1887
Volume 34, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study seeks to characterise the form of verbal irony common among Nigerians by identifying its motivation, inherent properties, and communicative value. Data for this study comprised detailed field notes taken within the last five years in contexts in which utterances occurred naturally. These were then tested among informants from diverse ethnic and linguistic backgrounds at the University of Benin to determine the prevalence and motivation of the ironic utterances. In addition, 500 questionnaires were administered to a group of students and staff in the same institution. These were analysed using frequency tables and simple percentages. Results support the claim that irony in this context is governed by a single cultural principle: “You hurt yourself by admitting a negative situation.” Although the study draws heavily from the relevance-theoretic echoic account, it seeks to reevaluate this account by suggesting that positive attitudes in negative situations are salient cultural notions that underlie the echoic account in this context.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20061.ogo
2023-05-16
2024-06-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abrams, Meyer H., and Geoffrey G. Harpham
    2005A Glossary of Literary Terms. Boston: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Attardo, Salvatore
    2000 “Irony as Relevant Inappropriateness.” Journal of Pragmatics321, 9–16. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00070‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00070-3 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailin, Alan
    2015 “On the Characteristics of Verbal Irony.” Semiotica2041: 101–119. 10.1515/sem‑2014‑0087
    https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2014-0087 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boutonnet, Josiane
    2009 “Irony: Stylistic Approaches.” InConcise Encyclopaedia of Pragmatics, ed. byJacob L. Mey, 408–411. Oxford: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Carston, Robyn
    1991 “Implicatures, Explicature and Truth-theoretical Semantics.” InPragmatics: A Reader, ed. bySteven Davis, 60–78. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clark, Herbert, and Richard Gerrig
    1984 “On the Pretence Theory of Irony.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General1131: 121–126. 10.1037/0096‑3445.113.1.121
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.1.121 [Google Scholar]
  7. Colebrooks, Claire
    2004Irony. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203634127
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203634127 [Google Scholar]
  8. Curcó, Carmen
    2002 “Irony: Negation, Echo and Metarepresentation.” Lingua1101: 257–280. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(99)00041‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(99)00041-8 [Google Scholar]
  9. Currie, Gregory
    2006 “Why Irony is Pretense.” InThe Architecture of the Imagination, ed. byShaun Nichols, 111–133. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199275731.003.0007
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199275731.003.0007 [Google Scholar]
  10. Dynel, Marta
    2013 “Irony from a Neo-Gricean Perspective: On Untruthfulness and Evaluative Implicature.” Intercultural Pragmatics10 (3): 403–431. 10.1515/ip‑2013‑0018
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2013-0018 [Google Scholar]
  11. Garmendia, Joana
    2000 “Irony is Critical.” Pragmatics and Cognition181: 397–421. 10.1075/pc.18.2.07gar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.18.2.07gar [Google Scholar]
  12. 2018Irony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316136218
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316136218 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gibbs, Raymond
    2007 “Irony in Talks among Friends.” InIrony in Language and Thought: A Cognitive Science Reader, ed. byRaymond W. Gibbs Jr., and Herbert L. Colston, 339–360. New York: Erlbaum. 10.4324/9781410616685
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410616685 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2012 “Are Ironic Acts Deliberate?” Journal of Pragmatics441: 104–115. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gibbs, Raymond, and Herbert Colston
    2012Interpreting Figurative Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139168779
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139168779 [Google Scholar]
  16. Grice, Paul H.
    1989Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Heritage, John, and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    2006 “The Structure of Patients’ Presenting Concerns: Physicians’ Opening Questions.” Health Communication19 (2): 89–102. 10.1207/s15327027hc1902_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1902_1 [Google Scholar]
  18. Knoblauch, Hubert
    2001 “Communication, Context and Culture: A Communicative Constructivist Approach to Intercultural Communication.” InCulture Communication: Analyses of Intercultural Situations, ed. byAldo Di Luzio, Susanne Günthner, and Franca Orletti, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.81.04kno
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.81.04kno [Google Scholar]
  19. Kumon-Nakamura, Sachi, Sam Glucksberg, and Mary Brown
    1995 “How About Another Piece of Pie: The Allusional Pretense Theory of Discourse Irony.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General1241: 2–21
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kreuz, Roger J., and Christine E. Link
    2002 “Asymmetries in the Use of Verbal Irony.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology21 (2): 127–143. 10.1177/02627X02021002002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/02627X02021002002 [Google Scholar]
  21. Laval, Virginie, and Alain Bert-Erboul
    2005 “French-speaking Children’s Understanding of Sarcasm: The Role of Intonation and Context.” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research481: 610–620. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2005/042)
    https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/042) [Google Scholar]
  22. Noveck, Ira, and Dan Sperber
    2012 “The Way and How of Experimental Pragmatics: The Case of Scalar Inferences.” InRelevance and Meaning, ed. byDeidre Wilson, and Dan Sperber, 307–330. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139028370.018
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.018 [Google Scholar]
  23. Papa-Wyatt, Michaela
    2014 “Pretense and Echo: Towards an Integrated Account of Verbal Irony.” International Review of Pragmatics51: 127–168. 10.1163/18773109‑00601007
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-00601007 [Google Scholar]
  24. Partington, Alan
    2007 “Irony and the Reversal of Evaluation.” Journal of Pragmatics391: 1547–1569. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.009 [Google Scholar]
  25. Recanati, Francois
    2004Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J., and Ines Lozano-Palecio
    2019 “A Cognitive-linguistic Approach to Complexity in Irony: Dissecting the Ironic Echo.” Metaphor and Symbol34 (2): 127–138. 10.1080/10926488.2019.1611714
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2019.1611714 [Google Scholar]
  27. Simpson, Paul
    2011 “‘It’s Not Ironic, That’s Just Stupid:’ Towards an Eclectic Account of the Discourse of Irony.” InThe Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains, ed. byMarta Dynel, 33–50. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.210.04sim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.210.04sim [Google Scholar]
  28. Spencer-Oatey, Helen D.
    2000 “Rapport Management: A Framework for Analysis.” InCulturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures, ed. byHelen D. Spencer-Oatey, 11–46. London: Continuum. 10.5040/9781350934085
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350934085 [Google Scholar]
  29. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
    1981 “Irony and the Use-Mention Distribution.” InRadical Pragmatics, ed. byPeter Cole, 295–318. New York: Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 1995Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 1998 “Irony and Relevance: A Reply to Seto, Hamamoto and Yamanoshi.” InRelevance Theory: Applications and Implications, ed. byRobyn Carston, and Seiji Uchida, 283–193. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.37.16spe
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.37.16spe [Google Scholar]
  32. Toolan, Michael
    1996Total Speech: An Integrational Linguistic Approach to Language. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Utsumi, Akira
    2000 “Verbal Irony as Implicit Display of Ironic Environment: Distinguishing Ironic Utterances from Non Irony”. Journal of Pragmatics321: 1777–1806. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00116‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00116-2 [Google Scholar]
  34. Van der Laaken, Manon, and Annw Bannink
    2020 “Openings in Follow-up Cancer Consultations: The ‘How Are You?’ Question Revisited.” Discourse Studies22 (2): 205–220. 10.1177/1461445619893793
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619893793 [Google Scholar]
  35. Wilson, Deirdre
    1998 “Discourse, Coherence and Relevance: A Reply to Rechel Giora.” Journal of Pragmatics291: 57–74. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00012‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00012-X [Google Scholar]
  36. 2006 “The Pragmatics of Verbal Irony: Echo or Pretence?” Lingua1161: 1722–1743. 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2013 “Irony Comprehension: A Developmental Perspective.” Journal of Pragmatics591: 40–56. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.016 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2017 “Irony, Hyperbole, Jokes and Banter.” InFormal Models in the Study of Language: Applications in Interdisciplinary Contexts, ed. byJoanna Blochowiak, Cristina Girsot, Stephania Durriemann, and Christopher Laenzlinger, 201–220. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑48832‑5_11
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48832-5_11 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2018 “Relevance Theory and Literary Interpretation.” InReading Beyond the Code: Literature and Relevance Theory, ed. byTerence Cave, and Deidre Wilson, 185–204. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber
    1992 “On Verbal Irony.” Lingua871: 53–76. 10.1016/0024‑3841(92)90025‑E
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(92)90025-E [Google Scholar]
  41. 2012 “Explaining Irony.” InMeaning and Relevance, ed. byDeidre Wilson, and Dan Sperber, 124–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139028370.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.008 [Google Scholar]
  42. Yus, Francisco
    2003 “Humour and the Search for Relevance.” Journal of Pragmatics251: 1295–1331. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00179‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00179-0 [Google Scholar]
  43. Zegarac, Vladimir
    2000 “Culture and Communication.” InCulturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, ed. byHelen D. Spencer-Oatey48–69. London: Continuum. 10.5040/9781350934085.ch‑003
    https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350934085.ch-003 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.20061.ogo
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