • Appendix
References (44)
References
Aarons, Debra. 2012. Jokes and the Linguistic Mind. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Adams, Valerie. 1973. An Introduction to Modern English Word Formation. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alexander, Richard J. 1997. Aspects of Verbal Humour in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore. 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Humorous texts: A semantics and pragmatics analysis. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, Donalee H. Attardo, Paul Baltes, and Marnie J. Petray. 1994. “The Linear Organization of Jokes: Analysis of Two Thousand Texts.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 7 (1): 27–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English Word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brône, Geert, Kurt Feyaerts, and Tony Veale. 2006. “Introduction: Cognitive linguistic approaches to humor.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 19 (3): 203–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bucaria, Chiara. 2004. Lexical and syntactic ambiguity as a source of humor: the case of newspaper headlines. Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 17 (3): 279–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland. 1986. “Blends in English Word formation.” Linguistics 24 (4): 725–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chiaro, Delia. 1992. The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duffy, Susan, Gretchen Kambe, and Rayner, Keith. 2001. “The effect of prior disambiguating context on the comprehension of ambiguous words: evidence from eye movements.” In On the Consequences of Meaning Selection: Perspectives on Resolving Lexical Ambiguity, ed. by David S. Gorfein, 27–43. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dynel, Marta. 2009. Humorous Garden Paths: A Pragmatic-Cognitive Study. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forabosco, Giovannantonio. 1992. “Cognitive aspects of the humor process: the concept of incongruity.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 5 (1/2): 45–68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “Is the concept of incongruity still a useful construct for the advancement of humor research?” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4: 45–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel. 2003. On Our Mind. Salience, Context, and Figurative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gorfein, David S. (ed.). 2001. On the Consequences of Meaning Selection: Perspectives on Resolving Lexical Ambiguity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guiraud, Pierre. 1976. Les jeux de mots. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1977. “Jokes.” In The View from Language: Selected Essays 1948-1964, 257–289. Athens: Georgia. [URL] (retrieved on 29/06/2015)
Lew, Robert. 1996. “Exploitation of linguistic ambiguity in Polish and English jokes”. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 31: 127–133.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. “Toward a taxonomy of linguistic jokes.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 31: 123–152.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, Rod. 2007. The Psychology of Humor. An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 1993. Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. “Non-verbal humor and joke performance.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 17 (4): 401–409. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2010. “Humor in interaction.” Language and Linguistics Compass 4: 232–244. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oaks, Dallin D. 1994. “Creating Structural Ambiguities in Humor: Getting English Grammar to Cooperate.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 7 (4): 377–401. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partington, Alan. 2006. The Linguistics of Laughter. A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pepicello, William J. 1987. “Pragmatics of humorous language.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 65: 27–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pepicello, William J., and Thomas Green. 1984. The Language of Riddles. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Rediel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987. “Linguistic heuristics of humor: A script-based semantic approach.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 65: 11–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Redfern, Walter. 1984. Puns. Oxford, New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ritchie, Graeme. 2004. The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roop, Peter, and Connie Roop. 2004. Make Me Laugh! Holiday Howlers. Jokes for Punny Parties. Minneapolis: Carolrhoda Books, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, Alison. 1998. The Language of Humor. London and New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schultz, Sam, and Brian Gable. 2004. Make Me Laugh! Don’t Kid Yourself. Relatively Great (Family) Jokes. Minneapolis: Carolrhoda Books, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seewoester, Sarah. 2011. “The role of syllables and morphemes as mechanisms in humorous pun formation.” In The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains, ed. by Marta Dynel, 71–104. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1981. “Irony and the use-mention distinction.” In Pragmatics. A Reader, 1991, ed. by Steven Davis, 550–563. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Suls, Jerry M. 1972. “A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: an information processing analysis”. In The Psychology of Humor, ed. by Jeffrey H. Goldstein and Paul E. McGhee, 81–100. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taha, Abdul Karim. 1983. “Types of syntactic ambiguity in English.” International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 21: 251–266.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco. 1997. “La teoría de la relevancia y la estrategia humorística de la incongruencia-resolución.” Pragmalingüística 3–4: 497–508.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “A Relevance-Theoretic Classification of Jokes.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics. Special Issue on Humour 4 (1): 131–157.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1996. “Translating jokes for dubbed television situation comedies.” The Translator 2 (2): 235–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue