Cover not available
Part of
The Pragmatics of Irony and Banter
Edited by Manuel Jobert and Sandrine Sorlin
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 30] 2018
► pp. 1–17

Chapter 2
Irony in a theory of textual meaning

| University of Huddersfield, UK

This chapter attempts to map out different types of irony, using a model of communication which encompasses a range of potential meaning including linguistic, textual, interpersonal and . It is argued that the resulting description of potentially ironic examples can help to show where apparently different types have overlap. It also attempts to demonstrate the boundaries of irony in relation to linguistic more generally and to articulate some of the distinctions between irony and other forms of apparent clash such as and hypocrisy. The chapter concludes that irony can occur without intention and despite, not because of, an audience, though both intentionality and addressee(s) are needed for the most recognisable forms of .

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. : The background
  • 3.Typology of the bases of irony
    • 3.1Text vs. text
    • 3.2Text vs.
    • 3.3Text vs. situational
    • 3.4Interpersonal vs.
    • 3.5Interpersonal vs.
    • 3.6Situational vs. situational
  • 4.Irony and other incongruities
  • 5.
  • 6.Conclusions about irony
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lal.30.02jef
References
Attardo, Salvatore
2000 Irony as relevant inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics 32(6): 793–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booth, Wayne
1974 A Rhetoric of Irony. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
1999 Irony in conversation. Language in Society 28(4): 523–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor
2014 The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W.
1986 On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115(1): 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994 The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel, Givoni, Shir, & Fein, Ofer
2015 Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol 30(4): 290–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John
1998; 2001 Talk is Cheap: Sarcasm, Alienation, and the Evolution of Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1985 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
2016 Aspects of Language and Learning, Jonathan J. Webster (ed.). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jeffries, Lesley
2007 Textual Construction of the Female Body. Houndmills: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 Critical Stylistics. Houndmills: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Critical stylistics. In The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics, Michael Burke (ed.), 408–420. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2014 Interpretation. In The Handbook of Stylistics, Peter Stockwell & Sara Whiteley (eds), 469–486. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015a Critical stylistics. In The Continuum Companion to Stylistics, Violeta Sotirova (ed.), 157–176. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
2015b Textual meaning and its place in a theory of language. Topics in Linguistics 15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey & Short, Michael
2007 Style in Fiction. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Nash, Walter
1985 The Language of Humour. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simpson, Paul
2003 On the Discourse of Satire. Towards a Stylistic Model of Satirical Humour [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 2]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “That’s not ironic, that’s just stupid!” Towards an eclectic account of the discourse of irony. In The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 210], Marta Dynel (ed.), 33–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Statham, Simon & Rocío Montoro
2019. The year’s work in stylistics 2018. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 28:4 ► pp. 354 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 september 2023. 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.