Cover not available
Part of
Participation in Public and Social Media Interactions
Edited by Marta Dynel and Jan Chovanec
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 256] 2015
► pp. 135–155

Humour in microblogging

Exploiting linguistic humour strategies for identity construction in two Facebook focus groups

ORCID logo
ORCID logo
Research within interpersonal pragmatics highlights the relational aspect of language in use (Locher and Graham 2010). While this focus has especially been dealt with in politeness research, it can also be fruitfully combined with the study of identity construction through language (see Locher 2008). The use of humour is such a means of identity construction since showing a sense of humour in interaction is valued in many contexts. This chapter reports on a project on Facebook status updates (see Bolander and Locher 2010, Locher and Bolander 2014) and thus provides insights into identity construction in an interactive Web 2.0 social network site, where the participation framework is such that status updates are written in a semi-public environment in front of an audience of ratified Facebook friends, who can decide to move from the role of overhearer/eavesdropper to participating actively. We conducted a qualitative discourse analytic study of how humour is used in status updates by participants of two Facebook focus groups. These humorous acts of microblogging (Zhao and Rosson 2009; Yus 2011; Zappavigna 2012) are contrasted with different types of identity construction in the other status updates. While some but not all convey that they have a sense of humour, others also evoke identities in connection with other personality traits, as well as making pastime, work, and relationships claims.
Published online: 12 February 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.256.06loc
References (56)
References
Alexander, Bryan. 2011. The New Digital Storytelling. Creating Narratives with New Media. Santa Barbara, Denver and Oxford: Praeger.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2012. “‘Greeklish’: Transliteration Practice and Discourse in the Context of Computer-mediated Communication. In Orthography as Social Action: Scripts, Spelling, Identity and Power, ed. by Alexandra Jaffe, Jannis Androutsopoulos, Mark Sebba, and Sally Johnson, 359–392. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Baron, Naomi S., Lauren Squires, Sara Tench, and Marshall Thompson. 2005. “Tethered or Mobile? Use of away Messages in Instant Messaging by American College Students.” In Mobile Communications: Re-Negotiation of the Social Sphere, ed. by Rich Ling and Per Pedersen, 293–311. London: Springer-Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baym, Nancy. 1995. “The Performance of Humour in Computer-mediated Communication.” Journal of Computer-mediated Communication 1 (2). Available at: [URL] (2013-06-13).Google Scholar
Bolander, Brook, and Miriam A. Locher. 2010. “Constructing Identity on Facebook: Report on a Pilot Study.” In Performing the Self, ed. by Karen Junod and Didier Maillat, 165–185. Tübingen: Narr Francke.Google Scholar
. In press. “‘Peter is a Dumb Nut’: Status Updates and Reactions to them as ‘Acts of Positioning’ in Facebook.” Pragmatics.
Boyd, Danah. 2011. “Social Network Sites as Networked Publics. Affordances, Dynmaics, and Implications.” In A Networked Self. Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites, ed. by Zizi Papacharissi, 39–58. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Boyd, Danah M., and Nicole B. Ellison. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13. Available at: [URL] (2012-07-07). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall. 2005. “Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach.” Discourse Studies 7 (4–5): 585–614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelli, Gloria. 2008. “Expats’ Talk: Humour and Irony in an Expatriate’s Travel Blog.” Textus XXI (1): 9–26.Google Scholar
Chovanec, Jan, and Marta Dynel. This volume. “Researching Interactional Forms and Participant Structures in Public and Social Media”.
Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danet, Brenda, Lucia Ruedenberg-Wright, and Yehudit Rosenbaum-Tamari. 1997. “‘HMMM… WHERE’S THAT SMOKE COMING FROM?’: Writing, Play and Performance on Internet Relay Chat.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2(4). Available at:, (2013-06-13).Google Scholar
Davies, Bronwyn, and Rom Harré. 1990. “Positioning: The Social Construction of Self.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 20: 43–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Del-Teso-Craviotto, Marisol. 2006. “Language and Sexuality in Spanish and English dating chats.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10: 460–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eldon, Eric. 2011. “Facebook is Testing a “Translate” button for Comments on Pages.” Available at: [URL] [URL] (Accessed on 1 July 2013).
Ess, CharlesThe AoIR Ethics Working Committee, and . 2002. “Ethical Decision-making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the aoir Ethics Working Committee.” Available at: [URL] (Accessed on 6 July 2012).
Eysenbach, Gunther, and James E. Till. 2001. “Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research on Internet Communities.” British Medical Journal 323: 1103–1105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2007. Small Stories, Interaction and Identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer. 2000. “Functions of Humor in the Conversations of Men and Women.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 709–742. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. “The Pragmatics of Humor Support.” Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 14 (1): 55–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herring, Susan C. 1996. “Posting in a Different Voice: Gender and Ethics in Computer-mediated Communication.” In Philosophical Perspectives in Computer-mediated Communication, ed. by Charles Ess, 115–145. Albany: Suny Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, Reconfigured, and Emergent.” In Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 2011: Discourse 2.0: Language and New Media, ed. by Deborah Tannen and Anna Marie Trester, 1–25. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 2000. “Politeness, Power and Provocation: How Humour Functions in the Workplace.” Discourse Studies 2 (2): 159–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., and Christa Dürscheid. 2012. “The Linguistics of Keyboard-to-Screen Communication. A New Terminological Framework.” Linguistik Online 56 (6/12): 39–64. Available at: [URL] (Accessed on 13 June 2013).Google Scholar
