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. 81–99

Chapter 5
Irony and semantic prosody revisited

| University of Huddersfield, UK
This chapter explore Louw’s (1993) claim that deviation from conventionalised semantic prosodies can be indicative of irony. Taking account of criticisms of the concept of semantic prosody, I analyse a short extract from a sketch from the 1960 satirical revue Beyond the Fringe. I argue that the satire in the sketch derives in part from the projected irony and that semantic prosody can be a useful tool in uncovering this. However, I argue that to fully reveal the source of the ironic effects, it is necessary to utilise a more nuanced approach to semantic prosody, as well as to consider how semantic prosodies clash with each other, and how concepts such as semantic preference and Gricean implicature act as further triggers of irony.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2. Semantic prosody
    • 2.1 Semantic prosody and irony
    • 2.2 Semantic prosody as one aspect of extended units of meaning
    • 2.3 Semantic prosody versus semantic preference
  • 3.Irony in “Aftermyth of war”
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lal.30.05mci
References (25)
References
Baker, Paul. 2006. Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Bennett, Alan, Cook, Peter, Miller, Jonathan & Moore, Dudley. 1963[1987]. Aftermyth of war. In The Complete Beyond the Fringe, Alan Bennett, Peter Cook, Dudley Moore & Jonathan Miller (eds), 72–78. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Berry-Roghe, George. 1973. The computation of collocations and their relevance to lexical studies. In The Computer and Literary Studies, Adam J. Aitken, Richard W. Bailey & Neil Hamilton-Smith (eds), 103–12. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Dunning, Ted. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics 19(1): 61–74.Google Scholar
Fowler, Roger. 1977. Linguistics and the Novel. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, Volume III: Speech Acts, Peter Cole & Jerry Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan. 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Semantic prosody revisited. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 12(2): 249–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam & Tugwell, David. 2001. WASP-Bench: An MT lexicographers’ workstation supporting state-of-the-art lexical disambiguation. In Proceedings of the MT Summit VIII , 187–190, Santiago de Compostela, September.
Lodge, David. 1984. Small World. London: Secker & Warburg.Google Scholar
Louw, Bill. 1993. Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, Mona Baker, Gill Francis & Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds), 157–176. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Contextual prosodic theory: Bringing semantic prosodies to life. In Words in Context: A Tribute to John Sinclair on his Retirement, Chris Heffer & Helen Sauntson (eds), 48–94. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Louw, Bill & Milojkovic, Marija. 2016. Corpus Stylistics as Contextual Prosodic Theory and Subtext [Linguistic Approaches to Literature 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mason, Oliver. 1999. Parameters of collocation: The word in the centre of gravity. In Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English, John M. Kirk (ed.), 267–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Morely, John & Partington, Alan. 2007. A few frequently asked questions about semantic – or evaluative – prosody. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 14(2): 139–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oakes, Michael. 1998. Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank. ed. 1968. Selected Papers of J. R. Firth 1952–1959. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Partington, Alan. 2004. Utterly content in each other’s company: Semantic prosody and semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 131–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simpson, Paul. 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
Sinclair, John. 1998. The lexical item. In Contrastive Lexical Semantics [Current Issues Linguistic Theory 171], Edda Weigand (ed.), 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stewart, Dominic. 2010. Semantic Prosody: A Critical Evaluation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stubbs, Michael. 2007. Quantitative data on multi-word sequences in English: The case of the word world . In Text, Discourse and Corpora: Theory and Analysis, Michael Hoey, Michaela Mahlberg, Michael Stubbs & Wolfgang Teubert (eds), 163–189. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Thomas, Jenny. 1995. Meaning in Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Whitsitt, Sam. 2005. A critique of the concept of semantic prosody. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(3): 283–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

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 21 october 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.