Cover not available

Article published In: Issues in Humour Cognition
Edited by Marta Dynel
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:1] 2018
► pp. 72–96

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

Humor, irony, and the body

 | University of California, Santa Cruz
 | University of California, Santa Cruz
 | University of California, Santa Cruz
Published online: 31 May 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00004.gib
Abstract
Irony has traditionally been studied as a purely pragmatic phenomenon, one in which a speaker says one thing and means another, often by commenting on the contrast between expectation and reality. However, as cognitive linguists have discerned for many other aspects of language, much of the ways that people speak and understand one another is motivated by people’s pervasive bodily experiences. Ironic humor provides another compelling phenomenon in which to understand the embodied foundation of both linguistic meaning and multimodal expression, particularly in terms of rough-and-tumble play. Many forms of humor arise from different benign violations of the body in play fighting. We describe cognitive linguistic and psychological evidence on the importance of bodily experience, and benign violations of the body, in linguistic expressions referring to teasing and humor. Variations of rough-and-tumble play help explain some of the instabilities in the ways ironic humor unfolds in interpersonal interactions.
Keywords: body, embodiment, humor, irony
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The roots of humor in pretend physical play
  • 3.Cognitive linguistic ideas on humor and the body
  • 4.Ironic humor
  • 5.Moving the body evokes ironic humor production
  • 6.Instability in ironic humor experience
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (38)
References
Booth, W. (1975). A rhetoric of irony. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burgers, C., Van Mulken, M., & Schellens, P. J. (2011). Finding irony: An introduction of the verbal irony procedure (VIP). Metaphor and Symbol, 261, 186–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H., & Gerrig, R. (1984). On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1131, 121–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H., & Van Der Wege, M. (2001). Imagination in discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 772–786). New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Currie, G. (2010). Narratives and narrators: A philosophy of stories. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dynel, M. (2017). But seriously: On conversational humour and (un)truthfulness. Lingua, 1971, 83–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). No child’s play: A philosophical pragmatic view of overt pretence as a vehicle for conversational humor. In V. Tsakona & J. Chovanec (Eds.), The dynamics of interactional humor: Creating and negotiating humor in everyday encounters (pp. 205–228). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eder, D. (1991). The role of teasing in adolescent peer group culture. Sociological Studies of Child Development, 41, 181–197.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flamson, T., & Barrett, C. (2008). The encryption theory of humor: A knowledge-based mechanism of honest signaling. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 61, 261–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgesen, J., Harris, M., Milich, R., & Bosko-Young, J. (1999). “Just teasing…”: Personality effects on perceptions and life narratives of childhood teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 251, 1254–1267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 151, 5–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Irony in the wake of tragedy. Metaphor and Symbol, 171, 145–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Embodiment and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphor in human life. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R., & Colston, H. (Eds.). (2007). Irony in language and thought: A cognitive science reader. New York: Erlbaum. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greene, V. (2011). Critique, counternarratives and ironic interventions in South Park and Stephen Colbert. In T. Gournelous & V. Greene (Eds.), A decade of dark humor: How comedy, irony, and satire shaped post 9–11 America (pp. 119–136). Jackson: University of Mississippi Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, C., & Christenfeld, N. (1997). Humor, tickle, and the Darwin-Hecker hypothesis. Cognition & Emotion, 111, 103–111 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kowalski, R. (2000). “I was only kidding!”: Victims’ and perpetrators’ perceptions of teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(2), 231–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S., & Brown, M. (1995). How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 124(1), 3–21. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leung, A., Kim, S., Polman, E., Ong, L., Qiu, L., Goncalo, J., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2011). Embodied metaphors and creative acts. Psychological Science, 231, 502–509. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Magill, R. J. (2007). Chic ironic bitterness. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGraw, A., & Warren, C. (2010). Benign violations make immoral behavior funny. Psychological Science, 211, 1141–1149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGraw, A., & Warner, J. (2014). The humor code: A global search for what makes things funny. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2017). Metaphor, irony and sarcasm in public discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 1091, 95–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reddy, V., & Mireault, G. (2015). Teasing and clowning in infancy. Current Biology, 251, R20–R23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosenblatt, R. (2001). The age of irony comes to an end. Time, 158(13).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samermit, P., & Gibbs, R. (2016). Humor, the body, and cognitive linguistics. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 21, 32–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seckman, M., & Couch, C. (1989). Jocularity, sarcasm and relationships: An empirical study. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 181, 327–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stern, D. N. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant: A view from psychoanalysis and developmental psychology. London/New York: Karnac.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 541, 768–777. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Veale, T., Feyaerts, K., & Brone, G. (2006). The cognitive mechanisms of adversarial humor. Humor, 191, 303–338. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Warren, C., & McGraw, A. (2016). Differentiating what is humorous from what is not. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3), 407–430. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watts, A. (1998). “You are such a tease!” Identifying and describing the chronic teaser. Unpublished master’s thesis. Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, NC.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, N., & Gibbs, R. (2007). Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor comprehension. Cognitive Science, 311, 721–731. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zajonc, R., Murphy, S., & Inglehart, M. (1989). Feeling and facial efference: Implications of the vascular theory of emotion. Psychological Review, 961, 395–416. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Constantinescu, Mihaela-Viorica
2024. Conventional metaphorical scenarios of humor in Romanian. HUMOR 37:1 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Xu, Tingting, Meichun Liu & Xiaolu Wang
2023. How humor is experienced: An embodied metaphor account. Current Psychology 42:20 ► pp. 16674 ff. DOI logo
Brdar, Mario & Rita Brdar-Szabó
2022. Figurative thought and language research in the 21st century. In Figurative Thought and Language in Action [Figurative Thought and Language, 16], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Fabry, Regina E.
2021. Getting it: A predictive processing approach to irony comprehension. Synthese 198:7 ► pp. 6455 ff. DOI logo
Roig, Antoni & Sandra Martorell
2021. A fictional character in a real pandemic: humanization of the Covid-19 virus as a parody account on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society 24:6 ► pp. 886 ff. DOI logo
Attardo, Salvatore
2020. Humor. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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