Lee, Carmen. 2011. “Micro-blogging and Status Updates on Facebook: Texts and Practices.” In Digital Discourse. Language in the New Media, ed. by Crispin Thurlow and Kristine Mroczek, 110–128. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2008. “Relational Work, Politeness and Identity Construction.” In Handbooks of Applied Linguistics. Volume 2: Interpersonal Communication, ed. by Gerd Antos, Eija Ventola and Tilo Weber, 509–540. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Electronic Discourse.” In Pragmatics of Discourse, ed. by Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron, 555–581. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Brook Bolander. 2014. “Relational Work and the Display of Multilingualism in Two Facebook Groups.” In Face Work & Social Media, ed. by Kristina Bedijs, Christiane Maaß, and Gudrun Held, 157–191. Münster: Lit-Verlag.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Sage L. Graham. 2010. “Introduction to Interpersonal Pragmatics.” In Interpersonal Pragmatics, ed. by Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 1–13. Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A., and Richard J. Watts, 2008. “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behaviour.” In Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, ed. by Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher, 77–99. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Marcoccia, Michel. 2004. “On-line Polylogues: Conversational Structure and Participant Framework in Internet Newsgroups.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 115–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markham, Annette, and Elizabeth Buchanancontributions from the AOIR Ethics Working Committee, with . 2012. Ethical Decision-making and Internet Research 2.0: Recommendations from the Aoir Ethics Working Committee. Available at: [URL] (2013-04-05).
Marley, Carol. 2010. “Interpersonal Issues in the Discourse of Dating Ads.” In Interpersonal Pragmatics, ed. by Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 435–462. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Morris, Merrill, and Christine Ogan. 1996. “The Internet as a Mass Medium.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 1(4). Available at: [URL]. (Accessed on 24 November 2014).Google Scholar
Mullany, Louise. 2004. “Gender, Politeness and Institutional Power Roles: Humour as a Tactic to gain Compliance in Workplace Business Meetings.” Multilingua 23 (1–2): 13–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nastri, Jacqueline, Jorge Peña, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2006. “The Construction of away Messages: A Speech Act Analysis.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11(4), article 7. Available at: [URL] (Accessed on 13 June 2013). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
North, Sarah. 2007. “‘The Voices, the Voices’: Creativity in Online Conversation.” Applied Linguistics 28: 538–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oring, Elliott. 2008. Engaging Humor. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Page, Ruth. 2012. Stories and Social Media: Identities and Interaction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Petroni, Sandra. 2009. “Affectivity and Humour in Computer-mediated Communication: Can they Survive in a Virtual Domain?” Rivista di Psicolinguistica Applicata 9: 53–75.Google Scholar
Schnurr, Stephanie, and Charley Rowe. 2008. “The ‘Dark Side’ of Humour: An Analysis of Subversive Humour in Workplace Emails.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4: 109–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schnurr, Stephanie. 2009. “Constructing Leader Identities Through Teasing at Work.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (6): 1125–1138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Humour.” In Interpersonal Pragmatics, ed. by Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 307–326. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Shifman, Limor and Dafna Lemish. 2010. “Between Feminism and Fun (ny)mism: Analysing Gender in Popular Internet Humour.” Information, Communication and Society 13 (6): 870–891. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sundén, Jenny. 2003. Material Virtualities: Approaching Online Textual Embodiment. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Thurlow, Crispin, and Kristine Mroczek. 2011. “Introduction. Fresh Perpespectives on New Media Sociolinguistics.” In Digital Discourse. Language in the New Media, ed. by Crispin Thurlow and Kristine Mroczek, xix–xliv. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandergriff, Ilona, and Carolin Fuchs. 2009. “Does CMC Promote Language Play? Exploring Humor in Two Modalities.” CALICO Journal 27(1). Available at: [URL] (Accessed on 13 June 2013). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watzlawick, Paul, Janet Helmick Beavin, and Don D. Jackson. 1967. Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
West, Laura, and Anna Marie Trester. 2013. “Facework on Facebook: Conversations on Social Media.” In Discourse 2.0: Language and New Media, ed. by Deborah Tannen and Anna Marie Trester, 133–154. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Yus, Francisco. 2011. Cyberpragmatics: Internet-Mediated Communication in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele. 2012. Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How We Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Zhao, Shanyang, Sherri Grasmuck, and Jason Martin. 2008. “Identity Construction on Facebook: Digital Empowerment in Anchored Relationships.” Computers in Human Behavior 24 (5): 1816–1836. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Dejin and Mary Beth Rosson. 2009. “How and Why People Twitter: The Role that Micro–blogging Plays in Informal Communication at Work.” Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work , 243–252.
Zuckerberg, Mark. 2010. “Giving You More Control.” Available at: [URL] (Accessed on 19 June 2013).
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Mortazavi, Seyed Mohammadreza, Hamed Zandi & Mohammad Makki
2023. “A history lesson, perhaps, for my novice counterpart”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict DOI logo
张, 梓渝
2023. A Case Study of the Phenomenon of “Nonsense Responses” in Online Conflict Talks from the Perspective of Rapport Management. Modern Linguistics 11:05 ► pp. 1889 ff. DOI logo
Bolander, Brook & Miriam A. Locher
2022. “Peter is a dumb nut”. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Locher, Miriam A., Brook Bolander & Nicole Höhn
2022. Introducing relational work in Facebook and discussion boards. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Yus, Francisco
2021. Pragmatics, humour and the internet. Internet Pragmatics 4:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Yus, Francisco
2023. Humour on Social Networking Sites. In Pragmatics of Internet Humour, ► pp. 189 ff. DOI logo
Yus, Francisco
2023. Beyond Humour: Relevant Affective Effects. In Pragmatics of Internet Humour, ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Chovanec, Jan & Villy Tsakona
2018. Chapter 1. Investigating the dynamics of humor. In The Dynamics of Interactional Humor [Topics in Humor Research, 7], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. Exploring the Sociopragmatics of Online Humor [Topics in Humor Research, 12], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.