1887

Irony in and through follow-ups

Talk and meta-talk in online commenting in the Israeli context

image of Irony in and through follow-ups

This study examines how irony is evaluated and practiced in online commenting. Specifically, it explores readers’ perceptions of irony manifest in their comments on ironic opinion editorials, and ironic comments following-up on ironic op-eds. Against the background of readers’ judgmental evaluations which highlight the threat to face embedded in ironic op-eds, the analysis focuses on affiliative irony whereby readers reciprocate the irony in the op-ed, and by so doing align with the columnist in jointly addressing a third party, who thus becomes a common target. In terms of the conceptualisation of follow-ups, the discussion adapts the traditional definition of a follow-up to the contextual constraints and requirements of CMC (in this case, op-eds. and their comments). In terms of irony research, it argues for the follow-up quality inherent in the flouting of implicit conversational norms or in the echoing mention of a previous act, be it explicit (a prior utterance) or implicit (presumed thought, belief, state of mind), true or imagined. The analysis draws on a corpus-based study of three Israeli newspapers: Ha’aretz, Ynet and NRG. The study presupposes an interactional view of irony, and considers the study of readers’ follow-ups as a way to gain access to speakers’ intuitions, as well as to spontaneous discourse.

  • Affiliations: 1: Bar-Ilan University, Israel

References

  1. Attardo, Salvatore
    2000 “Irony as Relevant Inappropriateness”. Journal of Pragmatics32: 793–826. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00070‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00070-3 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barbe, Katharina
    1995Irony in Context. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.34
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.34 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
    1987 “Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different?”Journal of Pragmatics11(2): 145–160. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90192‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90192-5 [Google Scholar]
  4. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana and Juliane House
    1989 “Cross-cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behavior.”InCross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies, ed. by Shoshana Blum-Kulka , Juliane House and Gabriele Kasper , 123–154. New Jersey: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Iniversals in Language Usage. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clift, Rebbeca
    1999 “Irony in Conversation”. Language and Society28: 523–553. doi: 10.1017/S0047404599004029
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599004029 [Google Scholar]
  7. Colston, Herbert L
    1997 “Salting a Wound or Sugaring a Pill: The Pragmatic Functions of Ironic Criticism”. Discourse Processes23: 25–45. doi: 10.1080/01638539709544980
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709544980 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2000a “On Necessary Conditions for Verbal Irony Comprehension”. Pragmatics and Cognition8(2): 277–324. doi: 10.1075/pc.8.2.02col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.8.2.02col [Google Scholar]
  9. 2000b “Dewey Defeats Truman: Interpreting Ironic Restatements”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology19(1): 46–65. doi: 10.1177/0261927X00019001003
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X00019001003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Deuze, Marc
    2008 “The Changing Context of News Work: Liquid Journalism and Monitorial Citizenship”.International Journal of Communication 2: 848‒865.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dews, Shelly , Joan Kaplan and Ellen Winner
    1995 “Why not say it directly? The Social Functions of Irony”. Discourse Processes19: 347–367. doi: 10.1080/01638539509544922
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539509544922 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dori-Hacohen, Gonen and Shavit, Nimrod
    2013 “The Cultural Meanings of Israeli Tokbek (Talk-Back Online Commenting) and their Relevance to the Online Democratic Public Sphere.” International Journal of Electronic Governance6(4): 361–379. doi: 10.1504/IJEG.2013.060649
    https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEG.2013.060649 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr
    1984 “Literal Meaning and Psychological Theory”. Cognitive Science8: 275–304. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0803_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0803_4 [Google Scholar]
  14. 1986 “On the Psycholinguistics of Sarcasm”. Journal of Experimental Psychology/ General115(1): 3–15. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.115.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Eisterhold, Jodi , Salvatore Attardo and Diane Boxer
    2006 “Reactions to Irony in Discourse: Evidence for the Least Disruption Principle”. Journal of Pragmatics38: 1239–1256. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fetzer, Anita
    2000 “Negotiating Validity Claims in Political Interviews.” Text20: 1–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2012 “Quotations in monologic and dialogic political discourse”. InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 72–86. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uniwuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  18. . “Quotations in Monologic and Dialogic Political Discourse”. This volume.
