1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics & Cognition
  4. Volume 32, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 32, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

A frequent response to someone taking offence in response to conversational humour is to claim the utterances in question were ‘not serious’, ‘taken out of context’, or that any offence taken was ‘unintended’. Yet in some instances such claims are construed as inadequate or irrelevant. In this paper we consider why that is the case. Building on a detailed analysis of incidents in which ostensibly joking utterances are construed as offensive, we propose that offence is a fundamentally phenomenon: not simply in the sense of the joking in question being open to evaluation as more or less offensive, but with respect to the morally ordered scope of that offence. The degree to which perceived offences become impervious to claims that any offence caused or taken was ‘unintended’ is a function of the scope of the spatiotemporal scales invoked through the joking itself and subsequent responses to it.

© 2025 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24019.hau
2025-09-26
2026-07-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/pc.24019.hau
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/pc.24019.hau.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24019.hau&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ariel, Mira
    2016 Revisiting the typology of pragmatic interpretations. Intercultural Pragmatics13(1). 1–35. 10.1515/ip‑2016‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2016-0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Attardo, Salvatore
    2020 The linguistics of humor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198791270.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198791270.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barrow, Robin
    2005 On the duty of not taking offence. Journal of Moral Education34(3). 265–275. 10.1080/03057240500211600
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240500211600 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bateson, Gregory
    1955 A theory of play and fantasy: A report on theoretical aspects of the project of study of the role of the paradoxes of abstraction in communication. Psychiatric research reports21. 39–51.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Baxter-Webb, Ibi, Chi-Hé Elder & Eleni Kapogianni
    . forthcoming. Fragile men and fishy arguments: Attributing and disputing offence. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict .
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bell, Nancy
    2015 We are not amused. Failed humor in interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501501586
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501501586 [Google Scholar]
  7. Billig, Michael
    1995 Banal nationalism. London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. 2005 Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of humour. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781446211779
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446211779 [Google Scholar]
  9. Blommaert, Jan
    2007 Sociolinguistic scales. Intercultural Pragmatics4(1).1–19. 10.1515/IP.2007.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/IP.2007.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2010 The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511845307
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511845307 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2015 Chronotypes, scales, and complexity in the study of language in society. Annual Review of Anthropology441. 105–116. 10.1146/annurev‑anthro‑102214‑014035
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102214-014035 [Google Scholar]
  12. Blommaert, Jan, Elina Westein & Sirpa Leppänen
    2015 Further notes on sociolinguistic scales. Intercultural Pragmatics12(1). 119–127. 10.1515/ip‑2015‑0005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2015-0005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Camp, Elizabeth
    2018 Insinuation, common ground, and the conversational record. InDaniel Fogal (ed.), New work on speech acts, 40–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Canestrari, Carla & Amadeu Viana
    2019 Dialogical strategies in replies to offensive humour. Language and Dialogue9(2). 217–235. 10.1075/ld.00039.can
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00039.can [Google Scholar]
  15. Carr, E. Summerson & Michael Lempert
    2016 Introduction. Pragmatics of scale. InE. Summerson Carr & Michael Lempert (eds.), Scale. Discourse and dimensions of social life, 1–21. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. 10.1525/luminos.15
     https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.15 [Google Scholar]
  16. Carson, Thomas L.
    2006 The definition of lying. Noûs40(2). 284–306. 10.1111/j.0029‑4624.2006.00610.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0029-4624.2006.00610.x [Google Scholar]
  17. Chang, Wei-Lin Melody, Michael Haugh & Hsi-Yao Su
    2021 Taking it too far: The role of ideological discourses in contesting the limits of teasing and offence. Pragmatics31(3). 382–405. 10.1075/prag.20003.cha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20003.cha [Google Scholar]
  18. Coupland, Nikolas
    2001 Dialect stylization in radio talk. Language in Society30(3). 345–375. 10.1017/S0047404501003013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404501003013 [Google Scholar]
  19. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2011 Impoliteness. Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511975752
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752 [Google Scholar]
  20. Culpeper, Jonathan & Michael Haugh
    2021a (Im)politeness and sociopragmatics. InMichael Haugh, Daniel Z. Kadar & Marina Terkourafi (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of sociopragmatics, 315–339. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108954105.018
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108954105.018 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2021b The metalinguistics of offence in (British) English. A corpus-based metapragmatic approach. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict9(2). 185–214. 10.1075/jlac.00035.cul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00035.cul [Google Scholar]
  22. Debras, Camille
    2017 The shrug. Forms and meanings of a compound enactment. Gesture16(1). 1–34. 10.1075/gest.16.1.01deb
     https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.16.1.01deb [Google Scholar]
  23. de Jongste, Henri
    2013 Negotiating humorous intent. InMarta Dynel (ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory, 179–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.1.09jon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.1.09jon [Google Scholar]
  24. Drew, Paul & Elizabeth Holt
    1998 Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society27(4). 495–522. 10.1017/S0047404500020200
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500020200 [Google Scholar]
  25. Dynel, Marta
    2009 Beyond a joke: Types of conversational humour. Language and Linguistics Compass3(5). 1284–1299. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2009.00152.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00152.x [Google Scholar]
  26. 2011 Joker in the pack. Towards determining the status of humorous framing in conversation. InMarta Dynel (ed.), The pragmatics of humour across discourse domains, 217–241). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.210.15dyn
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.210.15dyn [Google Scholar]
  27. 2013 Impoliteness as disaffiliative humour in film talk. InMarta Dynel (ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory, 105–144. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.1.07dyn
     https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.1.07dyn [Google Scholar]
  28. 2016 Conceptualizing conversational humour as (im)politeness: The case of film talk. Journal of Politeness Research12(1). 117–147. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0023
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0023 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2018 Irony, deception and humour. Seeking the truth about overt and covert untruthfulness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501507922
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501507922 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2021 Desperately seeking intentions: Genuine and jocular insults on social media. Journal of Pragmatics1791. 26–36. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.017
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.017 [Google Scholar]
  31. Dynel, Marta & Valeria Sinkeviciute
    2021 Conversational humour. InMichael Haugh, Dániel Z. Kádár & Marina Terkourafi (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of sociopragmatics, 408–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108954105.022
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108954105.022 [Google Scholar]
  32. Elder, Chi-Hé
    2021 Microaggression or misunderstanding? Implicatures, inference and accountability. Journal of Pragmatics1791. 37–43. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.020
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.020 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2024 Pragmatic Inference. Misunderstandings, Accountability, Deniability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009036672
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009036672 [Google Scholar]
  34. Elder, Chi-Hé & David Beaver
    2022 ‘We’re running out of fuel’: When does miscommunication go unrepaired?Intercultural Pragmatics19(5). 541–570. 10.1515/ip‑2022‑5001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2022-5001 [Google Scholar]
  35. Elder, Chi-Hé & Michael Haugh
    2018 The interactional achievement of speaker meaning: Towards a formal account of conversational inference. Intercultural Pragmatics15(5). 593–625. 10.1515/ip‑2018‑0021
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2018-0021 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2023 Exposing and avoiding unwanted inferences in conversational interaction. Journal of Pragmatics2181. 115–132. 10.1016/j.pragma.2023.09.014
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.09.014 [Google Scholar]
  37. Emerson, Joan P.
    1969 Negotiating the serious import of humour. Sociometry32(2). 169–181. 10.2307/2786261
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2786261 [Google Scholar]
  38. Ford, Celia & Barbara Fox
    2010 Multiple practices for constructing laughables. InDagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber & Margaret Selting (eds), Prosody in interaction, 339–368. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.23.27for
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.23.27for [Google Scholar]
  39. Gal, Susan
    2016 Scale-making. Comparison and perspective as ideological projects. InE. Summerson Carr & Michael Lempert (eds.), Scale. Discourse and dimensions of social life, 91–111. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Gillespie, Eden & Ben Smee
    2022 Leaked audio reveals Queensland police staff in racist conversations, joking about violence to black people and protestors. The Guardian Australia, 13 November 2022. (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/13/queensland-police-service-qps-leaked-audio-recording-tape-brisbane-city-watch-house) (Accessed2023-09-12)
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Goebel, Zane & Howards Manns
    2020 Chronotopic relations: Chronotopes, scale, and scale-making. Language & Communication701. 82–93. 10.1016/j.langcom.2019.03.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  42. Goffman, Erving
    1974 Frame analysis. An essay in the organization of experience. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 1978 Response cries. Language54(4). 787–815. 10.2307/413235
     https://doi.org/10.2307/413235 [Google Scholar]
  44. Grice, H. Paul
    1957 Meaning. Philosophical Review78(2). 147–177. 10.2307/2184179
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2184179 [Google Scholar]
  45. Haugh, Michael
    2012 Conversational interaction. InKeith Allan & Kasia M. Jaszczolt (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, 251–274. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139022453.014
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022453.014 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2013a Speaker meaning and accountability in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics48a1. 41–56. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.009 [Google Scholar]
  47. 2013b Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics581. 52–72. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  48. 2015 Impoliteness and taking offence in initial interactions. Journal of Pragmatics861. 36–42. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.018
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.018 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2016 ‘Just kidding’: Teasing and claims to serious intent. Journal of Pragmatics951. 120–136. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  50. 2022 (Online) public denunciation, public incivilities and offence. Language & Communication871. 44–59. 10.1016/j.langcom.2022.07.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2022.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  51. Haugh, Michael & Wei-Lin Melody Chang
    2019 Indexical and sequential properties of criticisms in initial interactions: Implications for examining (im)politeness across cultures. Russian Journal of Linguistics23(4). 904–929. 10.22363/2687‑0088‑2019‑23‑4‑904‑929
     https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2019-23-4-904-929 [Google Scholar]
  52. Haugh, Michael & Jonathan Culpeper
    2018 Integrative pragmatics and (im)politeness theory. InCornelia Ilie & Neal Norrick (eds.), Pragmatics and its interfaces, 213–239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.294.10hau
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.294.10hau [Google Scholar]
  53. Haugh, Michael, Dániel Z. Kádár & Rosina Márquez Reiter
    2022 Offence and morality: Pragmatic perspectives. Language & Communication871. 117–122. 10.1016/j.langcom.2022.07.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2022.07.005 [Google Scholar]
  54. Haugh, Michael & Béatrice Priego-Valverde
    2024 Conversational humour. InThomas E. Ford, Władysław Chłopicki & Giselinde Kuipers (eds.), De Gruyter handbook of humor studies, 307–326. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110755770‑018
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110755770-018 [Google Scholar]
  55. Haugh, Michael & Valeria Sinkeviciute
    2019 Offence and conflict talk. InMatthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries & Jim O’Driscoll (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language in conflict, 196–214. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429058011‑12
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429058011-12 [Google Scholar]
  56. Haugh, Michael & Lara Weinglass
    2018 Divided by a common language? Jocular quips and (non-)affiliative responses in initial interactions amongst American and Australian speakers of English. Intercultural Pragmatics15(4). 533–562. 10.1515/ip‑2018‑0019
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2018-0019 [Google Scholar]
  57. Hepburn, Alexa & Galina Bolden
    2017 Transcribing for social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781473920460
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473920460 [Google Scholar]
  58. Holmes, Janet
    2000 Politeness, power and provocation: How humour functions in the workplace. Discourse Studies2(2). 159–185. 10.1177/1461445600002002002
