Cover not available
Part of
Figurative Language – Intersubjectivity and Usage
Edited by Augusto Soares da Silva
[Figurative Thought and Language 11] 2021
► pp. 213–240

On verbal and situational irony

Towards a unified approach

 | University of La Rioja
 | University of La Rioja
This chapter treats the notion of ironic echo as subsidiary to the broader notion of epistemic scenario, which applies to both verbal and situational irony. In verbal irony, the existence of an epistemic scenario takes the shape of a pretended agreement with someone’s beliefs, which can be materialized in agreement expressions of various kinds including echoic mentions. In situational irony, the epistemic scenario is built on a generally reliable assumption about a state of affairs. Finally, situational irony can be embedded within a communicative context, an observation which allows for a classification of ironic types that overrides the traditional verbal irony-situational irony dichotomy. The resulting account provides a single unified framework for the study of irony.
Keywords: agreement scenario, attitudinal component of irony, epistemic scenario, irony, irony types, observable scenario, reasoning schemas, scenario-based account, situational irony, verbal irony
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Verbal irony
    • 2.1Pretense versus echo
    • 2.2Verbal irony as a clash between scenarios
    • 2.3Pretended agreement
    • 2.4Chained reasoning schemas in verbal irony
  • 3.Situational irony
    • 3.1Previous accounts of situational irony
    • 3.2The epistemic scenario
    • 3.3Chained reasoning schemas in situational irony
  • 4.The unified approach: A common framework for verbal and situational irony
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 May 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.11.07rui
References (52)
References
Aikin, S. (2012). Pregnant premise arguments. Informal Logic, 32(3), 357–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alba Juez, L., & Attardo, S. (2014). The evaluative palette of verbal irony. In G. Thompson, & L. Alba-Juez (Eds.), Evaluation in Context (pp. 93–115). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasiadou, A. (2017a). Cultural conceptualisations of irony in Greek. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), Advances in cultural linguistics (pp. 111–124). Singapore: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017b). Irony has a metonymic basis. In A. Athanasiadou, & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 201–218). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Attardo, S. (2000). Irony markers and functions: Towards a goal-oriented theory of irony and its processing. Rask –International Journal of Language and Communication, 12(1), 3–20.Google Scholar
Barnden, J. (2017). Irony, pretence and fictively-elaborating hyperbole. In A. Athanasiadou, & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 145–178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booth, W. C. (1974). A rhetoric of irony. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Camp, E. (2012). Sarcasm, pretence and the semantics/pragmatics distinction. Noûs, 46, 587–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J. (1984). On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1, 121–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colebrook, C. (2004). Irony: The new critical idiom. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colston, H. L. (2017). Irony performance and perception. What underlies verbal, situational and other ironies? In A. Athanasiadou, & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 19–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colston, H. L., & Gibbs, R. W. Jr. (2002). Are irony and metaphor understood differently? Metaphor and Symbol, 17(1), 57–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S. (2005). Sarcasm and the space structuring model. In S. Coulson, & B. Lewandowska-Tomasczyk (Eds.), The literal and the nonliteral in language and thought (pp. 129–144). Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Currie, G. (2006). Why irony is pretence. In S. Nichols (Ed.), The architecture of the imagination (pp. 111–133). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elleström, L. (2002). Divine madness: On interpreting literature, music and the visual arts. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., & Colston, H. L. (2012). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., & Fein, O. (1999). Irony: Context and salience. Metaphor and Symbol, 14(4), 241–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., Givoni, S., & Fein, O. (2015). Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(4), 290–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. (1995). Functionalism and grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, P., & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, J., Miller, G. A., & Sperber, D. (1984). Test of the mention theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 112–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S., & Brown, M. (1995). How about another piece of the pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 124(1), 3–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucariello, J. (1994). Situational irony: A concept of events gone awry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123(2), 129–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). Mind, culture, person: Elements in a cultural psychology. Human Development, 38(1), 2–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucariello, J., & Mindolovich, C. (1995). The development of complex metarepresentational reasoning: The case of situational irony. Cognitive Development, 10(4), 551–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muecke, D. C. (1969). The compass of irony. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
(1970). Irony and the ironic: The critical idiom. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Palinkas, I. (2014). Metaphor, irony, and blending. Argumentum, 10, 611–630.Google Scholar
Popa-Wyatt, M. (2014). Pretence and echo: Towards and integrated account of verbal irony. International Review of Pragmatics, 6(1), 127–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Récanati, F. (2007). Indexicality, context and pretense: A speech-act theory account. In N. Burton-Roberts (Ed.), Advances in pragmatics (pp. 213–229). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2013). Meaning construction, meaning interpretation, and formal expression in the Lexical Constructional Model. In B. Nolan, & E. Diedrichsen (Eds.), Linking constructions into functional linguistics: The role of constructions in grammar (pp. 231–270). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017a). Cognitive modeling and irony. In A. Athanasiadou, & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 179–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017b). Metaphor and other cognitive operations in interaction: from basicity to complexity. In B. Hampe (Ed.), Metaphor: Embodied cognition, and discourse (pp. 138–159). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Galera, A. (2014). Cognitive modeling. A linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). The metonymic exploitation of descriptive, attitudinal, and regulatory scenarios in making meaning. In A. Baicchi (Ed.), Figurative Meaning Construction in Thought and Language (pp. 284–307). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Lozano-Palacio, I. (2019a). Unraveling irony: From linguistics to literary criticism and back. Cognitive Semantics, 5, 147–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019b). A Cognitive-Linguistic approach to complexity in irony: Dissecting the ironic echo. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(2), 127–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shelley, C. (2001). The bicoherence theory of situational irony. Cognitive Science, 25(5), 775–818. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. (1984). Verbal irony: Pretense or echoic mention? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 113(1), 130–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1981). Irony and the use-mention distinction. In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 295–318). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1990). Rhetoric and relevance. In J. Bender, & D. Wellbery (Eds.), The ends of rhetoric: History, theory, practice (pp. 140–156). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
(1995). Relevance. Communication and cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., Clément, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, O., Mercier, H., Origgi, G., & Wilson, D. (2010). Epistemic vigilance. Mind & Language, 25(4), 359–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. (2006). The pragmatics of verbal irony: Echo or pretence? Lingua, 116, 1722–1743. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Irony comprehension: A developmental perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 40–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (1992). On verbal irony. Lingua, 87, 53–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Explaining irony. In D. Wilson, & D. Sperber (Eds.), Meaning and relevance (pp. 123–145). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yus, F. (2016). Humour and relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Martín Gascón, Beatriz
2024. Chapter 11. Irony in American-English tweets. In Recent Advances in Multiword Units in Machine Translation and Translation Technology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 366], ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Ruiz-Moneva, María Angeles
2024. Figuring out Figuration. A cognitive linguistic account, written by Peña-Cervel, María Sandra and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez. Cognitive Semantics 10:1 ► pp. 116 ff. DOI logo
Ruiz-Moneva, María Ángeles
2023. Inés Lozano-Palacio and Francisco José Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez. 2022. Modeling Irony. A Cognitive-Pragmatic Account. Cognitive Semantics 9:2 ► pp. 345 ff. DOI logo
Barnden, John
2023. Irony, Exaggeration, and Hyperbole: No Embargo on the Cargo!. In The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought, ► pp. 272 ff. DOI logo
Lozano-Palacio, Inés
2023. A multidimensional approach to echoing. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 21:1 ► pp. 210 ff. DOI logo
Lozano-Palacio, Inés
2024. A cognitive-pragmatic account of the structural elements of the ironic event. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 11:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José Ruiz de
2023. Irony and Cognitive Operations. In The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought, ► pp. 38 ff. DOI logo
Tasnia, Radiathun, Nabila Ayman, Afrin Sultana, Abu Nowshed Chy & Masaki Aono
2023. Exploiting stacked embeddings with LSTM for multilingual humor and irony detection. Social Network Analysis and Mining 13:1 DOI logo
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, Francisco José & María Asunción Barreras Gómez
2022. Linguistic and metalinguistic resemblance. In Figurativity and Human Ecology [Figurative Thought and Language, 17], ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Modeling Irony [Figurative Thought and Language, 12], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Figuring out Figuration [Figurative Thought and Language, 14], DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. The Scope of Irony. In The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought, ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. Irony, Affect, and Related Figures. In The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought, ► pp. 235 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.