  19. Fetzer, Anita , Elda Weizman and Elizabeth Reber
    (eds.) 2012Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Grice, Paul H
    1975 “Logic and Conversation”. InSyntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan , 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1978 “Further Notes on Logic and Conversation”. InSyntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole , 113–127. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Haverkate, Henk
    1990 “A Speech act Analysis of Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics14: 77–109. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90065‑L
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90065-L [Google Scholar]
  23. Hermida, Alfred and Niel Thurman
    2008 “A clash of Cultures: The Integration of User-generated Content within Professional Journalistic Frameworks at British Newspaper Websites”. Journalism Practice2(3): 343–356. doi:10.1080/17512780802054538 DOI: 10.1080/17512780802054538
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780802054538 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hirsch, Galia and Shoshana Blum-Kulka
    2014 “Identifying Irony in News Interviews”. Journal of Pragmatics70: 31–50. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Holdcroft, David
    1983 “Irony as trope, and irony as discourse”. Poetics Today4(3): 493–511. doi: 10.2307/1772029
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1772029 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jorgensen, Julia
    1996 “The Functions of Sarcastic Irony in Speech”. Journal of Pragmatics26: 613–634. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00067‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00067-4 [Google Scholar]
  27. Johansson, Marjut
    2012 “Editorial and its Comments. Follow-ups in a Discussion Forum”. InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 151–154. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  28. . Forthcoming. “Bravo for this Editorial: Writer’s Opinions in Comment Sections”. InFollow-Ups in Political Discourse ed. by Elda Weizman and Anita Fetzer . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Katriel, Tamar
    1986Talking Straight: Dugri Speech in Israeli Sabra Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Kilgarriff, Adam , V. Baisa , J. Bušta , M. Jakubiĕk , V. Kovar , J. Michelfeit , P. Rychly and V. Suchomel
    2014 “The Sketch Engine: ten years on”. Lexicography ASIALEX1: 7–36. doi: 10.1007/s40607‑014‑0009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kleinke, Sonia
    2010 “Interactive Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication. Disagreement in an English and German Public News Group.”InDiscourses in Interaction, ed. by Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen , Marja-Liisa Helasvuo , Marjut Johansson and Mia Raitaniemi , 195‒222. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.203.15kle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.203.15kle [Google Scholar]
  32. Kohn, Ayelet and Motti Neiger
    2007 “To talk and Talkback: The rhetoric of the Talk-back in Israeli On-line Newspapers”. InJournalism Dot Com: On-Line Newspapers in Israel, ed. by Tehila Altshuler , 321–350. Jerusalem: The Israeli Democratic Institute and Be-Gurion University (in Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Kotthoff, Helga
    2003 “Responding to Irony in Different Contexts: On Cognition in Conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics35: 1387–1411. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00182‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00182-0 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kumon-Nakamura, Sachi , Glucksberg, Sam and Mary Brown
    1995 “How About Another Piece of Pie: The Allusional Pretense Theory of Discourse Irony”. Journal of Experimental Psychology/ General124(1): 3–21. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.124.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Langlotz, Andreas and Miriam A. Locher
    2012 “Ways of Communicating Emotional Stance in Online Disagreements.”Journal of Pragmatics 44(12): 1591‒1606.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Leech, Geoffrey
    1983Principles of Pragmatics. London & New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Livnat, Zohar and Gonen Dori-Hacohen
    2013 “The effect of irony in radio talk-back programs in Israel”. InThe Pragmatics of Political Discourse: Explorations Across cultures, ed. by Anita Fetzer , 193–217. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.228.11liv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.228.11liv [Google Scholar]
  38. Manosevitch, Edith
    2011 “User Generated Content in the Israeli Online Journalism Landscape”. Israel Affairs17(3): 422–444. doi: 10.1080/13537121.2011.584670
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2011.584670 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mazara, Jekaterina
