A cross-linguistic/cross-cultural investigation of positive irony
Eleni Kapogianni
University of Kent
Abstract
One of the few points of consensus among the various pragmatic approaches to verbal irony (neo-Gricean, post-Gricean, interactional, Speech-Act-based) is its inherently evaluative nature. The observable imbalance between the frequencies of negative versus positive evaluation conveyed by irony has led researchers to dismiss cases of the latter as cases of non-ironic meaning (Garmendia 2010, 2011; Dynel 2014). This paper revisits the debate on positive irony making three main claims: (1) the perceived equation between irony and negative evaluation is mainly due to a conflation of the notions of irony and sarcasm (2) positive and negative attitudes can co-exist in ironic utterances (3) the use of ironies with a “positive charge” is culture-dependent. The latter argument is supported by survey-based data in six languages: Greek, English, Italian, German, Polish, and Korean
First, a model that distinguishes between pragmatic devices (or tropes) and communicative goals is proposed, leading to the suggestion that irony and sarcasm belong to two different levels (the former being a trope and the latter being a type of communicative goal, which is indeed always critical). Secondly, it is argued that irony triggers a bundle of explicitly and implicitly communicated propositions, one of which can be taken as the “primary intended meaning” (Jaszczolt 2009). It is then suggested that, while the ironic operation is linked (in different possible ways that normally involve some kind of reversal) to the explicit meaning of the utterance, it is the speaker’s more general communicative intentions that can determine an utterance as an act of ironic sarcasm, ironic asteism/jocularity, ironic banter etc.
The empirical testing required participants to judge the nature of evaluations conveyed by various types of (contextualised) ironic and nonironic utterances, providing ratings on a 10-point scale. The same 36 items were translated (and adapted for naturalness) in each of the investigated languages. The findings reveal significant differences in the evaluation of positive irony between languages, more prominently separating Greek and Italian (high positivity) from English, German, and Polish (low positivity). Qualitative analysis of participants’ comments indicates that these differences are driven by politeness considerations, conventional face-threats, as well as humour/jocularity practices.
References:
Dynel, M. (2014). Isn’t it ironic? Defining the scope of humorous irony. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 27: 619-639.
Garmendia, J. (2010). Irony is Critical. Pragmatics and Cognition, 18 (2): 397-421.
Garmendia, J. (2011). She’s (not) a fine friend: “Saying” and criticism in irony. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8 (1): 41-65.
Jaszczolt, K. M. (2009). Cancellability and the Primary/Secondary Meaning Distinction. Intercultural Pragmatics, 6: 259-289.