Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics & Cognition
Vol. 31:1 (2024) ► pp.97–124

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

Ironic criticisms and responses on Chinese social media

 | Beihang University
 | Beihang University
Published online: 11 October 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.00041.tia
Abstract
Ironic criticisms in online interactions are very common, but have rarely been examined. Following the concept of (non)propositional irony, this study investigates how online ironic criticisms are produced and responded to. The findings were derived from a mixed-methods analysis of 200 comments and 1,140 responses collected from Weibo. The analysis offers a computer-mediated taxonomy and identifies four subtypes of ironic criticisms, with different realisation forms in each subtype. Responses to negative evaluations are more common in online ironic interactions. Possible motivations for the prevalence of online ironic criticisms are also discussed. The findings shed light on the creativity of ironic criticisms on social media, and suggest the need for an updated definition of ironic criticisms to account for their use in online interactions.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Propositional and non-propositional ironic criticism
    • 2.2Ironic criticisms and responses
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Data collection
    • 3.2Data analysis
  • 4.Findings
    • 4.1Propositional ironic criticism and responses
      • 4.1.1Realisation forms of propositional ironic criticism
      • 4.1.2Responses to propositional ironic criticism
        • 4.1.2.1Responding to literal meaning
        • 4.1.2.2Responding to implied meaning
        • 4.1.2.3Responding using meta-language
    • 4.2Non-propositional ironic criticism and responses
      • 4.2.1Realisation forms of non-propositional ironic criticism
      • 4.2.2Responses to non-propositional ironic criticism
        • 4.2.2.1Responding to positive approaches
        • 4.2.2.2Responding to negative approaches
        • 4.2.2.3Responding using meta-language
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (54)
References
Aguert, Marc. 2022. Paraverbal expression of verbal irony: Vocal cues matter and facial cues even more. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 46(1). 45–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore. 2001. Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bettelli, Giulia & Francesca Panzeri. 2023. “Irony is easy to understand ”: The role of emoji in irony detection. Intercultural Pragmatics 20(5). 467–493. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Lucien. 2013. “Mind your own esteemed business”: Sarcastic honorifics use and impoliteness in Korean TV dramas. Journal of Politeness Research 9(2). 159–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burgers, Christian, Margot Van Mulken & Peter Jan Schellens. 2011. Finding irony: An introduction of the Verbal Irony Procedure (VIP). Metaphor and Symbol 26(3). 186–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Yifan & Qian Gong. 2023. Unpacking ‘baby man’ in Chinese social media: A feminist critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies 21(4). 400–417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. & Richard J. Gerrig. 1984. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113(1). 121–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 1999. Irony in conversation. Language in Society 28(4). 523–553. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coolidge, Andrew A., Carolyn Montagnolo & Salvatore Attardo. 2023. Comedic convergence: Humor responses to verbal irony in text messages. Language Sciences 991. 101566. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cui, Jing & Guiying Jiang. 2021. 国外反讽研究的现状、趋势和展望 [Status quo, trends and prospects of irony studies abroad]. Modern Foreign Languages 44(2). 284–293.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dews, Shelly, Joan Kaplan & Ellen Winner. 1995. Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony. Discourse Processes 19(3). 347–367. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dynel, Marta. 2017. Academics vs. American scriptwriters vs. academics: A battle over the etic and emic “sarcasm” and “irony” labels. Language & Communication 551. 69–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Irony, deception and humour: Seeking the truth about overt and covert untruthfulness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. Ironic intentions in action and interaction. Language Sciences 751. 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eisterhold, Jodi, Salvatore Attardo & Diana Boxer. 2006. Reactions to irony in discourse: Evidence for the least disruption principle. Journal of Pragmatics 38(8). 1239–1256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elder, Chi-Hé. 2024. Pragmatic inference: Misunderstandings, accountability, deniability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gal, Noam, Zohar Kampf & Limor Shifman. 2020. SRSLY?? A typology of online ironic markers. Information, Communication & Society 25(7). 992–1009. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garmendia, Joana. 2010. Irony is critical. Pragmatics & Cognition 18(2). 397–421. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2000. Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol 15(1–2). 5–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gong, Haomin & Xin Yang. 2010. Digitized parody: The politics of egao in contemporary China. China Information 24(1). 3–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert P. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In Cole Peter & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gu, Yueguo. 1990. Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 14(2). 237–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hancock, Jeffrey T. 2004. Verbal irony use in face-to-face and computer-mediated conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 23(4). 447–463. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
