Book contents
- Irony
- Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics
- Irony
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Irony as Opposition
- 3 Irony as Echo
- 4 Irony as Pretence
- 5 Attitude Expression in Irony
- 6 Clues of Irony
- 7 Sarcasm and Humour
- Examples Used in Text
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
6 - Clues of Irony
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2018
Book contents
- Irony
- Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics
- Irony
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Irony as Opposition
- 3 Irony as Echo
- 4 Irony as Pretence
- 5 Attitude Expression in Irony
- 6 Clues of Irony
- 7 Sarcasm and Humour
- Examples Used in Text
- Glossary
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
A major risk is associated with being ironic: a hearer who does not recognize the speaker’s irony will believe that the speaker has committed herself to the literal meaning of the utterance –and this meaning is normally rather different or even contradictory to what the speaker actually intends to communicate. Common knowledge and contextual information help the hearer recognize the speaker’s ironic intention but, to avoid misunderstandings, ironic speakers can resort to using clues. Some of these clues have been traditionally studied in the pragmatics of irony –the speaker’s tone of voice, stylistic choices, word ordering, etc. The speaker can use these to alert the hearer that her words should be understood ironically. In this chapter, I explain the risks of being ironic, and present the traditional clues that ironic speakers can use. Furthermore, I suggest that the list of irony’s clues should be opened to include three new candidates: echo, pretense and opposition. The main pragmatic approaches to irony have considered these three notions to be essential in irony, but my hypothesis is that they should be considered clues –they do not explain what irony is essentially, but how irony works usually.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Irony , pp. 107 - 125Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Gibbs, R. W. & Colston, H. L. 2001. The risks and rewards of ironic communication. In Say Not to Say: New Perspectives on Miscommunication, ed. Anolli, L., Ciceri, R. & Riva, G., 187–200. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Attardo, S., Eisterhold, J., Hay, J. & Poggi, I. 2003. Multimodal markers of irony and sarcasm. Humor 16(2): 243–60.Google Scholar
Attardo, S., Pickering, L. & Baker, A. 2011. Prosodic and multimodal markers of humor in conversation. Pragmatics & Cognition 19(2): 224–47.Google Scholar
Bryant, G. A. & Fox Tree, J. E. 2005. Is there an ironic tone of voice? Language and Speech 48(3): 257–77.Google Scholar
Rockwell, P. 2000. Lower, slower, louder: vocal cues of sarcasm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29(5): 483–95.Google Scholar
Carston, R. & Wearing, C. 2015. Hyperbolic language and its relation to metaphor and irony. Journal of Pragmatics 79: 79–92.Google Scholar
Kreuz, R. J. & Roberts, R. M. 1995. Two cues for verbal irony: hyperbole and the ironic tone of voice. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10(1): 21–31.Google Scholar
Garmendia, J. 2011. She’s (not) a fine friend: ‘saying’ and criticism in irony. Intercultural Pragmatics 8(1): 41–65.Google Scholar
Garmendia, J. 2013. Ironically saying and implicating. In What Is Said and What Is Not: The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface, eds. Penco, C. & Domaneschi, F., 225–41. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Garmendia, J. 2014. The clash: humor and critical attitude in verbal irony. Humor 27(4): 641–59.Google Scholar
Garmendia, J. 2015. A (neo-)Gricean account of irony: an answer to relevance theory. International Review of Pragmatics 7: 40–79.Google Scholar