    2013 “Irony in the Face(s) of Politeness: Strategic use of verbal irony in Czech political TV debates” . InApproaches to Slavic Interaction, ed. by Nadine Thielemann and Peter Kosta , 187–213. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.20.15maz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.20.15maz [Google Scholar]
  40. Neurauter-Kessels, M
    2013 Impoliteness in Cyberspace: Personally Abusive Reader Responses in Online News Media. Ph.D. thesis, University of Zurich, Switzerland. Available at: opac.nebis.ch/ediss/20131752.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Partington, Allen
    2007 “Irony and Reversal of Evaluation”. Journal of Pragmatics39: 1547–1569. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009 [Google Scholar]
  42. Reich, Zvi
    2011 “User comments: The transformation of Participatory Space”. InParticipatory Journalism: Guarding Open Gates at Online Newspapers, ed. by Jane B. Singer , David Domingo , Ari Heinonen , Alfred Hermida , Steve Paulussen , Thorsten Quandt , Zvi Reich and Marina Vujnovic , 96–117. London: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444340747.ch6
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ruiz, Carlos , David Domingo , Josep Lluís Micó , Javier Díaz-Noci , Koldo Meso and Pere Masip
    2011 “Public Sphere 2.0? The Democratic Qualitiesof Citizen Debates in Online Newspapers”. The International Journal of Press/Politics16(4): 463–487.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Sinclair, John and Malcolm Coulthard
    1975Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sinclair, John M
    1991 “Words and Phrases”. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP. pp.70–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Singer, Jane B
    2009 “Separate Spaces: Discourse About the 2007 Scottish Elections on a National Newspaper Web Site.”The International Journal of Press/Politics14: 477‒96. doi: 10.1177/1940161209336659
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161209336659 [Google Scholar]
  47. Singer, Jane B. , David Domingo , Ari Heinonen , Alfred Hermida , Steve Paulussen , Thorsten Quandt , Zvi Reich and Marina Vujnovic
    (eds.) 2011Participatory Journalism: Guarding Open Gates at Online Newspapers, 96–117. London: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444340747
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sperber, Dan
    1984 “Verbal Irony: Pretense or Echoic Mention?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General113(1): 130–136. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.113.1.130
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.1.130 [Google Scholar]
  49. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson
    1981 “Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction”. InRadical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole , 295–318. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Weizman, E
    2001 “Addresser, Addressee and Target”. InNegotiation and Power in Dialogic Interaction, ed. by Edda Weigand and Marcelo Dascal , 125–137. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.214.11wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.214.11wei [Google Scholar]
  51. 2007 “Quantity Scales: Towards Culture-Specific Profiles of Discourse Norms”. InDialogue and Culture, ed. by Marion Grein, M. and Edda Weigand , 141–152. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.1.10wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.1.10wei [Google Scholar]
  52. Weizman, Elda
    2008Positioning in Media Dialogue: Negotiating Roles in the News Interview. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.3 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2011 “Conveying Indirect Reservations Through Discursive Redundancy”. Language Sciences33: 295–304. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2010.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2010.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2012 “Negotiating Irony through Follow-Ups: Readers’ Comments on Op Eds in the Daily Press. Follow-Ups in a Discussion Forum.”InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 263–274. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg 2012 – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 2013 “Political Irony: Constructing Reciprocal Positioning in the News Interview”. InThe Pragmatics of Political Discourse: Explorations across Cultures, ed. by Anita Fetzer , 167–190. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.228.09wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.228.09wei [Google Scholar]
  56. Weizman, Elda and Anita Fetzer
    eds. Forthcoming Follow-Ups in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  57. Weizman, Elda and Marcelo Dascal
    1991 “On Clues and Cues: Strategies of Text Understanding”. Journal of Literary SemanticsXX/1: 18–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Wilson, Deirdre
    2006 “The Pragmatics of Verbal Irony: Echo or Pretence?”Lingua116: 1722–1743. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber
    1992 “On Verbal Irony”. Lingua87: 53–76. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(92)90025‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(92)90025-E [Google Scholar]
  60. Wright, Scott and John Street
    2007 “Democracy, Deliberation and Design: the Case of Online Discussion Forums”. New Media & Society9(5): 849–869. doi: 10.1177/1461444807081230
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807081230 [Google Scholar]
  61. Upadhyay, Shiv R
    2010 “Identity and Impoliteness in Computer-Mediated Reader Responses.”Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture6(1): 105–127. doi: 10.1515/jplr.2010.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.006 [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Attardo, Salvatore
    2000 “Irony as Relevant Inappropriateness”. Journal of Pragmatics32: 793–826. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00070‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00070-3 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barbe, Katharina
    1995Irony in Context. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.34
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.34 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
    1987 “Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different?”Journal of Pragmatics11(2): 145–160. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90192‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90192-5 [Google Scholar]
  4. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana and Juliane House
    1989 “Cross-cultural and Situational Variation in Requesting Behavior.”InCross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies, ed. by Shoshana Blum-Kulka , Juliane House and Gabriele Kasper , 123–154. New Jersey: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Iniversals in Language Usage. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clift, Rebbeca
    1999 “Irony in Conversation”. Language and Society28: 523–553. doi: 10.1017/S0047404599004029
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404599004029 [Google Scholar]
  7. Colston, Herbert L
    1997 “Salting a Wound or Sugaring a Pill: The Pragmatic Functions of Ironic Criticism”. Discourse Processes23: 25–45. doi: 10.1080/01638539709544980
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709544980 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2000a “On Necessary Conditions for Verbal Irony Comprehension”. Pragmatics and Cognition8(2): 277–324. doi: 10.1075/pc.8.2.02col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.8.2.02col [Google Scholar]
  9. 2000b “Dewey Defeats Truman: Interpreting Ironic Restatements”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology19(1): 46–65. doi: 10.1177/0261927X00019001003
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X00019001003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Deuze, Marc
    2008 “The Changing Context of News Work: Liquid Journalism and Monitorial Citizenship”.International Journal of Communication 2: 848‒865.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dews, Shelly , Joan Kaplan and Ellen Winner
    1995 “Why not say it directly? The Social Functions of Irony”. Discourse Processes19: 347–367. doi: 10.1080/01638539509544922
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539509544922 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dori-Hacohen, Gonen and Shavit, Nimrod
    2013 “The Cultural Meanings of Israeli Tokbek (Talk-Back Online Commenting) and their Relevance to the Online Democratic Public Sphere.” International Journal of Electronic Governance6(4): 361–379. doi: 10.1504/IJEG.2013.060649
    https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEG.2013.060649 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibbs, Raymond W. Jr
    1984 “Literal Meaning and Psychological Theory”. Cognitive Science8: 275–304. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog0803_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0803_4 [Google Scholar]
  14. 1986 “On the Psycholinguistics of Sarcasm”. Journal of Experimental Psychology/ General115(1): 3–15. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.115.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Eisterhold, Jodi , Salvatore Attardo and Diane Boxer
    2006 “Reactions to Irony in Discourse: Evidence for the Least Disruption Principle”. Journal of Pragmatics38: 1239–1256. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fetzer, Anita
    2000 “Negotiating Validity Claims in Political Interviews.” Text20: 1–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2012 “Quotations in monologic and dialogic political discourse”. InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 72–86. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uniwuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  18. . “Quotations in Monologic and Dialogic Political Discourse”. This volume.
  19. Fetzer, Anita , Elda Weizman and Elizabeth Reber
    (eds.) 2012Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Grice, Paul H
    1975 “Logic and Conversation”. InSyntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry Morgan , 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1978 “Further Notes on Logic and Conversation”. InSyntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole , 113–127. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Haverkate, Henk
    1990 “A Speech act Analysis of Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics14: 77–109. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90065‑L
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90065-L [Google Scholar]
  23. Hermida, Alfred and Niel Thurman
    2008 “A clash of Cultures: The Integration of User-generated Content within Professional Journalistic Frameworks at British Newspaper Websites”. Journalism Practice2(3): 343–356. doi:10.1080/17512780802054538 DOI: 10.1080/17512780802054538
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780802054538 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hirsch, Galia and Shoshana Blum-Kulka
    2014 “Identifying Irony in News Interviews”. Journal of Pragmatics70: 31–50. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Holdcroft, David
    1983 “Irony as trope, and irony as discourse”. Poetics Today4(3): 493–511. doi: 10.2307/1772029
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1772029 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jorgensen, Julia
    1996 “The Functions of Sarcastic Irony in Speech”. Journal of Pragmatics26: 613–634. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00067‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00067-4 [Google Scholar]
  27. Johansson, Marjut
    2012 “Editorial and its Comments. Follow-ups in a Discussion Forum”. InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 151–154. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg. – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  28. . Forthcoming. “Bravo for this Editorial: Writer’s Opinions in Comment Sections”. InFollow-Ups in Political Discourse ed. by Elda Weizman and Anita Fetzer . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Katriel, Tamar
    1986Talking Straight: Dugri Speech in Israeli Sabra Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Kilgarriff, Adam , V. Baisa , J. Bušta , M. Jakubiĕk , V. Kovar , J. Michelfeit , P. Rychly and V. Suchomel
    2014 “The Sketch Engine: ten years on”. Lexicography ASIALEX1: 7–36. doi: 10.1007/s40607‑014‑0009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kleinke, Sonia
    2010 “Interactive Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication. Disagreement in an English and German Public News Group.”InDiscourses in Interaction, ed. by Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen , Marja-Liisa Helasvuo , Marjut Johansson and Mia Raitaniemi , 195‒222. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.203.15kle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.203.15kle [Google Scholar]
  32. Kohn, Ayelet and Motti Neiger
    2007 “To talk and Talkback: The rhetoric of the Talk-back in Israeli On-line Newspapers”. InJournalism Dot Com: On-Line Newspapers in Israel, ed. by Tehila Altshuler , 321–350. Jerusalem: The Israeli Democratic Institute and Be-Gurion University (in Hebrew).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Kotthoff, Helga
    2003 “Responding to Irony in Different Contexts: On Cognition in Conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics35: 1387–1411. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00182‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00182-0 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kumon-Nakamura, Sachi , Glucksberg, Sam and Mary Brown
    1995 “How About Another Piece of Pie: The Allusional Pretense Theory of Discourse Irony”. Journal of Experimental Psychology/ General124(1): 3–21. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.124.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Langlotz, Andreas and Miriam A. Locher
    2012 “Ways of Communicating Emotional Stance in Online Disagreements.”Journal of Pragmatics 44(12): 1591‒1606.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Leech, Geoffrey
    1983Principles of Pragmatics. London & New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Livnat, Zohar and Gonen Dori-Hacohen
    2013 “The effect of irony in radio talk-back programs in Israel”. InThe Pragmatics of Political Discourse: Explorations Across cultures, ed. by Anita Fetzer , 193–217. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.228.11liv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.228.11liv [Google Scholar]
  38. Manosevitch, Edith
    2011 “User Generated Content in the Israeli Online Journalism Landscape”. Israel Affairs17(3): 422–444. doi: 10.1080/13537121.2011.584670
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13537121.2011.584670 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mazara, Jekaterina
    2013 “Irony in the Face(s) of Politeness: Strategic use of verbal irony in Czech political TV debates” . InApproaches to Slavic Interaction, ed. by Nadine Thielemann and Peter Kosta , 187–213. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.20.15maz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.20.15maz [Google Scholar]
  40. Neurauter-Kessels, M
    2013 Impoliteness in Cyberspace: Personally Abusive Reader Responses in Online News Media. Ph.D. thesis, University of Zurich, Switzerland. Available at: opac.nebis.ch/ediss/20131752.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Partington, Allen
    2007 “Irony and Reversal of Evaluation”. Journal of Pragmatics39: 1547–1569. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009 [Google Scholar]
  42. Reich, Zvi
    2011 “User comments: The transformation of Participatory Space”. InParticipatory Journalism: Guarding Open Gates at Online Newspapers, ed. by Jane B. Singer , David Domingo , Ari Heinonen , Alfred Hermida , Steve Paulussen , Thorsten Quandt , Zvi Reich and Marina Vujnovic , 96–117. London: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444340747.ch6
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ruiz, Carlos , David Domingo , Josep Lluís Micó , Javier Díaz-Noci , Koldo Meso and Pere Masip
    2011 “Public Sphere 2.0? The Democratic Qualitiesof Citizen Debates in Online Newspapers”. The International Journal of Press/Politics16(4): 463–487.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Sinclair, John and Malcolm Coulthard
    1975Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sinclair, John M
    1991 “Words and Phrases”. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: OUP. pp.70–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Singer, Jane B
    2009 “Separate Spaces: Discourse About the 2007 Scottish Elections on a National Newspaper Web Site.”The International Journal of Press/Politics14: 477‒96. doi: 10.1177/1940161209336659
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161209336659 [Google Scholar]
  47. Singer, Jane B. , David Domingo , Ari Heinonen , Alfred Hermida , Steve Paulussen , Thorsten Quandt , Zvi Reich and Marina Vujnovic
    (eds.) 2011Participatory Journalism: Guarding Open Gates at Online Newspapers, 96–117. London: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444340747
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sperber, Dan
    1984 “Verbal Irony: Pretense or Echoic Mention?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General113(1): 130–136. doi: 10.1037/0096‑3445.113.1.130
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.1.130 [Google Scholar]
  49. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson
    1981 “Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction”. InRadical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole , 295–318. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Weizman, E
    2001 “Addresser, Addressee and Target”. InNegotiation and Power in Dialogic Interaction, ed. by Edda Weigand and Marcelo Dascal , 125–137. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cilt.214.11wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.214.11wei [Google Scholar]
  51. 2007 “Quantity Scales: Towards Culture-Specific Profiles of Discourse Norms”. InDialogue and Culture, ed. by Marion Grein, M. and Edda Weigand , 141–152. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.1.10wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.1.10wei [Google Scholar]
  52. Weizman, Elda
    2008Positioning in Media Dialogue: Negotiating Roles in the News Interview. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.3 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2011 “Conveying Indirect Reservations Through Discursive Redundancy”. Language Sciences33: 295–304. doi: 10.1016/j.langsci.2010.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2010.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2012 “Negotiating Irony through Follow-Ups: Readers’ Comments on Op Eds in the Daily Press. Follow-Ups in a Discussion Forum.”InProceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-Ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer , Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber , 263–274. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg 2012 – [online]. URL: opus.bibliothek.uni-wuerzburg.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/6116
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 2013 “Political Irony: Constructing Reciprocal Positioning in the News Interview”. InThe Pragmatics of Political Discourse: Explorations across Cultures, ed. by Anita Fetzer , 167–190. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.228.09wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.228.09wei [Google Scholar]
  56. Weizman, Elda and Anita Fetzer
    eds. Forthcoming Follow-Ups in Political Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  57. Weizman, Elda and Marcelo Dascal
    1991 “On Clues and Cues: Strategies of Text Understanding”. Journal of Literary SemanticsXX/1: 18–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Wilson, Deirdre
    2006 “The Pragmatics of Verbal Irony: Echo or Pretence?”Lingua116: 1722–1743. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber
    1992 “On Verbal Irony”. Lingua87: 53–76. doi: 10.1016/0024‑3841(92)90025‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(92)90025-E [Google Scholar]
  60. Wright, Scott and John Street
    2007 “Democracy, Deliberation and Design: the Case of Online Discussion Forums”. New Media & Society9(5): 849–869. doi: 10.1177/1461444807081230
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807081230 [Google Scholar]
  61. Upadhyay, Shiv R
    2010 “Identity and Impoliteness in Computer-Mediated Reader Responses.”Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture6(1): 105–127. doi: 10.1515/jplr.2010.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.006 [Google Scholar]
/content/books/9789027268242-pbns.259.07wei
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027268242
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error