Volume 13, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Cartoons are designed as a response to a social event and aim to create a humorous effect in the audience through their multimodal discourse. The interpretation requires contextual and cultural information which has to be shared by the cartoonist and the audience. Our research focuses on the dialogue of humorous cartoons between the West and the East. From a dialogic perspective, the action, i.e., the cartoons published in the French and Swiss media, generates a reaction in the Romanian media. We discuss the transfer of national stereotypes at a European level and show that, although the cartoons target a particular out-group, they ricochet to another group. Thus, new boundaries are set up and humour functions as a divisive social activity.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Al-Masri, Hanada
    2016 “Jordanian editorial cartoons: A multimodal approach to the cartoons of Emad Hajjaj.” Language and Communication501: 45–58. 10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  2. Attardo, Salvatore
    1998 “The analysis of humorous narratives.” HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research11(3): 231–260. 10.1515/humr.1998.11.3.231
    https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1998.11.3.231 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2001Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110887969
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110887969 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bleahu Ana
    Bleahu Ana 2006 “Italia: Între informal şi ilegal, toleraţi, dar nelegalizaţi.” InLocuirea temporară în străinătate, Migraţia economică a românilor: 1990–2006, Sandu Dumitru (coord.), 85–91. Bucureşti: Fundaţia pentru o Societate Deschisă.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brône, Geert and Kurt Feyaerts
    2003 “The Cognitive Linguistics of Incongruity Resolution: Marked Reference Point Structures in Humour.” Available atwww.ling.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/18/iclc/papers/bronefeyaerts.pdf
  6. Constantinescu, Mihaela-Viorica
    2020 “Pictorial verbal interplay in Romanian cartoons.” InRomanian Humour, ed. byMihaela-Viorica Constantinescu, Stanca Măda, and Răzvan Săftoiu, 89–114. Kraków: Tertium.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Coulson, Seana
    2002 “What’s so Funny: Conceptual Integration in Humorous Examples”. www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/∼+++coulson/funstuff/funny.html
  8. Davies, Christie
    1990Ethnic Humour Around the World: A Comparative Analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2009 “A general theory of jokes whose butts are the stupid and the canny.” Acta Ethnographica Hungarica54(1): 7–19. 10.1556/AEthn.54.2009.1.2
    https://doi.org/10.1556/AEthn.54.2009.1.2 [Google Scholar]
  10. Degano, Chiara
    2017 “Visual Arguments in Activist’s Campaign. A Pragmadialectical Perspective.” InArgumentation across Communities of Practice: Multidisciplinary perspectives, ed. byCornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 291–315. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.10.13deg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.10.13deg [Google Scholar]
  11. Douglas, Allen, Fadwa Malti-Douglas
    1994Arab comic strips: Politics of an Emerging Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Forceville, Charles and Billy Clark
    2014 “Can pictures have explicatures?” Linguagem em (Dis)curso14(3): 1–22. 10.1590/1982‑4017‑140301‑0114
    https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-4017-140301-0114 [Google Scholar]
  13. Forceville, Charles
    1996Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. London, New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203272305
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203272305 [Google Scholar]
  14. Genova, Dafina
    2018 “Complementarity of Image and Text in Political Cartoons: Three Case Studies.” Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies27(2): 143–158. 10.7311/0860‑5734.27.2.08
    https://doi.org/10.7311/0860-5734.27.2.08 [Google Scholar]
  15. Grice, H. Paul
    1975 “Logic and Conversation”. InSyntax and Semantics, Vol.31. Speech Acts, ed. byPeter Cole and Jerry Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Harvey, Robert C.
    2009 “How Comics Came to Be: Through the Juncture of Word and Image from Magazine Gag Cartoons to Newspaper Strips, Tools for Critical Appreciation Plus Rare Seldom Witnessed Historical Facts”. InA Comics Studies Reader, ed. byJeet Heer and Kent Worcester, 25–45. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 2010 “Defining Comics Again: Another in the Long List of Unnecessarily Complicated Definitions”. The Comics Journal, 20.12.2010. Available atclassic.tcj.com/top-stories/defining-comics-again-another-in-the-long-list-of-unnecessarily-complicated-definitions/
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hempelmann, Christian F. and Andrea C. Samson
    2008 “Cartoons: Drawn jokes?” InThe Primer of Humor Research, ed. byVictor Raskin, 609-640. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110198492.609
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198492.609 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kogălniceanu, Mihail
    1837Esquisse sur l’histoire, les moeurs et la langue des Cigains, connus en France sous le nom de Bohémiens. Berlin: Librairie de B. Behr
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kronenfeld, David
    2008 “Cultural models.” Intercultural Pragmatics5(1): 67–74. 10.1515/IP.2008.004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2008.004 [Google Scholar]
  21. Marín-Arrese, Juana
    2008 –Cognition and culture in political cartoons.– Intercultural Pragmatics5(1): 1–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Măda, Stanca
    2020 “A Pragmatic Analysis of Political Cartoons.” InExploring Discourse Practices in Romanian, ed. byAndra Vasilescu, Mihaela-Viorica Constantinescu, Gabriela Stoica, Jonathan Russel White, 146–167. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. McCloud, Scott
    1993Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Negro, Isabel
    2014 “Pictorial and verbo-pictorial metaphor in Spanish political cartooning.” Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación57(57): 59–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Plug, H. Jose
    2017 “Attacks on the Cartoonist’s Strategic Manoeuvring. An Argumentative Analysis of Criticism on Political Cartoons.” InArgumentation across Communities of Practice: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. byCornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 317–337. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.10.14plu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.10.14plu [Google Scholar]
  26. Samson, Andrea C. and Oswald Huber
    2007 “The Interaction of Cartoonist’s Gender and Formal Features of Cartoons.” Humor20(1): 1–25. 10.1515/HUMOR.2007.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.2007.001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Sandu, Ion
    2018Istoria și tradițiile minorității rrome: manual pentru clasa a VI-a. București: Editura Didactică și Pedagogică.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Săftoiu, Răzvan
    2017 “Categoria etnică din perspectivă lingvistică.” Diacronia5, A73 (1–9). 10.17684/i5A73ro
    https://doi.org/10.17684/i5A73ro [Google Scholar]
  29. Sperber, Dan
    1996Explaining Culture: A Naturalistic Approach. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Șerbănescu, Horia Vladimir
    2013 “Caricatura militară în presa umoristică românească de la unire până la războiul cel mare (1859–1916)”. Studii și cercetări de istoria artei. Artă plastică, serie nouă3(47): 9–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Tasić, Miloš and Dušan Stamenković
    2015 “The interplay of words and images in expressing multimodal metaphors in comics.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences2121: 117–122. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.308
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.308 [Google Scholar]
  32. Tsakona, Villy
    2009 “Language and Image Interaction in Cartoons: Towards a Multimodal Theory of Humour.” 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]
  33. Tudor, Noémi
    2020 “Constructing Ethnic Identity in Transylvania through Humour.” Acta Universitatis Sapientiae12(2): 144–163. 10.2478/ausp‑2020‑0018
    https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2020-0018 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2022 “Interethnic jokes in Transylvania. The case of Gypsy jokes.” Bulletin of Transilvania University of Brașov, Seria IV. Philology. Cultural Studies15(64): 9–28. 10.31926/but.pcs.2022.
    https://doi.org/10.31926/but.pcs.2022. [Google Scholar]
  35. Van Dijk, Teun
    2008Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511481499
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511481499 [Google Scholar]
  36. Weigand, Edda
    2012 “Professional action games. Theory and practice.” InProfessional Communication across Languages and Cultures, ed. byStanca Măda, Răzvan Săftoiu, 43–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.17.04wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.17.04wei [Google Scholar]
  37. 2000 “The Dialogic Action Game.” Dialogue Analysis VII: Working with Dialogue (Selected Papers from the 7th IADA Conference, Birmingham1999), 1–18. 10.1515/9783110941265‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110941265-002 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2010Dialogue. The Mixed Game. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.10 [Google Scholar]
  39. Yus, Francisco
    2016Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.4 [Google Scholar]
  40. Zafiu, Rodica
    2009 “Păcatele Limbii: Rom.” România Literară101.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Žegarac, Vladimir
    2000 (2008) “Culture and Communication.” InCulturally Speaking, ed. byHelen Spencer-Oatey, 48–70. London/New York: Continuum. 10.5040/9781350934085.ch‑003
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350934085.ch-003 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cartoons; ethnic representations; ethnicity; Romani; Romanian; stereotypes
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