Chapter in:
Dynamism in Metaphor and BeyondEdited by Herbert L. Colston, Teenie Matlock and Gerard J. Steen
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 9] 2022
► pp. 305–324
Defaultness vs. constructionism
The case of default constructional sarcasm and default non-constructional literalness
Rachel Giora | Tel Aviv University
Default responses play a major role in affecting processing, pleasantness, and cueing of nondefault alternatives. Default responses are activated automatically, initially and directly, faster than nondefault counterparts, irrespective of degree of negation, novelty, nonliteralness, or contextual support (Giora et al., 2015c). No wonder default automatic responses may be initially involved in processing nondefault counterparts. This involvement of defaultness in processing nondefaultness slows down the latter while rendering it Optimal Innovative and therefore pleasing, even if highly dependent on context or cueing for its derivation. Findings here are discussed in terms of the Defaultness Hypothesis (Giora et al., 2015c, 2017), Construction Grammar (e.g., Goldberg, 1995, 1996, 2006, 2013; Johnson & Goldberg, 2013), and pragmatic effects.
Keywords: the defaultness hypothesis, the optimal innovation hypothesis, default and nondefault sarcasm, hedonic effects, construction grammar, non/constructional interpretations, pragmatic cueing
Article outline
- 1.Overview
- 2.Testing the defaultness hypothesis
- 2.1Defining defaultness
- 2.1.1Conditions for default interpretations
- 2.2Predictions
- 2.2.1Processing: The speed superiority of default over nondefault interpretations
- 2.2.2Pleasure: The role of defaultness in affecting pleasure
- 2.2.3Cueing: Rejecting default interpretations while inviting nondefault counterparts
- 2.2.3.1Cues inviting nondefault sarcastic interpretations of affirmatives
- 2.2.3.2Weighing cues explicitly rejecting defaultness vs. explicitly intensifying defaultness (of negative sarcasm)
- 2.1Defining defaultness
- 3.The role of defaultness in affecting processing, pleasure, and pragmatic cueing
- 4.Constructions
- 5.Conclusions: Non/default vs. non/constructional interpretations
-
Acknowledgements -
Notes -
References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References
Adler, Meni
2007 Hebrew morphological disambiguation: An unsupervised stochastic word-based approach (unpublished PhD dissertation, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel).
Baroni, Marco, Silvia Bernardini, Adriano Ferraresi & Eros Zanchetta
Becker, I. & Giora, R.
Biacchi, A.
Bianchi, I., Paradis, C., Burro, R., van de Weijer, J., Nyström, M. & Savardi, U.
Clausner, T. C., & Croft, W.
Fein, O., Yeari, M., & Giora, R.
Filik, R., Howman, H., Ralph-Nearman, C., & Giora, R.
Filik, R., Țurcan, A., Thompson, D., Harvey, N., Davies, H., & Turner, A.
Giora, R.
Giora, R., Cholev, A., Fein, O. & Peleg, O.
Giora, R., Drucker, A., Fein, O. & Mendelson, I.
Giora, R., Fein, O., Kotler, N., & Shuval, N.
Giora, R., Fein, O., Kronrod, A., Elnatan, I., Shuval, N., & Zur, A.
Giora, R., Givoni, S., & Fein, O.
Giora, R., Givoni, S., Heruti, V., & Fein, O.
Giora, R., Jaffe, I., Becker, I. & Fein, O.
Giora, R., Livnat, E., Fein, O., Barnea, A., Zeiman, R. & Berger, I.
Giora, R., Zaidel, E., Soroker, N., Batori, G., and Kasher, A.
Givón, T.
Givoni, S. & Giora, R.
Givoni, S., Giora, R., & Bergerbest, D.
Goldberg, A. E.
Grice, H. P.
Hilpert, M.
Johnson, M., & Goldberg, A. E.
Jung-Beeman, M.
Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý & Vít Suchomel
Levy, G.
(2015) Israel’s Low Court of Justice Helps Perpetuate the Occupation. http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.652428
Partington, A.
Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. Th.
Sulis, E., Hernandez-Farias, D. I., Rosso, P., Patti, V., & Ruffo, G.
Thompson, D., & Filik, R.