1887
image of Stylistic humor across modalities
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN 2542-386X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper is concerned with ‘Classical Art Memes’, a category of internet memes that distinctively derives its visual input from classical and medieval art. I specifically show that humor in Classical Art Memes arises from incongruity among different stylistic varieties, namely a colloquial linguistic expression in the text and a classical-style artwork in the image. Given that stylistic incongruity cross-cuts modalities, I further argue that Classical Art Memes make a case for what I call ‘multimodal stylistic humor’. The analysis is based on a small corpus of -memes, whereby the image complements a -clause. The findings of the study suggest that humor in Classical Art Memes serves to convey affective meanings that emerge from the embodied affect in the image that is textually recontextualized in contemporary terms. Such meanings ultimately convey a critical commentary on knowable features of modern life.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00031.pia
2019-07-01
2019-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Archakis, Argiris, Sofia Lampropoulou, Villy Tsakona, and Vasia Tsami
    2014 “Linguistic varieties in style: Humorous representations in Greek mass culture texts.” Discourse, Context & Media3: 46–55. doi:  10.1016/j.dcm.2014.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2014.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Attardo, Salvatore
    1994Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2001Humorous Texts: Α Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110887969
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110887969 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2009 “A commentary on Antonopoulou and Nikiforidou.” InCognitive Poetics: Goals, Gains and Gaps, ed. byGeert Brône, and Jeroen Vandaele, 315–317. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bakhtin, Mikhail
    1986Speech Genres and Other Late Essays (trans. byVern W. McGee). Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Burgress, Jean
    2007 “Vernacular creativity and new media.” Unpublished PhD dissertaion, Queensland University of Technology. eprints.qut.edu.au/16378 (accessed8 August 2018).
  7. Dancygier, Barbara, and Eve Sweetser
    2014Figurative Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dancygier, Barbara, and Lieven Vandelanotte
    2017 “Internet memes as multimodal constructions.” Cognitive Linguistics28(3): 565–598. 10.1515/cog‑2017‑0074
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0074 [Google Scholar]
  9. Davis, Corey B., Mark Glantz, and David R. Novak
    2016 “‘You can’t run your SUV on cute. Let’s go!’: Internet memes as delegitimizing discourse.” Environmental Communication10(1): 62–83. doi:  10.1080/17524032.2014.991411
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.991411 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dawkins, Richard
    1976The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ekman, Paul
    1989 “The argument and evidence about universals in facial expressions of emotion.” InHandbook of Social Psychophysiology, ed. byHugh Wagner, and Antony Mansted, 143–164. New York: John Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fairclough, Norman
    1992Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gal, Noam, Limor Shifman, and Zohar Kampf
    2013 “‘It Gets Better’: Internet memes and the construction of collective identity.” New Media and Society17(1): 1–17. doi:  10.1177/1461444814568784
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814568784 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gendron, Maria, Debi Roberson, Jacoba Marietta van der Vyver, and Lisa Fieldman Barrett
    2014 “Perceptions of emotion from facial expressions are not culturally universal: Evidence from a remote culture.” Emotion14(2): 251–262. 10.1037/a0036052
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036052 [Google Scholar]
  15. Herring, Susan
    2007 “A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse.” [email protected]4, article 1. www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2007/761 (accessed8 May 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jack, Rachel, Oliver Garrod, Hui Yu, Roberto Caldara, and Philippe Schyns
    2012 “Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America109(19): 7241–7244. 10.1073/pnas.1200155109
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1200155109 [Google Scholar]
  17. Knobel, Michele, and Colin Lankshear
    2007 “Online memes, affinities, and cultural production.” InA New Literacies Sampler, ed. byMichele Knobel, and Colin Lankshear, 199–227. New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kövecses, Zoltán
    2000Metaphor and Emotion: Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2015 “Surprise as a conceptual category.” Review of Cognitive Linguistics13(2): 270–290. 10.1075/rcl.13.2.01kov
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.13.2.01kov [Google Scholar]
  20. Kristeva, Julia
    1980Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art (trans. byLeon Roudiez). Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
    1980Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lou, Adrian
    2017 “Multimodal simile: The ‘when’ meme in social media discourse.” English Text Construction10(1): 106–131. 10.1075/etc.10.1.06lou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.10.1.06lou [Google Scholar]
  23. Milner, Ryan M.
    2013 “Pop polyvocality: Internet memes, public participation, and the Occupy Wall Street movement.” International Journal of Communication7: 2357–2390.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Norrick, Neal
    1989 “Intertextuality in humor.” Humor2(2): 117–139. 10.1515/humr.1989.2.2.117
    https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1989.2.2.117 [Google Scholar]
  25. Partington, Alan Scott
    2006The Linguistics of Laughter: A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203966570
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203966570 [Google Scholar]
  26. Piata, Anna
    2018 “On-line humorous representations of the 2015 Greek national elections: Acting and interacting about politics on social media.” InThe Dynamics of Interactional Humor: Creating and Negotiating Humor in Everyday Encounters, ed. byVilly Tsakona, and Jan Chovanec, 257–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.7.11pia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.7.11pia [Google Scholar]
  27. Raivio, Oskari
    2016 “Classical Art Memes as an affinity space. A faceted classification on an online entertainment page.” MA thesis, University of Helsinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/167404/classica.pdf?sequence=2 (accessed18 August 2017).
  28. Ross, Andrew S., and Damian J. Rivers
    2017 “Digital cultures of political participation: Internet memes and the discursive delegitimization of the 2016 U.S presidential candidates.” Discourse, Context & Media16: 1–11. doi:  10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Shifman, Limor
    2007 “Humor in the age of digital reproduction: Continuity and change in internet-based comic texts.” International Journal of Communication1: 187–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 2011 “An anatomy of a YouTube meme.” New Media and Society14(2): 187–203. 10.1177/1461444811412160
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811412160 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2013 “Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication18(3): 362–377. 10.1111/jcc4.12013
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12013 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2014Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Soriano, Salinas, Fontaine Johnny Cristina, and Klaus Scherer
    2015 “Surprise in the GRID.” Review of Cognitive Linguistics13(2): 436–460. 10.1075/rcl.13.2.07sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.13.2.07sor [Google Scholar]
  34. Stryker, Cole
    2011Epic Win for Anonymous: How 4chan’s Army Conquered the Web. New York: Overlook Duckworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Tsakona, Villy
    2009 “Language and image interaction in cartoons: Towards a multimodal theory of humor.” Journal of Pragmatics41(6): 1171–1188. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2018 “Intertextuality and/in political jokes.” Lingua203: 1–15. doi:  10.1016/j.lingua.2017.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2017.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  37. Wiggins, Bradley E., and Bret G. Bowers
    2014 “Memes as genre: A structurational analysis of the memescape.” New Media and Society17(11): 1886–1906. doi:  10.1177/1461444814535194
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814535194 [Google Scholar]
  38. Yus, Fransisco
    2011Cyperpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.213
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.213 [Google Scholar]
  39. Zappavigna, Michele
    2012The Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How We Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00031.pia
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00031.pia
Loading

Data & Media 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