Cover not available

Article published In: ‘Only joking’: Negotiating offensive humour in interaction
Edited by Chi-Hé Elder, Eleni Kapogianni and Ibi Baxter-Webb
[Pragmatics & Cognition 32:1] 2025
► pp. 121–150

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

“I’m just kidding”

Teasing and potential offence in Greek fictional interactions

ORCiD logo with link | Deree-The American College of Greece
 | University of Crete
Published online: 26 September 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.24021.sal
Abstract
This paper investigates the role of claims to non-seriousness in ‘jocular pretence’ teasing sequences (. 2016. ‘‘Just kidding’’: Teasing and claims to non-serious intent. Journal of Pragmatics 951. 120–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Drawing on 50 hours of Greek scripted interactions from popular TV sitcoms, we examined 18 ‘biting’ (Boxer, Diana, & Florencia Cortés-Conde. 1997. From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics 27(3). 275–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) teases involving overt claims to non-seriousness. Our analysis adopts an interactional pragmatic approach (. 2013. Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics 581. 52–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) with a particular focus on the sequential and moral/social implications of claims to non-seriousness, as well as on the ways these were informed by the conventions of the said genre. The analysis brings to the fore a systematic relation between the location and uptake of such claims, namely that they emerged after serious rejections of teases, and they were subsequently responded to in low-aligning ways. It also shows that these claims were used by teasers to project positive self-identities of politeness and sensitivity while preserving their relationship with the teasees. Overall, the analysis points to an intertwined relation between humour, identity, im/politeness-in-interaction.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
    • 2.1Teasing and (im)politeness
    • 2.2Humour, (im)politeness & TV sitcoms
    • 2.3The metapragmatics of teasing
  • 3.Methods and data
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Emergence and sequentiality of claims to non-serious intent in teasing sequences
      • 4.1.1Other-directed jocular pretence in ongoing interaction
      • 4.1.2Third-party directed jocular pretence in ongoing interaction
      • 4.1.3Retrospective claim to non-seriousness in storytelling
    • 4.2Social actions of claims to non-seriousness in teasing episodes
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (81)
References
Aitaki, Georgia. 2019. Laughing with/at the national self: Greek television satire and the politics of self-disparagement. Social Semiotics 29(1). 68–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alberts, Jess K. 1992. Teasing and sexual harassment: Double-bind communication in the workplace. In Linda A. M. Perry, Lynn H. Turner & Helen M. Sterk (eds.), Constructing and reconstructing gender, 185–196. Albany, NY: State University of NY Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Archakis, Argiris, Sofia Lampropoulou, Villy Tsakona & Vasia Tsami. 2015. Style and humor in Greek mass culture texts. In Dorota Brzozowska & Władysław Chłopicki (eds.), Culture’s software: Communication styles, 16–38. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore. 1994. Linguistic theories of humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020. The linguistics of humor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bell, Nancy. 2015. We αre not amused: Failed humor in interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bi, Xiaoyi & Elizabeth Marsden. 2020. Managing interpersonal relationships: Teasing as a method of professional identity construction. Journal of Pragmatics 1651. 18–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bousfield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boxer, Diana, & Florencia Cortés-Conde. 1997. From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics 27(3). 275–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Wei-Lin Melody & Michael Haugh. 2011. Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology. Intercultural Pragmatics 81. 411–442. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. Teasing and claims to non-serious intent in Chinese talk shows. East Asian Pragmatics 61. 135–159. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2005. Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The weakest link. Journal of Politeness Research 11. 35–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1987. Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 251. 219–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Setting our House in order: The workings of impoliteness in multi-party film discourse. Journal of Politeness Research 81. 161–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Conceptualizing conversational humour as (im)politeness: The case of film talk. Journal of Politeness Research 121. 117–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edwards, Derek. 2008. Intentionality and mens rea in police interrogations: The production of actions as crimes. Intercultural Pragmatics 51. 177–199. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar. 2010. A genre approach to the study of im-politeness. International Review of Pragmatics 21. 46–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2001. Arguing about the future: On indirect disagreements in conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 331. 1881–1900. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgalidou, Marianthi & Boukala, Salomi. forthcoming. The language of politics and the Greek paradigm. London: Springer.
Geyer, Naomi. 2010. Teasing and ambivalent face in Japanese multi-party discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 421. 2120–2130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of the experience. New York: Harper Colophon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grainger, Karren. 2004. Verbal play on the hospital ward: solidarity or power? Multilingua 23(1–2). 39–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Paul H. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1992. Contextualization and understanding. In Alessandro Duranti & Charles Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hatfield, Hunter & Jee-Won Hahn. 2011. What Korean apologies require of politeness theory. Journal of Pragmatics 431. 1303–1317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael. 2009. Face and interaction. In Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini & Michael Haugh (eds.), Face, communication and interaction, 1–30. London: Equinox. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. Jocular mockery, (dis)affiliation and face. Journal of Pragmatics 421. 2106–2119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics 581. 52–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. ‘‘Just kidding’’: Teasing and claims to non-serious intent. Journal of Pragmatics 951. 