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445600002002002 [Google Scholar]
  59. Holt, Elizabeth
    2013 There’s many a true word said in jest: Seriousness and nonseriousness in interaction. InPhillip Glenn & Elizabeth Holt (eds.), Studies of laughter in interaction, 69–89. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781472542069.ch‑004
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472542069.ch-004 [Google Scholar]
  60. Hopper, Robert
    1995 Episode trajectory in conversational play. InPaul ten Have & George Psathas (eds.), Situated order. Studies in the social organisation of talk and embodied activities, 57–71. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Horn, Laurence
    1972 On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
  62. 1989 A natural history of negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Hymes, Dell
    1972 On communicative competence. InJ. B. Pride & Janet Holmes (eds), Sociolinguistics. Selected readings, 269–293. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Horisk, Claire
    2024 Dangerous jokes: How racism and sexism weaponize humor. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197691496.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197691496.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  65. Jefferson, Gail
    1991 List construction as a task and resource. InGeorge Psathas (ed.), Interactional Competence, 63–92. New York: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. 2004 A note on laughter in ‘male-female’ interaction. Discourse Studies6(1). 117–133. 10.1177/1461445604039445
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604039445 [Google Scholar]
  67. Kramer, Elise
    2011 The playful is political: The metapragmatics of Internet rape-joke arguments. Language in Society40(2). 137–168. 10.1017/S0047404511000017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404511000017 [Google Scholar]
  68. Malhi, Amrita
    2024 Enumerating Australia’s ‘diverse’: Ethnicity and raciology in census and workplace diversity surveys. Ethnic and Racial Studies47(10). 2219–2240. 10.1080/01419870.2023.2273313
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2023.2273313 [Google Scholar]
  69. Márquez Reiter, Rosina
    2006 Interactional closeness in service calls to a Montevidean Carer service company. Research on Language and Social Interaction39(1). 7–39. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3901_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3901_2 [Google Scholar]
  70. Marsh, Moira
    2014 On going too far. European Journal of Humour Research2(4). 126–139. 10.7592/EJHR2014.2.4.marsh
     https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2014.2.4.marsh [Google Scholar]
  71. Maynard, Douglas
    2013 Defensive mechanisms: I-mean-prefaced utterances in complaint and other conversational sequences. InMakoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding, 198–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. McTernan, Emily
    2021 Taking offense: An emotion reconsidered. Philosophy & Public Affairs49(2). 179–208. 10.1111/papa.12188
     https://doi.org/10.1111/papa.12188 [Google Scholar]
  73. 2023 On taking offence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780197613092.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197613092.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  74. Mitchell, Tony
    1992 Wogs still out of work: Australian television comedy as colonial discourse. Australasian Drama Studies201. 119–133.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Moeschler, Jacques
    2021 Why truth matters. Where relevance meets truthfulness. Pragmatics & Cognition28(2). 416–440. 10.1075/pc.21012.moe
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21012.moe [Google Scholar]
  76. Mosegaard Hansen, Maj-Britt & Marina Terkourafi
    2023 We need to talk about hearer’s meaning!Journal of Pragmatics2081. 99–114. 10.1016/j.pragma.2023.02.015
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.02.015 [Google Scholar]
  77. Mullany, Louise
    2004 Gender, politeness and institutional power roles: Humour as a tactic to gain compliance in workplace business meetings. Multilingua23(1). 13–37. 10.1515/mult.2004.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2004.002 [Google Scholar]
  78. Ődmark, Sara
    2021 De-contextualisation fuels controversy: The double-edged sword of humour in a hybrid media environment. European Journal of Humour Research9(3). 49–64. 10.7592/EJHR2021.9.3.523
     https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2021.9.3.523 [Google Scholar]
  79. O’Driscoll, Jim
    2013 Situational transformations: The offensive-izing of an email message and the public-ization of offensiveness. Pragmatics & Society4(3). 369–387. 10.1075/ps.4.3.05odr
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.4.3.05odr [Google Scholar]
  80. 2022 Offensive language. Taboo, offence and social control. London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Patiño-Santos, Adriana & Rosina Márquez Reiter
    2019 Banal interculturalism: Latin Americans in Elephant and Castle, London. Language and Intercultural Communication19(3). 227–241. 10.1080/14708477.2018.1508292
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2018.1508292 [Google Scholar]
  82. Pérez, Raúl
    2013 Learning to make racism funny in the “color-blind” era: Stand-up comedy students, performance strategies, and the (re)production of racist jokes in public. Discourse & Society24(4). 478–503. 10.1177/0957926513482066
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513482066 [Google Scholar]
  83. Pillet-Shore, Danielle
    2011 Doing introductions: The work involved in meeting someone new. Communication Monographs78(1). 73–93.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Poggi, Isabella & Francesca D’Errico
    2018 Feeling offended: A blow to our image and our social relationships. Frontiers in Psychology81. Article 2221. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02221
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02221 [Google Scholar]
  85. Pomerantz, Anita
    1978 Compliment responses: Notes on the cooperation of multiple constraints. InJim Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction, 79–112. New York: Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑623550‑0.50010‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-623550-0.50010-0 [Google Scholar]
  86. Priego-Valverde, Béatrice
    2009 Failed humor in conversation: A double voicing analysis. InNeal Norrick & Delia Chiaro (eds.), Humor in interaction, 165–183. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.182.08pri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.182.08pri [Google Scholar]
  87. Sacks, Harvey
    1972 An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. InDavid Sudnow (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 31–74. New York: The Free Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Shaw, Chloë, Alexa Hepburn & Jonathan Potter
    2013 Having the last laugh: On post-completion laughter particles. InPhillip Glenn & Elizabeth Holt (eds.), Studies of laughter in interaction, 91–106. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781472542069.ch‑005
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472542069.ch-005 [Google Scholar]
  89. Sinkeviciute, Valeria
    2017 What makes teasing impolite in Australian and British English? ‘Step[ping] over those lines […] you shouldn’t be crossing’. Journal of Politeness Research13(2). 175–207. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0034
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0034 [Google Scholar]
  90. 2019 Conversational humour and (im)politeness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/thr.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/thr.8 [Google Scholar]
  91. Skalicky, Stephen, Cynthia M. Berger & Nancy D. Bell
    2015 The functions of ‘just kidding’ in American English. Journal of Pragmatics851. 18–31. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.024
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.024 [Google Scholar]
  92. Slembrouck, Stef & Mieke Vandenbroucke
    2020 Scale. InKaren Tusting (ed.), The Routledge handbook of linguistic ethnography, 70–83. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Smith, Moira
    1995 Whipping up a storm: The ethics and consequences of joking around. Journal of Folklore Research32(2). 121–136.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    1995 Relevance. Communication and cognition (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Sternau, Marit, Mira Ariel, Rachel Giora & Ofer Fein
    2015 Levels of interpretation: New tools for characterizing intended meanings. Journal of Pragmatics841. 86–101. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  96. Szabó, Roland-Attila
    2020 Factors and conditions that influence the perception of offensive humor. Tanulmányok11. 47–63. 10.19090/tm.2020.1.47‑63
     https://doi.org/10.19090/tm.2020.1.47-63 [Google Scholar]
  97. Technau, Björn
    2017 Aggression in banter. Patterns, possibilities, and limitations of analysis. InSilvia Bonacchi (ed.), Verbale Aggression. Multidisziplinäre Zugänge zur verletzenden Macht der Sprache, 97–130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110522976‑005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110522976-005 [Google Scholar]
  98. 2018 Going beyond hate speech. The pragmatics of ethnic slur terms. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics14(1). 25–43. 10.1515/lpp‑2018‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lpp-2018-0002 [Google Scholar]
  99. Thomson, Angus, Michael McGowan & Alexandra Smith
    2023 Former multiculturalism minister apologises for allegedly racist comment. Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May 2023 (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/former-multicultural-minister-apologises-for-allegedly-racist-comment-20230524-p5davv.html). Accessed2023-09-12.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Weckert, John
    2007 Giving and taking offence in a global context. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction3(3). 25–35. 10.4018/jthi.2007070103
     https://doi.org/10.4018/jthi.2007070103 [Google Scholar]
  101. Wharton, Tim & Louis de Saussure
    2024 Pragmatics and emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Zajdman, Anat
    1995 Humorous face-threatening acts: Humor as strategy. Journal of Pragmatics23(3). 325–339. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00038‑G
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00038-G [Google Scholar]
  103. Zillmann, Dolf
    1983 Disparagement humor. InPaul E. McGhee & Jeffrey H. Goldstein (eds.), The handbook of humor research, 85–107. New York: Springer-Verlag. 10.1007/978‑1‑4612‑5572‑7_5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-5572-7_5 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.24019.hau
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): intention; interactional pragmatics; joking; offence; scales; speaker meaning

Most Cited

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