Cover not available
Part of
Metapragmatics of Humor: Current research trends
Edited by Leonor Ruiz-Gurillo
[IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 14] 2016
► pp. 127–143

A look at metalinguistic jokes based on intentional morphological reanalysis

| University of Alicante

This chapter analyses metalinguistic jokes produced by intentional morphological reanalysis, particularly, those which involve intentional morphological misinterpretations of morphemes or word parts. One single morpheme or word may be decomposed into pseudo-morphemes, through what Guiraud (1976) calls “defunctionalization” of language, which most often become fully meaningful and transparent due to their formal identity with an already existent free morpheme. Consequently, new, potential and highly motivated words are created with humorous purposes. In our sample, the manipulation and reinterpretation of the a priori indivisible word structures are supported by the existence of, mainly, homophones and paronyms, graphic marks and, less frequently, by slight spelling changes, e.g. Q: What do you give a skeleton for Valentine’s Day? A: Bone-bones in a heart-shaped box.

Keywords: metalinguistic jokes, morphological reanalysis, intentional morphological misinterpretation, ambiguity, word play
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.(Meta)linguistic Jokes: Puns and/or Word Play
  • 3.Objectives and methodology
  • 4.Intentional morphological reanalysis as a metalinguistic Joke/Pun-making strategy
    • 4.1Upgrading word boundaries and other non-morphological alterations
    • 4.2On the interpretation of semantic ambiguity or wordplay
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 24 November 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.14.07bal
References
Aarons, Debra
2012 Jokes and the Linguistic Mind. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Adams, Valerie
1973 An Introduction to Modern English Word Formation. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Alexander, Richard J.
1997 Aspects of Verbal Humour in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore
1994 Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2001 Humorous texts: A semantics and pragmatics analysis. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, Donalee H. Attardo, Paul Baltes, and Marnie J. Petray
1994 “The Linear Organization of Jokes: Analysis of Two Thousand Texts.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 7 (1): 27–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
1983 English Word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brône, Geert, Kurt Feyaerts, and Tony Veale
2006 “Introduction: Cognitive linguistic approaches to humor.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 19 (3): 203–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bucaria, Chiara
2004 Lexical and syntactic ambiguity as a source of humor: the case of newspaper headlines. Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 17 (3): 279–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cannon, Garland
1986 “Blends in English Word formation.” Linguistics 24 (4): 725–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiaro, Delia
1992 The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play. London and New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duffy, Susan, Gretchen Kambe, and Rayner, Keith
2001 “The effect of prior disambiguating context on the comprehension of ambiguous words: evidence from eye movements.” In On the Consequences of Meaning Selection: Perspectives on Resolving Lexical Ambiguity, ed. by David S. Gorfein, 27–43. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta
2009 Humorous Garden Paths: A Pragmatic-Cognitive Study. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Forabosco, Giovannantonio
1992 “Cognitive aspects of the humor process: the concept of incongruity.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 5 (1/2): 45–68.Google Scholar
2008 “Is the concept of incongruity still a useful construct for the advancement of humor research?” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4: 45–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, Rachel
2003 On Our Mind. Salience, Context, and Figurative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gorfein, David S.
(ed.) 2001 On the Consequences of Meaning Selection: Perspectives on Resolving Lexical Ambiguity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Paul
1975 “Logic and conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Guiraud, Pierre
1976 Les jeux de mots. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F.
1977 “Jokes.” In The View from Language: Selected Essays 1948-1964, 257–289. Athens: Georgia. [URL] (retrieved on 29/06/2015)
Lew, Robert
1996 “Exploitation of linguistic ambiguity in Polish and English jokes”. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 31: 127–133.Google Scholar
1997 “Toward a taxonomy of linguistic jokes.” Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 31: 123–152.Google Scholar
Martin, Rod
2007 The Psychology of Humor. An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R.
1993 Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
2004 “Non-verbal humor and joke performance.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 17 (4): 401–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Humor in interaction.” Language and Linguistics Compass 4: 232–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oaks, Dallin D.
1994 “Creating Structural Ambiguities in Humor: Getting English Grammar to Cooperate.” Humor – International Journal of Humor Research 7 (4): 377–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Partington, Alan
2006 The Linguistics of Laughter. A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pepicello, William J.
1987 “Pragmatics of humorous language.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 65: 27–35.Google Scholar
Pepicello, William J., and Thomas Green
1984 The Language of Riddles. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Raskin, Victor
1985 Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Rediel.Google Scholar
1987 “Linguistic heuristics of humor: A script-based semantic approach.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 65: 11–25.Google Scholar
Redfern, Walter
1984 Puns. Oxford, New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ritchie, Graeme
2004 The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roop, Peter, and Connie Roop
2004 Make Me Laugh! Holiday Howlers. Jokes for Punny Parties. Minneapolis: Carolrhoda Books, Inc.Google Scholar
Ross, Alison
1998 The Language of Humor. London and New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Sam, and Brian Gable
2004 Make Me Laugh! Don’t Kid Yourself. Relatively Great (Family) Jokes. Minneapolis: Carolrhoda Books, Inc.Google Scholar
Seewoester, Sarah
2011 “The role of syllables and morphemes as mechanisms in humorous pun formation.” In The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains, ed. by Marta Dynel, 71–104. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1981 “Irony and the use-mention distinction.” In Pragmatics. A Reader 1991, ed. by Steven Davis, 550–563. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Suls, Jerry M.
1972 “A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: an information processing analysis”. In The Psychology of Humor, ed. by Jeffrey H. Goldstein and Paul E. McGhee, 81–100. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taha, Abdul Karim
1983 “Types of syntactic ambiguity in English.” International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 21: 251–266.Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco
1997 “La teoría de la relevancia y la estrategia humorística de la incongruencia-resolución.” Pragmalingüística 3–4: 497–508.Google Scholar
2008 “A Relevance-Theoretic Classification of Jokes.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics. Special Issue on Humour 4 (1): 131–157.Google Scholar
Zabalbeascoa, Patrick
1996 “Translating jokes for dubbed television situation comedies.” The Translator 2 (2): 235–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar