Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN: 2542-386X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, many users around the world exploited internet memes as a digital source of humour to cope with the negative psychological effects of quarantining. Drawing on multimodal discourse analysis, this study investigates a set of COVID-19 internet memes to explore the quarantine activities and routines to understand ordinary people’s mindsets, anxieties and emotional narratives surrounding self-isolation as well as the pragmatically generated humorous meanings relying on verbal and visual components of memes. The findings revealed that quarantine humour is centred around themes including quarantine day comparisons focusing on the perceived effects of home quarantines on physical and mental well-being, quarantine routines, and physical appearance predictions at the end of quarantine. Intertextuality was a productive resource establishing connections between quarantine practices and popular texts. In addition, humorous meanings were created through anomalous juxtapositions of different texts and incongruity resolution is largely dependent on the combined meanings of verbal and visual components.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aslan, Erhan
    2021 “When the internet gets ‘coronafied’: Pandemic creativity and humor in internet memes.” InViral Discourse: Doing Discourse Analysis in the Midst of a Pandemiced. byRodney H. Jones, 49–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aslan, Erhan, and Camilla Vásquez
    2018 “‘Cash me ousside’: A citizen sociolinguistic analysis of online metalinguistic commentary.” Journal of Sociolinguistics22(4): 406–431.   10.1111/josl.12303
    https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12303 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bayerl, Petra Saskia and Lachezar Stoynov
    2016 “Revenge by photoshop: Memefying police acts in the public dialogue about injustice.” New Media & Society18(6):1006–1026.   10.1177/1461444814554747
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814554747 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bischetti, Luca, Paolo Canal, and Valentina Bambini
    2021 “Funny but aversive: A large-scale survey of the emotional response to Covid-19 humor in the Italian population during the lockdown.” Lingua249: 102963.   10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102963
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102963 [Google Scholar]
  5. boyd, danah, and Kate Crawford
    2012 “Critical questions for big data.” Information, Communication & Society15(5): 662–679.   10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cauberghe, Verolien, Ini Van Wesenbeeck, Steffi De Jans, Liselot Hudders, and Koen Ponnet
    2020 “How adolescents use social media to cope with feelings of loneliness and anxiety during COVID-19 lockdown.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking24(4): 250–257.   10.1089/cyber.2020.0478
    https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0478 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chiaro, Delia
    2018The Language of Jokes in the Digital Age. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chovanec, Jan
    2019 “Early Titanic jokes: a disaster for the theory of disaster jokes?” Humor32(2): 201–225.   10.1515/humor‑2018‑0090
    https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2018-0090 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cialdini, Robert. B.
    2009Influence: Science and Practice (5th edn.). New York: Harper Collins.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 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]
  11. Danesi, Marcel
    2019Understanding Media Semiotics (2nd edn.). London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dawkins, Richard
    1976The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Demjén, Zsófia
    2016 “Laughing at cancer: Humour, empowerment, solidarity and coping online.” Journal of Pragmatics101: 18–30.   10.1016/j.pragma.2016.05.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.05.010 [Google Scholar]
  14. Denisova, Anastasia
    2019Internet Memes and Society: Social, Cultural, and Political Contexts. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429469404
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429469404 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dundes, Alan
    1987 “At ease, disease – AIDS Jokes as sick humor.” American Behavioral Scientist30(3): 72–81.   10.1177/000276487030003006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/000276487030003006 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dynel, Marta
    2016 “‘I has seen image macros!’: Advice animal memes as visual-verbal jokes.” International Journal of Communication10: 660–688. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/4101 (accessed10 July 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2021 “COVID-19 memes going viral: On the multiple multimodal voices behind face masks.” Discourse & Society32(2): 175–195.   10.1177/0957926520970385
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926520970385 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dynel, Marta, and Fabio I. M. Poppi
    2018 “In tragoedia risus: Analysis of dark humour in post-terrorist attack discourse.” Discourse & Communication12(4): 382–400.   10.1177/1750481318757777
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481318757777 [Google Scholar]
  19. Flecha Ortiz, José A., Maria A. Santos Corrada, Evelyn Lopez, and Virgin Dones
    2021 “Analysis of the use of memes as an exponent of collective coping during COVID-19 in Puerto Rico.” Media International Australia178(1): 168–181.   10.1177/1329878X20966379
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X20966379 [Google Scholar]
  20. Freud, Sigmund
    1905Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. New York: Norton.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Global Web Index
    Global Web Index (2020, March25). “Coronavirus research, series 4: Media consumption and sport. https://www.globalwebindex.com/hubfs/1.%20Coronavirus%20Research%20PDFs/GWI%20coronavirus%20findings%20April%202020%20-%20Media%20Consumption​%20(Release%204).pdf (accessed25 March 2020).
  22. Hatfield, Elaine, John T. Cacioppo, and Richard L. Rapson
    1994Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hussein, Ahmed T., and Lina Nabil Aljamili
    2020 “COVID-19 humor in Jordanian social media: A socio-semiotic approach.” Heliyon6(12): e05696.   10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05696
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05696 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jewitt, Carey
    2016 “Multimodal analysis.” InHandbook of Language and Digital Communication, ed. byAlexandra Georgakopoulou, and Tereza Spillioti, 69–84. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kertcher, Chen and Ornat Turin
    2020 “‘Siege mentality’ reaction to the pandemic: Israeli memes during Covid-19.” Postdigital Science Education2: 581–587.   10.1007/s42438‑020‑00175‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00175-8 [Google Scholar]
  26. Knobel, Michelle, and Colin Lankshear
    2007 “Online memes, affinities, and cultural production.” InA New Literacies Sampler, ed. byMichelle Knobel, and Colin Lankshear, 199–229. New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Know Your Meme
    Know Your Meme 2020 “COVID-19 Meme Insights.” https://insights.knowyourmeme.com/covid-19 (accessed6 June 2020).
  28. Kuiper, Nicholas A., Sandra D. Mckenzie, and Kristine A. Belanger
    1995 “Cognitive appraisals and individual differences in sense of humor: Motivational and affective implications.” Personality and Individual Differences19: 359–372.   10.1016/0191‑8869(95)00072‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00072-E [Google Scholar]
  29. Lefcourt, Herbet M., Karina Davidson, Robert Shepherd, Margory Phillips, Ken Prkachin, and David Mills
    1995 “Perspective-taking humor: Accounting for stress moderation.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology14(4): 373–391.   10.1521/jscp.1995.14.4.373
    https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1995.14.4.373 [Google Scholar]
  30. Marcus, Olivia Rose and Merrill Singer
    2017 “Loving Ebola-chan: Internet memes in an epidemic.” Media, Culture & Society39(3): 341–356.   10.1177/0163443716646174
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443716646174 [Google Scholar]
  31. Martin, Rod A., and Thomas E. Ford
    2018The Psychology of Humour: An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. McCloud, Scott
    1994Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Harper Collins.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. McGhee, Paul E.
    1979Humor: Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: Freeman.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Milner, Ryan
    2013 “Pop polyvocality: Internet memes, public participation, and the Occupy Wall Street movement.” International Journal of Communication7: 2357–2390. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1949/1015 (accessed8 August 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 2016The World Made Meme: Public Conversations and Participatory Media. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262034999.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034999.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Rim, Y.
    1988 “Sense of humour and coping styles.” Personality and Individual Differences9 (3): 559–564.   10.1016/0191‑8869(88)90153‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(88)90153-5 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ross, Andrew S., and Damian J. Rivers
    2017 “Digital cultures of political participation: Internet memes and the discursive delegitimization of the 2016 US Presidential candidates.” Discourse, Context & Media16: 1–11.   10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  38. Seiffert-Brockmann, Jens, Trevor Diehl, and Leonhard Dobusch
    2018 “Memes as games: The evolution of a digital discourse online.” New Media & Society20(8): 2862–2879.   10.1177/1461444817735334
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817735334 [Google Scholar]
  39. Shifman, Limor
    2012 “An anatomy of a YouTube meme.” New Media & Society14(2): 187–203.   10.1177/1461444811412160
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811412160 [Google Scholar]
  40. 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]
  41. 2014Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Tyler, Lisa
    2020 ““Regency novel or pandemic life”? Understanding Jane Austen-Related Pandemic Memes.” Persuasions On-Line41(1). jasna.org/publications/persuasions-online/vol-41-no-1/tyler/ (accessed2 January 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Varis, Piia, and Jan Blommaert
    2015 “Conviviality and collectives on social media: Virality, memes, and new social structures.” Multilingual Margins2(1): 31–45.   10.14426/mm.v2i1.55
    https://doi.org/10.14426/mm.v2i1.55 [Google Scholar]
  44. Vásquez, Camilla
    2019Language, Creativity and Humour Online. Abingdon: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315159027
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315159027 [Google Scholar]
  45. Vásquez, Camilla, and Erhan Aslan
    2021 “‘Cats be outside, how about meow’: Multimodal humor and creativity in an internet meme.” Journal of Pragmatics171: 101–117.   10.1016/j.pragma.2020.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Wiggins, Bradley E.
    2016 “Crimea River: Directionality in memes from the Russia-Ukraine conflict.” International Journal of Communication10: 451–485. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/4103 (accessed4 March 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  47. 2019The Discursive Power of Memes in Digital Culture: Ideology, Semiotics, and Intertextuality. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429492303
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429492303 [Google Scholar]
  48. Wiggins, Bradley. E.
    2020 “Memes and the media narrative: The Nike-Kaepernick controversy.” Internet Pragmatics3(2): 202–222.   10.1075/ip.00032.wig
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00032.wig [Google Scholar]
  49. Willmore, James and Darryl Hocking
    2017 “Internet meme creativity as everyday conversation.” Journal of Asia-Pacific Pop Culture2(2): 140–166.   10.5325/jasiapacipopcult.2.2.0140
    https://doi.org/10.5325/jasiapacipopcult.2.2.0140 [Google Scholar]
  50. Yus, Francisco
    2011Cyberpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.213
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.213 [Google Scholar]
  51. 2016Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.4 [Google Scholar]
  52. 2018 “Identity-related issues in meme communication.” Internet Pragmatics1(1): 113–133.   10.1075/ip.00006.yus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00006.yus [Google Scholar]
  53. 2019 “Multimodality in memes.” InAnalyzing Digital Discourse: New Insights and Future Directions, ed. byPatricia Bou-Franch, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 105–131. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑92663‑6_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92663-6_4 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2020 “Incongruity-resolution humorous strategies in image macro memes.” Internet Pragmatics1–19.   10.1075/ip.00058.yus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00058.yus [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): COVID-19; incongruity; internet memes; intertextuality; multimodal humour; quarantine
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