Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural Conceptualisations in Humorous Discourse in English and Serbian

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advances in Cultural Linguistics

Part of the book series: Cultural Linguistics ((CL))

Abstract

The main aim of this chapter was to explore the under-researched interrelationship between verbal humour and culture exemplified by film and television dialogues in English and Serbian. As much as humour has become a widely explored topic, it seems that the cultural dimensions of it have not yet received enough attention. The corpus of the study, which was selected using a theoretical framework offered by Attardo (Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 1994; Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 2001), contains scripted dialogues taken from several comedies and television series in English and Serbian. Specifically, the corpus of the study was selected using the Knowledge Resources, as defined by Attardo (Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 2001). In order to get a better insight into different cultures, dialogues in English were taken from both British and USA films, and contrasted with the dialogues in Serbian. Although it is well known that verbal humour is deeply embedded in the given culture, it is important to determine to what extent the interrelationship of linguistic and extralinguistic aspects of verbal humour affects the humorous effect. The theoretical framework of the study was based on the General Theory of Verbal Humour and Cultural Linguistics (Sharifian in Cultural conceptualisations and language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2011; Cultural linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2017). The results of the analysis indicate the similarities and differences between the two languages in terms of preferred styles for producing the humorous effect and the tendencies to use both global and culture-specific elements that can serve as a basis for the humorous effect or as means of maximising it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    More information on these films and television series can be found at http://www.imdb.com.

References

  • Alexander, R. J. (1997). Aspects of verbal humour in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antonopoulou, E. (2004). Humour theory and translation research: Proper names in humorous discourse. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17(3), 219–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attardo, S. (2001). Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Attardo, S. (2003). The pragmatics of humor. Special issue of Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1287–1294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attardo, S., & Victor, R. (1991). Script theory revis(it)ed: Joke similarity and joke representation model. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 4(3–4), 293–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attardo, S., et al. (2002). Script oppositions and logical mechanisms: Modeling incongruities and their resolutions. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 15, 3–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barcelona, A. (2003). The case of a metonymic basis of pragmatic inferencing: Evidence from jokes and funny anecdotes. In K. Panther & L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing (pp. 81–102). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bergson, H. (2002). Laughter: An essay on the meaning of the comic. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4352/4352-h/4352-h.htm. Accessed February 15, 2016.

  • Boskin, J. (1997). Rebellious laughter: People’s humor in American culture. New York, Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, A. (2006). Wissensmuster im humoristischen Diskurs. Ein Beitrag zur Inkongruenztheorie anhand von Monthy Python’s Flying Circus. In H. Kottfoff (Ed.), Scherzkommunikation: Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung (pp. 7–21). Radolfzell: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung. http://www.verlag-gespraechsforschung.de. Accessed September 3, 2014.

  • Brône, G. (2010). Bedeutungskonstitution in verbalem Humor: ein kognitiv-linguistischer und diskurssemantischer Ansatz. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brône, G., & Feyaerts, K. (2003). The cognitive linguistics of incongruity resolution: Marked reference-point structures in humor. University of Leuven, Department of Linguistics, preprint no. 205. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.111.4193&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed April 14, 2015.

  • Brône, G., Feyaerts, K., & Veale, T. (2015). Cognitive linguistics and humor research. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, A. J. (1983). Humor and laughter in social interaction and some implications for humor research. In P. E. McGhee, & J. H. Goldstein (Ed.), Handbook of humor research (pp. 135–157). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiaro, D. (1992). The language of jokes. Analyzing verbal play. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps. Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S. (2003). What’s so funny? Conceptual integration in humorous examples. Cognitive semantics and jokes. Cognitive Psychopathology/Psicopatologia Cognitive, 2(3): 67–78. http://cogsci.ucsd.edu/~coulson/funstuff/funny.html. Accessed April 11, 2015.