120–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2022. Action ascription, accountability, and inference. In Arnulf Deppermann & Michael Haugh (eds.), Action ascription in interaction, 81–104. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael & Derek Bousfield. 2012. Mock impoliteness, jocular mockery and jocular abuse in Australian and British English. Journal of Pragmatics 441. 1099–1114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael & Kasia M. Jaszczolt. 2012. Speaker intentions and intentionality. In Keith Allan & Kasia Jaszczolt (eds.), Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 87–112. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael, Daniel Kádár & Marina Terkourafi. 2021. Introduction: Directions in sociopragmatics. In Michael Haugh, Daniel Kádár & Marina Terkourafi (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociopragmatics, 1–12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael & Valeria Sinkeviciute. 2019. Offence and conflict talk. In Μatthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries & Jim O’Driscoll (eds.), Handbook of language in conflict, 196–214. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer. 2000. Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics 321. 709–742. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. The pragmatics of humour support. Humor 141. 55–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heath, Christian. 1988. Embarrassment and interactional organization. In Paul Drew & Andrew Wootton (eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order, 136–160. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirschon, Renée. 1992. Greek adults’ verbal play, or, how to train for caution. Journal of Modern Greek Studies 101. 35–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holt, Elizabeth. 2013. “There’s many a true word said in jest”: Seriousness and non-seriousness in interaction. In Phillip Glenn & Elizabeth Holt (eds.), Studies of laughter in interaction, 69–90. London: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian. 2008. Participants’ orientations to interruptions, rudeness and other impolite acts in talk-in-interaction. Journal of Politeness Research. 4(2). 221–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1984. On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action, 346–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 13–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z. & Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaklamanidou, Betty. 2017. Introduction to the Greek sitcom: The case of I tris charites/The Three Graces. Filmicon: Journal of Greek Film Studies 4(1). 138–154.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kapogianni, Eleni. 2013. Irony and the literal versus nonliteral distinction: A typological approach with focus on ironic implicature strength. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karachaliou, Rania. 2018. Addressing in conversational narratives. Thessaloniki: Idryma Triantafillidi. [in Greek]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria. 2009. Television discourse: Analysing language in the media. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lytra, Vally. 2007. Teasing in contact encounters: Frames, participant positions and responses. Multilingua 261. 381–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 1993. Repetition in canned jokes and spontaneous conversational joking. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 6(4). 385–402. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ogiermann, Eva & Vasiliki Saloustrou. 2020. Conceptualising politeness in Greece and Great Britain. Glossologia 281. 1–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. Offering a candidate answer: An information seeking strategy. Communication Monographs 551. 360–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, Alfred R. 1940. On joking relationships. Journal of the International African Institute 131. 195–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, & John Heritage. 2006. The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society 351. 677–705. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saloustrou, Vasiliki. forthcoming. Lay (im)politeness evaluations in face-to-face interaction: A study of Greek friendship groups living abroad. In Maria Sifianou & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich (eds.), The Routledge series on (im)politeness. London: Routledge.
Schieffelin, Bambi. 1986. Teasing and shaming in Kauli children’s interactions. In Bambi Schieffelin & Ellinor Ochs (eds.), Language socialization across cultures, 165–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schnurr, Stephanie & Chan Angela. 2011. When laughter is not enough: Responding to teasing and self-denigrating humour at work. Journal of Pragmatics 431. 20–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2023. On understandings of politeness in Greek, again! Roczniki Humanistyczne 71(6). 251–271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. Shifters, linguistic categories and cultural description. In Keith H. Basso & Henry A. Selby (eds.), Meaning in anthropology, 11–55. Arbuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. Language and the culture of gender. In Elizabeth Mertz & Richard Parmentier (eds.), Semiotic mediation, 219–259. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinkeviciute, Valeria. 2014. “When a joke’s a joke and when it’s too much”: Mateship as a key to interpreting jocular FTAs in Australian English. Journal of Pragmatics 601. 121–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. What makes teasing impolite in Australian and British English? “Step[ping] over those lines […] you shouldn’t be crossing”. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture 131. 175–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skalicky, Stephen, Cynthia M. Berger & Nancy D. Bell. 2015. The functions of ‘just kidding’ in American English. Journal of Pragmatics 851. 18–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language & Social Interaction 411. 31–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thornborrow, Joanna. 2015. The discourse of public participation media: From talk show to Twitter. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsakona, Villy. 2023. Recontextualizing humor: Rethinking the analysis and teaching of humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsami, Vasia. 2019. Metapragmatic stereotypes and humour: Interpreting and perceiving linguistic homogeneity in mass culture texts. European Journal of Humour Research 71. 68–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tzanne, Angeliki & Maria Sifianou. 2019. Understandings of impoliteness in the Greek context. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23(4). 1014–1038. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wedgwood, Daniel. 2011. The individual in interaction: Why cognitive and discourse-level pragmatics need not conflict. Intercultural Pragmatics 81. 517–542. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wooffitt, Robin. 2005. Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: A comparative and critical introduction. New York: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue