Cover not available
Article published In:
(Inter)Cultural Dialogues
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu
[Language and Dialogue 13:3] 2023
► pp. 383–406

The drama of dialogue action in distinct discourse spaces

Conservative and liberal humour in television talk shows

| Jagiellonian University
The article addresses the issue of intracultural dialogue between two strong political mindsets, liberal and conservative. This polarization is typical of contemporary cultural divides and emerges in the public sphere through mass media, often finding its outlet through humour, which may be treated as a mediating factor. It will be discussed on the example of a popular Polish humorous talk show broadcast on the public TV channel as compared to one broadcast on commercial television. The central finding of the study, seemingly replicable for other languages and television cultures, is the discovery of the central item on the discursive agenda, i.e., a worldview hiding in the conservative epistemic stance that assumes the authority of the journalists running the show.
Keywords: conservatism, political satire, cultural mindset, dialogue action, polarization strategies, Polish television shows
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Right-wing vs left-wing humour in the lens of dialogue scholars and humour scholars
  • 3.Conservative vs liberal stance: The Polish style
  • 4.The two Polish talk shows in counterpoint
  • 5.Analysis of selected examples
    • 5.1Speaker’s authority – Omniscient satirist (WTW) vs speaker’s distance (SZK)
    • 5.2Humour targets and negative sterotypes
    • 5.3Sarcasm and irony
    • 5.4Play of imagination vs targeted humour
    • 5.5The literal vs the metaphorical
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 September 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00156.chl
References (27)
References
Attardo, Salvatore. 2020. The Linguistics of Humor. An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Humor 2.0: How the Internet Changed Humor. London, New York: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
Billig, Michael. 2005. Laughter and Ridicule: Toward a Social Critique of Humour. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cap, Piotr. 2008. “Towards the Proximization Model of the Analysis of Legitimization in Political Discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 401: 17–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carrell, Amy. 1997. “Humor Communities”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 10 (1): 11–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chłopicki, Władysław. 2009. “The “Szkło kontaktowe” show: A return to the old irrationality?” In Permitted laughter: socialist, post-socialist and never-socialist humour, ed. by Arvo Krikmann and Liisi Laineste, 171–181. Tartu: ELM Scholarly Press.Google Scholar
Colman, Andrew M., and Gorman, L. Paul. 1982. “Conservatism, Dogmatism, and Authoritarianism in British Police Officers.” Sociology 16 (1): 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daviess, Beth. 2019. “Making Memes and Shitposting: The Powerful Political Discourse of Alt-right Meme Culture” (June 5, 2019). Available at [URL]
Eagleton, Terry. 2019. Humour. Yale: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Heinz, Sonja et al. 2020. “Benevolent and Corrective Humor, Life Satisfaction, and Broad Humor Dimensions: Extending the Nomological Network of the BenCor across 25 Countries.” Journal of Happiness Studies 21 (7): 2473–2492. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hietalahti, Jarno. 2023. “Book review: Weaver, Simon (2022). The Rhetoric of Brexit Humour: Comedy, Populism and the EU Referendum. London and New York: Routledge.” The European Journal of Humour Research 11 (1): 218–222.Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2010. “The Paradox of Communication: A Socio-Cognitive Approach.” Pragmatics and Society 1 (1): 50–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “A Dialogic Approach to Pragmatics.” Russian Journal of Linguistics 20 (4): 26–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuipers, Giselinde. 2009. “Humor Styles and Symbolic Boundaries.” Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2): 219–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. forthcoming. “Humour and Polarization: How the Clown Style in 21st Century Drives People Apart, in Politics and Beyond.”
Laaksonen, Salla-Maria, Joonas Koivukoski, and Merja Porttikivi. 2022. “Clowning around a Polarized Issue: Rhetorical Strategies and Communicative Outcomes of a Political Parody Performance by Loldiers of Odin.” New Media & Society 24 (8): 1912–1931. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruch, Willibald. 1992. “Assessment of Appreciation of Humor: Studies with the 3 WD Humor Test.” In Advances in Personality Assessment, Vol. 91, ed. by Charles D. Spielberger and James N. Butcher, 27–75. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Săftoiu, Răzvan. 2014. “Review of Cap, Piotr. 2013. Proximization. The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing .” Language and Dialogue 4 (3): 497–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sienkiewicz, Matt and Nick Marx. 2022. That’s not Funny: How the Right Makes Comedy Work for Them. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Underhill, James. 2009. Humboldt, Worldview and Language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. Ethnolinguistics and Cultural Concepts: Truth, Love, Hate and War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhulst, Brad, Lindon J. Eaves, and Peter K. Hatemi. 2012. “Correlation not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies.” American Journal of Political Science 56(1): 34–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weaver, Simon. 2022. The Rhetoric of Brexit Humour: Comedy, Populism and the EU Referendum. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda. 2017. “The Mixed Game Model: A Holistic Theory.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Dialogue, ed. by Edda Weigand. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2021. “Dialogue: The Complex Whole.” Language and Dialogue 11 (3): 457–486. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zijp, Dick. 2014. Re-thinking Dutch Cabaret: The Conservative Implications of Humour in the Dutch Cabaret Tradition. MA Thesis. University of Amsterdam.
Żygulski, Kazimierz. 1976. Wspólnota śmiechu. Studium socjologiczne komizmu [Community of Laughter. A Sociological Study of Comedy]. Warszawa: PIW.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Laineste, Liisi & Anastasiya Fiadotava
2024. Polarised but similar. The European Journal of Humour Research 12:1 ► pp. 194 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.