He, Juan. 2022. Sharing emotions or/and making allies: The emoji’s interpersonal function in Chinese social media news comments. Social Semiotics 33(5). 1131–1146. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga. 2003. Responding to irony in different contexts: On cognition in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 35(9). 1387–1411. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Shanpeng, Aoju Chen, Ying Chen & Ping Tang. 2022. The role of auditory and visual cues in the interpretation of Mandarin ironic speech. Journal of Pragmatics 2011. 3–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Livnat, Zohar & Gonen Dori-Hacohen. 2018. Indexing membership via responses to irony: Communication competence in Israeli radio call-in shows. Language & Communication 581. 62–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meng, Jiangang. 2005. 试析自然会话中的反讽回应 [An analysis of response to irony in natural conversation]. Foreign Language Research 1261. 12–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nuolijärvi, Pirkko & Liisa Tiittula. 2011. Irony in political television debates. Journal of Pragmatics 43(2). 572–587. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Obana, Yasuko & Michael Haugh. 2021. (Non-)propositional irony in Japanese-Impoliteness behind honorifics. Lingua 2601. 103119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Okamoto, Shinichiro. 2002. Politeness and the perception of irony: Honorifics in Japanese. Metaphor and Symbol 17(2). 119–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pawlak, Matthew C. 2019. How to be sarcastic in Greek: Typical means of signaling sarcasm in the New Testament and Lucian. Humor 32(4). 545–564. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piskorska, Agnieszka. 2014. A relevance-theoretic perspective on humorous irony and its failure. Humor 27(4). 661–685. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ren, Wei. 2018a. Exploring Chinese digital communication. Discourse Context & Media 261. 1–4. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018b. Mitigation in Chinese online consumer reviews. Discourse Context & Media 261. 5–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. Emancipating (im)politeness research and increasing its impact. Acta Linguistica Academica 66(2). 289–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2024. Low spirits vs. high spirits: How failure and success influence sharing in social media groups. Journal of Pragmatics 2251. 139–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanina, Anna. 2019. “Who are you kidding?”: Visual political irony in contemporary. Qualitative Inquiry 25(4). 432–444. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sequeiros, X. Rosales. 2011. Irony, relevance and pragmatic interpretation in Spanish. Language Sciences 33(3). 369–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen. 1980. Speech acts in interaction: A critique of Searle. Discourse Processes 3(2). 133–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsakona, Villy. 2011. Irony beyond criticism. Pragmatics and Society 2(1). 57–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda. 2023. Explicitating irony in a cross-cultural perspective: Discursive practices in online op-eds in French and in Hebrew. Contrastive Pragmatics 4(3). 437–465. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda & Ayelet Kohn. 2022. Resemblance in comments/posts interaction. Pragmatics and Society 13(5). 861–884. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weng, Xin, Xiaoming Jiang & Qiaoyun Liao. 2023. Using information of relationship closeness in the comprehension of Chinese ironic criticism: Evidence from behavioral experiments. Journal of Pragmatics 2151. 55–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Dan Sperber. 1992. On verbal irony. Lingua 87(1). 53–76. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Xiaoping & Richard Fitzgerald. 2021. ‘Hidden in plain sight’: Expressing political criticism on Chinese social media. Discourse Studies 23(3). 365–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yao, Jun. 2007. 英汉反讽话语的应答方式——基于电视辩论语料的语用研究 [Responding to ironic discourse in English and Chinese: A pragmatic study based on a television debate corpus]. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 215(02). 11–14.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yao, Jun, Jie Song & Michael Singh. 2013. The ironical Chinese bei-construction and its accessibility to English speakers. Journal of Pragmatics 551. 195–209. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhao, Xiufeng. 2019. Interactive blending of multimodal irony and conceptual metaphor andmetonymy: Cases of verbal-pictorial irony. Foreign Language Education 40(05). 8–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhou, Ling & Shaojie Zhang. 2018. Reconstructing the politeness principle in Chinese: A response to Gu’s approach. Intercultural Pragmatics 15(5). 693–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zou, Sheng. 2020. Beneath the bitter laughter: Online parodies, structures of feeling and cultural citizenship in China. Global Media and Communication 16(2). 131–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Weng, Xin & Qiaoyun Liao
2025. The intimacy-power relationships in the usage of direct criticism in Chinese: a reflection of rapport management. Language and Cognition 17 DOI logo
Zhou, Suifang, Kexue Fu, Huanmin Yi & Ray Lc
2025. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Creativity and Cognition, ► pp. 244 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue