The paper starts from the assumption that organisational culture, a type of behaviour considered acceptable by employees (Hofstede and Hofstede 2004), is not pre-extant but is jointly created during the interactions of the people working together. This paper is part of a longer study that has analysed institutional talk in a multinational company based in Romania by looking at different aspects of interaction such as types of questions, modality, mitigation, politeness and frames. The paper tries to identify the uses and functions of humour in the exchanges between the team leader and the team members in this multinational company.
1991 “Script Theory Revisited: Joke Similarity and Joke Representation Model”. Humour: International Journal of Humour Research 3-41: 293–347.
1994Linguistic Theories of Humour. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.
2002 “Humour and Irony in Interaction From Mode Adoption to Failure of Detection”. In Say not to Say: New Perspectives on Miscommunication, Vol. 31, ed. by Luigi Anolli, Rita Ciceri, and Giuseppe Riva, 166–186. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
2002a “Translation and Humour: An Approach Based on the General Theory of Verbal Humour (GTVH)”. The Translator 8 (2). Special Issue. Translating Humour: 173–194.
Berger, Arthur Asa
1993An Anatomy of Humor. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2009 “Modality in Institutional Talk”. In Intercultural Communication in Multinational Companies, ed. by Liliana Coposescu, 47–60. Brașov: Editura Universității Transilvania din Brașov.
Colston, Herbert L., and Jennifer O’Brien
2000 “Contrast and Pragmatics in Figurative Language: Anything Understatement can do, Irony can do Better”. Journal of Pragmatics 32 (11): 1557–1583.
Coposescu, Liliana, and Silviu Coposescu
2009 “Humour at Work”. In Intercultural Communication in Multinational Companies, ed. by Liliana Coposescu, 83–102. Brașov: Editura Universității Transilvania din Brașov.
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
1992Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1976Les jeux de mots. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
2009Professional Discourse. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
2000 “Functions of Humour in the Conversation of Men and Women.” Journal of Pragmatics 321: 709–722.
Hill, Brooks L., and R. Kennan William
1979 “Mythmaking as Social Process: Directions for Myth Analysis and Cross Cultural Communication Research”. In Intercultural Theory and Practice, ed. by William G.Davey, 44–66. Washington: SIETAR Georgetown University.
Hill, Brooks L., and Brandon Fitzgerald
2002 “Humour Reconsidered with Prospects for Interethnic Relations”. Intercultural Communication Studies 11 (4): 93–108.
Hofstede, Geert, and Geert-Jan Hofstede
2004Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw-Hill USA.
2000 “Politeness, Power and Provocation: How Humour Functions in the Workplace”. Discourse Studies 2 (2): 159–185.
Holmes, Janet, and Meredith Marra
2004 “Relational Practice in the Workplace: Women’s Talk or Gendered Discourse.” Language in Society 331: 377–398.
2006Gendered Talk at Work. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
2006a “Sharing a Laugh: Pragmatic Aspects of Humour and Gender in the Workplace.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 26–50.
2022. The Use of Humor in Employee-to-Employee Workplace Communication: A Systematic Review With Thematic Synthesis. International Journal of Business Communication► pp. 232948842110699 ff.
Tonelli, Maria José & Felipe Zambaldi
2019. HUMOR NA ACADEMIA E PESQUISAS SOBRE HUMOR. Revista de Administração de Empresas 59:2 ► pp. 80 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 august 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.