  • Coulson, S., & Oakley, T. (2000). Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(3/4), 175–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Crystal, D. (2012). Into the twenty-first century. In L. Muggelestone (Ed.), The Oxford history of English (pp. 488–514). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, C. (1990). Ethnic humour around the world: A comparative analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dynel, M. (2011). ‘You talking to me?’ The viewer as a ratified listener to film discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1628–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauconnier, G., & Turner, T. (2002). The way we think. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context and figurative language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goddard, C. (2006). Ethnopragmatics: A new paradigm. In C. Goddard (Ed.), Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context (pp. 1–30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, J. (2000). Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 709–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, D., & Quinn, N. (1987). Cultural models in language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2002). Over the edge: Subversive humor between colleagues and friends. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 15(1), 65–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janney, R. (2012). Pragmatics and cinematic discourse. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 8, 85–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kecskes, I. (2008). Dueling contexts: A dynamic model of meaning. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(3), 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kecskes, I. (2013). Why do we say what we say the way we say it? Journal of Pragmatics, 48(1), 71–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kecskes, I. (2015). Language, culture, and context. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 113–129). London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, N. K. (2010). Wrinkling complexity: Concepts of identity and affiliation in humour. In M. Bednarek & J. R. Martin (Ed.), New discourse on language: Functional perspectives on multimodality, identity, and affiliation (pp. 35–58). London, New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kövecses, Z. (2006). Language, mind, and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyratzis, S. (2003). Laughing metaphorically: Metaphor and humour in discourse. Paper presented at the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Logroño: 20–25 July 2003. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.132.9689&rep=rep1&-type=pdf. Accessed December 23, 2014.

  • Laineste, L. (2005). Targets of Estonian ethnic jokes within the theory of ethnic humour (Ch. Davies). Folklore 29. http://www.folkolore.ee/folklore/vol29/davies.pdf. Accessed December 11, 2015.

  • Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Langacker, R. W. (1994). Culture, cognition, and grammar. In M. Pütz (Ed.), Language contact and language conflict (pp. 25–53). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Manteli, V. (2011). Humour and…. Stalin in a national theatre of Greece postmodern production: Stalin. A discussion about Greek theatre. In V. Tsakona & D. E. Popa (Ed.), Studies in political humour: In between political critique and public entertainment (pp. 243–271). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. C. (2000). Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory, 10(3), 310–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issues in conversational joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1333–1359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, G. B. (1996). Toward a theory of cultural linguistics. Texas: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolillo, J. C. (1998). Gary Larson’s far Side: Nonsense? Nonsense! Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 11(3), 261–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piazza, R., Bednarek, M., & Rossi, F. (2011). Telecinematic discourse: Approaches to the language of films and television series. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prćić, T. (2003). Is English still a foreign language? The European English Messenger, 12(2), 35–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prćić, T. (2014a). English as the nativized foreign language and its impact on Serbian. English Today, 30(1), 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prćić, T. (2014b). Building contact linguistic competence related to English as the nativized foreign language. System, 42, 143–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prodanović Stankić, D. (2015). The role of metaphor and metonymy in humorous discourse: A case study. Paper presented at the Cognitive Linguistics Conference in Wroclaw, 3–6 December, 2015. https://sites.google.com/site/coglingwroc/panels/metaphor-and-metonymy/paper-14. Accessed March 10, 2016.

  • Prodanović Stankić, D. (2016). Verbalni humor u engleskom i srpskom jeziku [Verbal Humour in English and Serbian]. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet. http://digitalna.ff.uns.ac.rs/sadrzaj/2016/978–86-6065-353-8. Accessed March 10, 2016.

  • Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasulić, K. (2008). Srpsko-engleske tvorenice u svetlu teorije pojmovne integracije [Serbian–English lexical formations in the light of conceptual integration theory]. In M. Radovanović & P. Piper (Eds.), Semantička proučavanja srpskog jezika (pp. 269–289). Beograd: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharifian, F. (2011). Cultural conceptualisations and language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sharifian, F. (2015). Cultural linguistics. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 473–493). London, New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharifian, F. (2017). Cultural linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. (1997). A cognitive theory of cultural meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taubman, W. (2003). Did he bang it? Nikita Khrushchev and the shoe. The New York Times, July 23. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/26/opinion/26iht-edtaubman_ed3_.html. Accessed January 10, 2016.

  • Tsakona, V. (2009). Language and image interaction in cartoons: Towards a multimodal theory of humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1171–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, N. A. (1998). What’s so funny: Humor in American culture. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wardhaugh, R. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wierzbicka, A. (2006). English: Meaning and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. C. (2005). Frame-shifts in action: What spontaneous humor reveals about language comprehension. Cognitive Science, 17(2), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, N. (2007). The Chinese conceptualization of the heart and its cultural context. In F. Sharifian & G. B. Palmer (Eds.), Applied cultural linguistics: Implications for second language learning and intercultural communication (pp. 65–85). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English Studies, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

    Diana Prodanović Stankić

Authors
  1. Diana Prodanović Stankić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana Prodanović Stankić .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Farzad Sharifian

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Prodanović Stankić, D. (2017). Cultural Conceptualisations in Humorous Discourse in English and Serbian. In: Sharifian, F. (eds) Advances in Cultural Linguistics. Cultural Linguistics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4055-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4056-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation