Article published In: (Inter)Cultural Dialogues
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu
[Language and Dialogue 13:3] 2023
► pp. 383–406
The drama of dialogue action in distinct discourse spaces
Conservative and liberal humour in television talk shows
Published online: 18 September 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00156.chl
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00156.chl
Abstract
The article addresses the issue of intracultural dialogue between two strong political mindsets, liberal and
conservative. This polarization is typical of contemporary cultural divides and emerges in the public sphere through mass media,
often finding its outlet through humour, which may be treated as a mediating factor. It will be discussed on the example of a
popular Polish humorous talk show broadcast on the public TV channel as compared to one broadcast on commercial television. The
central finding of the study, seemingly replicable for other languages and television cultures, is the discovery of the central
item on the discursive agenda, i.e., a worldview hiding in the conservative epistemic stance that assumes the authority of the
journalists running the show.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Right-wing vs left-wing humour in the lens of dialogue scholars and humour scholars
- 3.Conservative vs liberal stance: The Polish style
- 4.The two Polish talk shows in counterpoint
- 5.Analysis of selected examples
- 5.1Speaker’s authority – Omniscient satirist (WTW) vs speaker’s distance (SZK)
- 5.2Humour targets and negative sterotypes
- 5.3Sarcasm and irony
- 5.4Play of imagination vs targeted humour
- 5.5The literal vs the metaphorical
- 6.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (27)
Attardo, Salvatore. 2020. The
Linguistics of Humor. An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cap, Piotr. 2008. “Towards
the Proximization Model of the Analysis of Legitimization in Political Discourse”. Journal of
Pragmatics 401: 17–41.
Carrell, Amy. 1997. “Humor
Communities”. Humor: International Journal of Humor
Research 10 (1): 11–24.
Chłopicki, Władysław. 2009. “The “Szkło kontaktowe” show: A return to the old irrationality?” In Permitted laughter: socialist, post-socialist and never-socialist humour, ed. by Arvo Krikmann and Liisi Laineste, 171–181. Tartu: ELM Scholarly Press.
Colman, Andrew M., and Gorman, L. Paul. 1982. “Conservatism,
Dogmatism, and Authoritarianism in British Police
Officers.” Sociology 16 (1): 1–11.
Daviess, Beth. 2019. “Making
Memes and Shitposting: The Powerful Political Discourse of Alt-right Meme Culture” (June 5, 2019). Available at [URL]
Heinz, Sonja et al. 2020. “Benevolent
and Corrective Humor, Life Satisfaction, and Broad Humor Dimensions: Extending the Nomological Network of the BenCor across 25
Countries.” Journal of Happiness
Studies 21 (7): 2473–2492.
Hietalahti, Jarno. 2023. “Book
review: Weaver, Simon (2022). The Rhetoric of Brexit Humour: Comedy, Populism and the EU
Referendum. London and New York: Routledge.” The European Journal of Humour
Research 11 (1): 218–222.
Kecskes, Istvan. 2010. “The
Paradox of Communication: A Socio-Cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics and
Society 1 (1): 50–73.
Kuipers, Giselinde. 2009. “Humor
Styles and Symbolic Boundaries.” Journal of Literary
Theory 3 (2): 219–240.
. forthcoming. “Humour
and Polarization: How the Clown Style in 21st Century Drives People Apart, in Politics and
Beyond.”
Laaksonen, Salla-Maria, Joonas Koivukoski, and Merja Porttikivi. 2022. “Clowning
around a Polarized Issue: Rhetorical Strategies and Communicative Outcomes of a Political Parody Performance by Loldiers of
Odin.” New Media &
Society 24 (8): 1912–1931.
Ruch, Willibald. 1992. “Assessment
of Appreciation of Humor: Studies with the 3 WD Humor
Test.” In Advances in Personality
Assessment, Vol. 91, ed. by Charles D. Spielberger and James N. Butcher, 27–75. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Săftoiu, Răzvan. 2014. “Review
of Cap, Piotr. 2013. Proximization. The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance
Crossing.” Language and
Dialogue 4 (3): 497–499.
Sienkiewicz, Matt and Nick Marx. 2022. That’s
not Funny: How the Right Makes Comedy Work for
Them. Oakland: University of California Press.
. 2012. Ethnolinguistics
and Cultural Concepts: Truth, Love, Hate and
War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Verhulst, Brad, Lindon J. Eaves, and Peter K. Hatemi. 2012. “Correlation
not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies.” American
Journal of Political
Science 56(1): 34–51.
Weaver, Simon. 2022. The
Rhetoric of Brexit Humour: Comedy, Populism and the EU Referendum. London and New York: Routledge.
Weigand, Edda. 2017. “The
Mixed Game Model: A Holistic Theory.” In The Routledge Handbook of
Language and Dialogue, ed. by Edda Weigand. New York and London: Routledge.
. 2021. “Dialogue:
The Complex Whole.” Language and
Dialogue 11 (3): 457–486.
Zijp, Dick. 2014. Re-thinking
Dutch Cabaret: The Conservative Implications of Humour in the Dutch Cabaret Tradition. MA
Thesis. University of Amsterdam.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
