Understanding Conversational Joking

A cognitive-pragmatic study based on Russian interactions

| Vienna University of Economics and Business
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027207357 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027260925 | EUR 95.00 | USD 143.00
 
This book examines the diverse forms of conversational humor with the help of examples drawn from casual interactions among Russian speakers. It argues that neither an exclusively discourse-analytic perspective on the phenomenon nor an exclusively cognitive one can adequately account for conversational joking. Instead, the work advocates reconciling these two perspectives in order to describe such humor as a form of cognitive and communicative creativity, by means of which interlocutors convey additional meanings and imply further interpretive frames. Accordingly, in order to analyze cognition in interaction, it introduces a discourse-semantic framework which complements mental spaces and blending theory with ideas from discourse analysis. On the one hand, this enables both the emergent and interactive character and the surface features of conversational joking to be addressed. On the other, it incorporates into the analysis those normally backgrounded cognitive processes responsible for the additional meanings emerging from, and communicated by jocular utterances.
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 310]  2020.  x, 287 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
List of figures
vii–viii
Transcription conventions
ix–x
Chapter 1. Introduction
1–11
Chapter 2. Conversational joking from a discourse-analytic perspective
13–103
Chapter 3. Humor as a cognitive phenomenon
105–184
Chapter 4. Conversational humor from a discourse-semantic perspective
185–258
Chapter 5. Conclusion
259–261
References
263–282
Appendix
283
Index
285–287
References

References

Aarons, Debra
2012Jokes and the Linguistic Mind. New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Antonopoulou, Eleni, and Kiki Nikiforidou
2009 “Deconstructing Verbal Humour with Construction Grammar.” In Cognitive Poetics: Goals, Gains and Gaps, ed. by Geert Brône, and Jereon Vandaele, 289–316. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2011 “Construction Grammar and Conventional Discourse: A Construction-Based Approach to Discoursal Incongruity.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (10): 2594–2609. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Antonopoulou, Eleni, and Maria Sifianou
2003 “Conversational Dynamics of Humour: The Game in Greek.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 741–769. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Archakis, Argiris, Maria Giakoumelou, Dimitris Papazachariou, and Villy Tsakona
2010 “The Prosodic Framing of Humour in Conversational Narratives: Evidence from Greek Data.” Journal of Greek Linguistics 10: 187–212. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asinovsky, Aleksandr S., Natalia V. Bogdanova, Marina V. Rusakova, Anastassia I. Ryko, Svetlana B. Stepanova, and Tatiana Yu. Sherstinova
2009 “The ORD Speech Corpus of Russian Everyday Communication ‘One Speaker’s Day’: Creation Principles and Annotation.” In Text, Speech, and Dialogue TDS 2009, ed. by Vladimir Matoušek, and Peter Mautner, 250–257. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore
1993 “Violation of Conversational Maxims and Cooperation: The Case of Jokes.” Journal of Pragmatics 19: 537–558. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
1997a “Locutionary and Perlocutionary Cooperation: The Perlocutionary Cooperative Principle.” Journal of Pragmatics 27: 753–779. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997b “The Semantic Foundations of Cognitive Theories of Humor.” Humor 10: 395–420. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998 “Are Socio-Pragmatics and (Neo)-Gricean Pragmatics Incompatible?Journal of Pragmatics 30: 627–636. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002 “Humor and Irony in Interaction: From Mode Adoption to Failure of Detection.” In Say Not to Say. New Perspectives on Miscommunication, ed. by Luigi Anolli, Rita Ciceri, and Giuseppe Riva, 166–188. Amsterdam and Washington: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, Jodi Eisterhold, Jennifer Hay, and Isabella Poggi
2003 “Multimodal Markers of Irony and Sarcasm.” Humor 16 (2): 243–260. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, Christian Hempelmann, and Sarah Di Maio
2002 “Script Oppositions and Logical Mechanisms: Modeling Incongruities and Their Resolutions.” Humor 15 (1): 3–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, and Victor Raskin
1991 “Script Theory Revis(it)ed: Joke Similarity and Joke Representation Model.” Humor 4: 293–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter
1986 “Kontextualisierung.” Studium Linguistik 19: 22–47.Google Scholar
1992 “Introduction: John Gumperz’ Approach to Contextualization.” In The Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer, and Aldo di Luzio, 1–37. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “Projection in Interaction and Projection in Grammar.” Text 25 (1): 7–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Zum Segmentierungsproblem in der Gesprochenen Sprache.” InLiSt 49: 1–19. http://​www​.inlist​.uni​-bayreuth​.de​/issues​/49​/InList49​.pdf (latest access 10/12/2014).
Auer, Peter, and Aldo di Luzio
(eds) 1992The Contextualization of Language. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Michail
2003 “Speech Genres.” In The Bakhtin Reader. Selected Writings of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov, ed. by Pam Morris, 80–88. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Bange, Pierre
1985 “Fiktion im Gespräch.” In Kommunikationstypologie, ed. by Werner Kallmeyer, 117–153. Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar
Barcelona, Antonio
2003 “The Case for a Metonymic Basis of Pragmatic Inferencing: Evidence from Jokes and Funny Anecdotes.” In Metonymy and Pragmatic Inferencing, ed. by Klaus-Uwe Panther, and Linda L. Thornburg, 81–104. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bateson, Gregory
1972 “A Theory of Play and Fantasy.” In Steps to an Ecology of The Mind, ed. by Gregory Bateson, 177–193. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Baumann, Richard
1977Verbal Art as Performance. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bell, Nancy
2009 “Responses to Failed Humor.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1825–1836. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(ed) 2017Multiple Perspectives on Language Play. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika A.
2005 “Frames Revisited – The Coherence-Inducing Function of Frames.” Journal of Pragmatics 37 (5): 685–705. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergmann, Jörg
1998 “Authentisierung und Fiktionalisierung in Alltagsgesprächen.” In Inszenierungsgesellschaft: Ein einführendes Handbuch, ed. by Herbert Willems, and Martin Jurga, 107–123. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, Roxane, and Beatrice Priego-Valverde
2011 “Does Prosody Play a Specific Role in Conversational Humor?Pragmatics & Cognition 19 (2): 333–356. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bilmes, Jack
1988 “The Concept of Preference in Conversation Analysis.” Language in Society 17: 161–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993 “Ethnomethodology, Culture, and Implicature: Toward an Empirical Pragmatics.” Pragmatics (3/4): 387–409. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek
2007 “Impoliteness, Preference Organization and Conducivity.” Multilingua 26 (1): 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boxer, Diana, and Fernanda Cortes-Conde
1997 “From Bonding to Biting: Conversational Joking and Identity Display.” Journal of Pragmatics 27: 275–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Branner, Rebecca
2003Scherzkommunikation unter Mädchen: Eine ethnographisch-gesprächsanalytische Untersuchung. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Brehmer, Bernhard
2009Höflichkeit zwischen Konvention und Kreativität. Eine pragmalinguistische Analyse von Dankesformeln im Russischen. München and Berlin: Otto Sagner. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brock, Alexander
1996 “Wissensmuster im humoristischen Diskurs. Ein Beitrag zur Inkongruenztheorie anhand von Monty Python’s Flying Circus.” In Scherzkommunikation. Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung, ed. by Helga Kotthoff, 21–48. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
2003 “Spielerische Kommunikation – zur Bestimmung einer Textsorte.” Deutsche Sprache 4: 351–362.Google Scholar
2004a “Analyzing Scripts in Humorous Communication.” Humor 17 (4): 353–360. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004bBlackadder, Monty Python and Red Dwarf: eine linguistische Untersuchung britischer Fernsehkomödien. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
2011 “On Coherence in Humorous Communication.” In Explorations and Extrapolations: Applying English and American Studies, ed. by Alexander Brock, Uwe Küchler, and Anne Schröder, 11–32. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar
Brône, Geert
2008 “Hyper- and Misunderstanding in Interactional Humor.” Journal of Pragmatics 40: 2027–2061. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Bedeutungskonstitution in verbalem Humor: ein kognitiv-linguistischer und diskurssemantischer Ansatz. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Brône, Geert, and Seana Coulson
2010 “Processing Deliberate Ambiguity in Newspaper Headlines: Double Grounding.” Discourse Processes 47 (3): 212–236. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brône, Geert, Kurt Feyaerts, and Tony Veale
2006 “Introduction: Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Humor.” Humor 19 (3): 203–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brône, Geert, and Bert Oben
2013 “Resonating Humour: A Corpus-Based Approach to Creative Parallelism in Dialogue.” In Creativity and the Agile Mind. A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon, ed. by Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville, 181–203. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bucaria, Chiara
2004 “Lexical and Syntactic Ambiguity as a Source of Humor: The Case of Newspaper Headlines.” Humor 17 (3): 279–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Busse, Dietrich
2012Frame-Semantik. Ein Kompendium. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2002Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. London: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1980 “The Deployment of Consciousness in the Production of Narrative.” In The Pear Stories. Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production, ed. by Wallace Chafe, 9–50. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
1994Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2007The Importance of Not Being Earnest. The Feeling behind Laughter and Humor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Christodoulidou, Maria
2012 “Conversational Irony: Evaluating Complaints.” In Spaces of Polyphony, ed. by Clara Ubaldina Lorda Mur, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa Terran, 25–42. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cicourel, Aaron
1973Cognitive Sociology: Language and Meaning in Social Interaction. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan
2008 “Looking at Analysis from Mental Spaces and Blending: Looking at and Experiencing Discourse in Interaction.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Oakley, and Anders Hougaard, 235–246. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H.
1996Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 “Pragmatics of Language Performance.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, 365–382. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert, and Richard J. Gerrig
1984 “On the Pretense Theory of Irony.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 91: 121–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
1999 “Irony in Conversation.” Language in Society 28: 523–553. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer
2007 “Talk in a Play Frame: More on Laughter and Intimacy.” Journal of Pragmatics 39: 29–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, Seana
2001Semantic Leaps: Frame Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “Extemporaneous Blending: Conceptual Integration in Humorous Discourse from Talk Radio.” Style 39 (2): 107–122.Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana, and Todd Oakley
2000 “Blending Basics.” Cognitive Linguistics 11: 175–196.Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana, Thomas P. Urbach, and Marta Kutas
2006 “Looking Back: Joke Comprehension and the Space Structuring Model.” Humor 19 (3): 229–250. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elisabeth
1996 “The Prosody of Repetition: On Quoting and Mimicry.” In Prosody in Conversation. Interactional Studies, ed. by Elisabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Margret Selting, 366–405. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 “Coherent Voicing: On Prosody in Conversational Reported Speech.” In Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse, ed. by Wolfram Bublitz, Uta Lenk, and Eija Ventola, 11–53. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William, and Alan D. Cruse
2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan
1984 “The Relevance of Intonational Misfits.” In Intonation, Accent & Rhythm. Studies in Discourse Phonology, ed. by Daffyd Gibbon, and Helmut Richter, 67–75. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Curcó, Carmen
1995 “Some Observations on the Pragmatics of Humorous Interpretations: A Relevance Theoretic Approach.” UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 7: 27–47.Google Scholar
Daiber, Thomas
2010 “The Quotativmarker im Russischen (tipo/tipa).” Zeitschrift für Slawistik 55 (1): 69–89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Beaugrande, Robert-Alain, and Wolfgang Ulrich Dressler
1981Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dement’ev, Vadim
2010Teorija rečevych žanrov [The theory of speech genres]. Moscow: Znak.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf
2000 “Ethnographische Gesprächsanalyse: Zu Nutzen und Notwendigkeit von Ethnographie für die Konversationsanalyse.” Gesprächsforschung – online Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 1: 96–124.http://​www​.gespraechsforschung​-ozs​.de​/heft2000​/ga​-deppermann​.pdf (latest access 2/13/2014)
2002 “Von der Kognition zur verbalen Interaktion: Bedeutungskonstitution im Kontext aus Sicht der Kognitionswissenschaften und der Gesprächsforschung.” In Be-deuten. Wie Bedeutung im Gespräch entsteht, ed. by Arnulf Deppermann, and Thomas Spranz-Fogasy, 11–33. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
2018 “Inferential Practices in Social Interaction: A Conversation-Analytic Account.” Open Linguist 4: 35–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, and Thomas Spranz-Fogasy
(eds) 2002Be-deuten. Wie Bedeutung im Gespräch entsteht. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Dittgen, Andrea Maria
1989Regeln für Abweichungen. Funktionale sprachspielerische Abweichungen in Zeitungsüberschriften, Werbeschlagzeilen, Werbeslogans, Wandsprüchen und Titeln. Frankfurt am Main and New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Douven, Igor
2011 “Abduction”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), ed. by Edward Zalta. http://​plato​.stanford​.edu​/archives​/spr2011​/entries​/abduction/ (latest access 2/13/2014)
Drew, Peter
1987 “Po-Faced Receipts of Teases.” Linguistics 25: 219–253. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, Peter, and Elisabeth Holt
1998 “Figures of Speech: Figurative Expressions and the Management of Topic Transition in Conversation.” Language in Society 27 (4): 495–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dry, Helen A.
1985 “Approaches to Coherence in Natural and Literary Narrative.” In Text Connexity, Text Coherence: Aspects, Methods, Results, ed. by Emel Sözer, 484–499. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley, and Chris Holcomb
2011Understanding Language through Humor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta
2008 “There Is Method in the Humorous Speaker’s Madness: Humour and Grice’s Model.” Lódź Papers in Pragmatics 4 (1): 159–185.Google Scholar
2009aHumorous Garden-Paths. A Pragmatic-Cognitive Study. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
2009b “Creative Metaphor is a Birthday Cake: Metaphor as the Source of Humour.” Metaphorik.de 17 http://​www​.metaphorik​.de​/17​/dynel​.pdf (latest access 4/2/2010)
2011 “Joker in the Pack. Towards Determining the Status of Humorous Framing in Conversations.” In The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains, ed. by Marta Dynel, 217–241. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018aIrony, Deception and Humour. Seeking the Truth about Overt and Covert Untruthfulness. Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018b “Taking Cognisance of Cognitive Linguistic Research on Humour.” Issues in Humour Cognition, Special Issue of Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16 (1): 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Carol L.
1984 “ ‘Stop Me if You Heard This One’: Narrative Disclaimers as Breakthrough into Performance.” Fabula 25 (3/4): 241– 228.Google Scholar
Eelen, Gino
2001A Critique of Politeness Theory. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar
Ehmer, Oliver
2011Imagination und Animation. Die Herstellung mentaler Räume durch animierte Rede. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eisterholt, Jodi, Salvatore Attardo, and Diana Boxer
2006 “Reactions to Irony in Discourse: Evidence for the Least Disruption Principle.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (8): 1239–1256. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ensink, Titus, and Christoph Sauer
2003 “Social-Functional and Cognitive Approaches to Discourse Interpretation: The Role of Frame and Perspective.” In Framing and Perspectivising in Discourse, ed. by Titus Ensink, and Christoph Sauer, 1–22. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, Victoria
2004 “Norms and Principles. Putting Social and Cognitive Pragmatics Together.” In Current Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, ed. by Rosina Márquez Reiter, and Maria Elena Placencia, 347–371. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green
2007Cognitive Linguistics. An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles
1994Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997Mappings in Thought and Language. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Eve Sweetser
(eds) 1996Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner
2003The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Feyaerts, Kurt
2013 “A Cognitive Grammar of Creativity.” In Creativity and the Agile Mind. A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon, ed. by Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville, 205–227. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles
1977 “Scenes-and-Frames Semantics.” In Linguistic Structure Processing, ed. by Antonio Zambolli, 55–82. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Forabosco, Giovanantonio
1992 “Cognitive Aspects of the Humor Process: The Concept of Incongruity.” Humor 5: 45–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Celia, and Barbara Fox
2010 “Multiple Practices for Constructing Laughable.” In Prosody in Interaction, ed. by Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Elisabeth Reber, and Margret Selting, 339–368. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Freidhof, Gerd
1984 “Zur Typologisierung von Wortspielen mit Hilfe von oppositiven Merkmalen.” In Slavistische Linguistik 1983, ed. by Peter Rehder, 9–37. München: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
(ed) 1990Sowjetische Beiträge zum Wortspiel. München: Otto Sagner. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Freud, Sigmund
1987 [1905] “Der Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewussten.” In Gesammelte Werke. Chronologisch geordnet (vol. 6), ed. by Sigmund Freud, 5–206. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer.Google Scholar
Fuji, Aji
2008 “Meaning Construction in Humorous Discourse. Context and Incongruities in Conceptual Blending.” In Language in the Context of Use. Discourse and Cognitive Approaches to Language, ed. by Andrea Tyler, Yiyoung Kim, and Mari Takada, 183–197. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Furman, Michael
2013 “Impoliteness and Mock-Impoliteness: A Descriptive Analysis.” In Approaches to Slavic Interaction, ed. by Nadine Thielemann, and Peter Kosta, 237–256. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giora, Rachel
1991 “On the Cognitive Aspects of the Joke.” Journal of Pragmatics 16: 465–485. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1997 “Understanding Figurative and Literal Language: The Graded Salience Hypothesis.” Cognitive Linguistics 8 (3): 183–206. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 “On the Priority of Salient Meanings: Studies of Literal and Figurative Meanings.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 919–929. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003On Our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, Philip
2003Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, Philip, and Elisabeth Holt
(eds) 2013Studies of Laughter in Interaction. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Goatly, Andrew
1994 “Register and the Redemption of Relevance Theory. The Case of Metaphor.” Pragmatics 4 (2): 139–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012Meaning and Humour. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
1981Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele
2006Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1984 “Notes on Story Structure and the Organization of Participation.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by James M. Atkinson, and John Heritage, 225–246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gorelov, Il’ja N., and Konstantin F. Sedov
1997Osnovy psicholingvistiki [Fundamentals of psycholinguistics]. Moscow: Labirint. http://​www​.fidel​-kastro​.ru​/psihology​/g​_osnpsyl​.htm (latest access 25/10/2013)
Grady, Joseph, Todd Oakley, and Seanna Coulson
2001 “Blending and Metaphor.” In Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, and Gerard J. Steen, 101–124. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Graesser, Arhtur, Debrah Long, and Jeffery Mio
1989 “What Are the Cognitive and Conceptual Components of Humorous Texts?Poetics 18: 143–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenall, Ann Jorid Klungervik
2002Towards a Socio-Cognitive Account of Flouting and Flout-Based Meaning. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
2009 “Towards a New Theory of Flouting.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (11): 2295–2311. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grenoble, Lenore
2008 “Sintaksis i sovmestnoe postroenie repliki v ustnom russkom dialoge [Syntax and the co-construction of a turn in a spoken Russian dialogue].” Voprosy jazykoznanija 1: 25–36.Google Scholar
2013 “Talking out of Turn: (Co)-Constructing Russian Conversation.” In Approaches to Slavic Interaction, ed. by Nadine Thielemann, and Peter Kosta, 17–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert P.
1975 “Logic and Conversation.” In Syntax and Semantics (vol. 3: Speech acts), ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Groeben, Norbert, and Ursula Christmann
2003 “Verstehen von Sprecherintentionen: Witz, Metapher, Ironie.” In Psycholinguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch, ed. by Gert Rickheit, Theo Herrmann, and Werner Deutsch, 651–664. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gruner, Charles
2000 [1997]The Game of Humor: A Comprehensive Theory of Why We Laugh. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J.
1982Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992a “Contextualization and Understanding.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. by Alessandro Duranti, and Charles Goodwin, 229–252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1992b “Contextualization Revisited.” In The Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer, and Aldo di Luzio, 39–53. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne
1995 “Gattungen in der sozialen Praxis. Die Analyse kommunikativer Gattungen als Textsorten mündlicher Kommunikation.” Deutsche Sprache 25 (1): 193–218.Google Scholar
1999 “Polyphony and the ‘Layering of Voices’ in Reported Dialogues: An Analysis of the Use of Prosodic Devices in Everyday Reported Speech.” Journal of Pragmatics 31: 685–708. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Günthner, Susanne, and Hubert Knoblauch
1994 “ ‘Forms Are the Food of Faith’ – Gattungen als Muster kommunikativen Handelns.” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 46 (4): 693–723.Google Scholar
Haiman, John
1990 “Sarcasm and Theater.” Cognitive Linguistics 1/2: 181–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1998Talk Is Cheap: Sarcasm, Alienation, and the Evolution of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood
2002 “Text as Semantic Choice in Social Contexts”. In Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse (vol. 2), ed. by Jonathan Webster, 28–81. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood, and Ruqayia Hasan
1985Language, Context, and Text. Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Victoria: Deakan University Press.Google Scholar
Hartung, Martin
1996 “Ironische Äußerungen in privater Scherzkommunikation.” In Scherzkommunikation. Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung, ed. by Helga Kotthoff, 109–143. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael
2010 “Jocular Mockery, (Dis)affiliation, and Face.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2106–2119. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Implicature and Inferential Substrate.” In Implicitness. From Lexis to Discourse, ed. by Piotr Cap, and Marta Dynel, 281–304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer
1995Gender and Humour: Beyond a Joke. Unpublished MA thesis, Victoria University of Wellington. http://​www​.ling​.canterbury​.ac​.nz​/jen​/documents​/hay​-MA​-thesis​.pdf (latest access 5/14/2007)
2000 “Functions of Humor in the Conversation of Men and Women.” Journal of Pragmatics 32: 709–742. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 “The Pragmatics of Humor Support.” Humor 14 (1): 55–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
2004 “Shared Syntax: The Grammar of Co-Constructions.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1315–1336. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Rod Watson
1979 “Formulations as Conversational Objects.” In Everyday Language, ed. by Gregory Psathas, 123–162. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles
1967 “Where the Tongue Slips, There Slip I.” In To Honour Roman Jakobson (vol. 2), ed. by Roman Jakobson, 910–936. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael
2005Lexical Priming. A New Theory of Words and Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hofstadter, David, and Liane Gabora
1989 “Frame Blends: Synopsis of the Workshop on Humor and Cognition.” Humor 2: 417–440.Google Scholar
Holt, Elisabeth
2007 “ ‘I’m Eyeing Your Chop Up Mind’: Reporting and Enacting.” In Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics, ed. by Elisabeth Holt, and Rebecca Clift, 47–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2011 “On the Nature of ‘Laughables’. Laughter as a Response to Overdone Figurative Phrases.” Pragmatics & Cognition 21 (3): 393–410. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holt, Elizabeth
2013a “Conversation Analysis and Laughter.” In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ed. by Carol A. Chapelle, 1–6. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holt, Elisabeth
2013b “ ‘There’s Many a True Word Said in Jest’: Seriousness and Nonseriousness in Interaction.” In Studies of Laughter in Interaction, ed. by Philip Glenn, and Elisabeth Holt, 69–89. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, and Sandra Thompson
1980 “Transitivity in Grammar and Conversation.” Language 56 (2): 251–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hougaard, Anders
2005 “Conceptual Disintegration and Blending in Interactional Sequences: A Discussion of New Phenomena, Processes vs. Products, and Methodology.” Journal of Pragmatics 37 (10): 1653–1685. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 “Compression in Interaction.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Oakley, and Anders Hougaard, 179–208. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hougaard, Anders, and Todd Oakley
2008 “Mental Spaces and Discourse Analysis.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Oakley, and Anders Hougaard, 1–26. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hougaard, Gitte
2008 “ ‘Mental Spaces’ and ‘Blending’ in Discourse and Interaction. A Response.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Oakley, and Anders Hougaard, 247–250. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Huizinga, Johan
2004Homo Ludens: Vom Ursprung der Kultur im Spiel. Reinbek: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell
1972 “Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life.” In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, ed. by John Gumperz, and Dell Hymes, 35–71. New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
1974Foundations of Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Ide, Sachiko
1989 “Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Universals of Linguistic Politeness.” Multilingua 8 (2/3): 223–248. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ilʹjasova, Svetlana V., and Ljudmila P. Amiri
2009Jazykovaja igra v kommunikativnom prostranstve SMI i reklamy [Language games in the communicative space of the media and advertising]. Moscow: Flinta.Google Scholar
Imo, Wolfgang
2011 “Cognitions Are Not Observable – But Their Consequences Are: Mögliche Aposiopese-Konstruktionen in der gesprochenen Alltagssprache.” Gesprächsforschung 12: 265–300. http://​ozs​.riversite​-cms​.net​/fileadmin​/dateien​/heft2011​/ga​-imo​.pdf (latest access 9/1/2014)
Ivanova, Ljudmila Ju
. et al. 2003Kul'tura russkoj reči: ėnciklopedičeskij slovar'-spravočnik [Russian speech culture: An encyclopedic handbook]. Moscow: Flinta.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman
1960 “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics.” In Style in Language, ed. by Thoman Sebeok, 350–377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, Katarzyna
2014 “Defaults in Semantics and Pragmatics.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), ed. by Edward Zalta. http://​plato​.stanford​.edu​/archives​/spr2014​/entries​/defaults​-semantics​-pragmatics/ (latest access 20/5/2014)
Jefferson, Gail
1979 “A Technique for Inviting Laughter and Its Subsequent Acceptance/ Declination.” In Everyday Language. Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 79–96. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
1984 “On Organization of Laughter in Talk about Troubles.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 346–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1985 “An Exercise in the Transcription and Analysis of Laughter.” In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, (vol. 3: Discourse and Dialogue), ed. by Teun van Dijk, 25–34. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1990 “List Construction as a Task and Resource.” In Interactional Competence, ed. by Gregory Psathas, 63–92. New York: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar
1996 “On the Poetics of Ordinary Talk.” Text and Performance Quarterly 16: 1–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 “Sometimes a Frog in Your Throat Is Just a Frog in Your Throat: Gutturals as (Sometimes) Laughter-Implicative.” Jounal of Pragmatics 42 (6): 1476–1484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail, Harvey Sacks, and Emanuel Schegloff
1987 “Notes on Laughter in the Pursuit of Intimacy.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John Lee, 152–205. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Kallmeyer, Werner
1979 “ ‘(Expressif) eh ben dis donc, hein’pas bien’ – Zur Beschreibung von Exaltation als Interaktionsmodalität.” In Bildung und Ausbildung in der Romania (vol. 1), ed. by Rolf Kloepfer, and Arnold Rothe, 549–568. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Karasik, Vladimir I.
(2007): “Kommunikativnaja tonal’nost’ [Communicative tonality].” In Žanry reči [Speech genres], ed. by Vadim V. Dementyev, 81–94. Saratov: Kolledž http://​www​.sgu​.ru​/node​/75356 (latest access 5/6/2013)
Karaulov, Jurij N.
1986 “Rol’ precedentnych tekstov v strukture i funkcionirovanii jazykovoj ličnosti [The role of precedent texts in the structure and functioning of linguistic identity].” In Naučnye doklady u novye napravlenija v prepodavanii russkogo jazyka i literatury. Doklady sovetskoj delegacii na VI kongresse MAPRJAL [Scientific reports and the new directions in teaching the Russian language and literature. Reports of the Soviet delegation at the MAPRJAL congress], 125–126. Moscow: Russkij jazyk.Google Scholar
Keith-Spiegel, Patricia
1972 “Early Conceptions of Humor: Varieties and Issues.” In The Psychology of Humor, ed. by Jeffrey Goldstein, and Paul McGhee, 3–39. London and New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kibrik, Andrej A.
2009 “Modus, žanr i drugie parametry klassifikacii diskursov [Mode, genre, and other parameters of discourse classification].” Voprosy jazykoznanija 2: 3–21.Google Scholar
2011 “Cognitive Discourse Analysis: Local Discourse Structure.” In Slavic Linguistics in a Cognitive Framework, ed. by Marcin Grygiel, and Laura Janda, 273–304. Frankfurt and New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Andrej A., and Vera Podlesskaja
2006 “Problema segmentacii ustnogo diskursa i kognitivnaja sistema govorjaščego [Segmentation of spoken discourse and the speaker’s cognitive system].” In Kognitinye issledovanija [Cognitive studies] (vol. 1), ed. by V. D. Solov’ev, 138–158. Moscow: RAN.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Andrej A., and Vera I. Podlesskaja
2009Rasskazy o snovidenijach: korpusnoe issledovanie ustnogo diskursa [Night dream stories: a corpus study of spoken discourse]. Moscow: RAN.Google Scholar
Kitajgorodskaja Margarita v., and Nina N. Rozanona
1999Reč’ moskvičej: kommunikativno-kulturologičeskij aspekt [Muscovite speech: communicative culture]. Moscow: Russkie slovari.Google Scholar
Kitajgorodskaja, Margarita V., and Nina N. Rozanova
2005Reč’ moskvičej: Kommunikativno-kul’turologičeskij aspekt [Muscovites’ speech: Communicative and cultural aspects]. Moscow: Naučnyj mir.Google Scholar
2010Jazykovoe suščestvovanie sovremennogo gorožanina. Na materiale jazyka Moskvy [The linguistic existence of a modern citizen. A case study of the language of Moscow]. Moscow: Jazyki slovjanskoj kul’tury.Google Scholar
Koester-Thoma, Soja, and Elena A. Zemskaja
(eds) 1995Russische Umgangssprache: Phonetik, Morphologie, Syntax, Wortbildung, Wortstellung, Lexik, Nomination, Sprachspiel. Berlin: Dieter Lenz.Google Scholar
Koestler, Arthur
1964The Act of Creation. London: Arkana.Google Scholar
Kosta, Peter, and Gerd Freidhof
1987 “Das komplexe Wortspiel als Problem der Übersetzungstheorie.” In Slavistische Linguistik 1986, ed. by Gerd Freidhof, 125–156. München: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga
(ed) 1996Scherzkommunikation. Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
1998Spaß verstehen. Zur Pragmatik von konversationellem Humor. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999 “Coherent Keying in Conversational Humor: Contextualizing Joint Fictionalisation.” In Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse, ed. by Wolfram Bublitz, Uta Lenk, and Eija Ventola, 125–149. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002 “Irony, Quotation, and Other Forms of Staged Intertextuality. Double or Contrastive Perspectivation in Conversation.” In Perspective and Perspectivation in Discourse, ed. by Carl F. Graumann, and Werner Kallmeyer, 201–233. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003 “Responding to Irony in Different Contexts: On Cognition in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1387–1411. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006a “Oral Genres of Humor: On the Dialectic of Genre Knowledge and Creative Authoring.” InLiSt 44: 1–36. http://​www​.unipotsdam​.de​/u​/inlist​/issues​/44​/InLiSt44​.pdf (latest access 4/4/2009)
2006b “Pragmatics of Performance and the Analysis of Conversational Humor.” Humor 19 (3): 271–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009a “An Interactional Approach to Irony Development.” In Humor in Interaction, ed. by Neil Norrick, and Delia Chiaro, 49–78. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009b “Joint Construction of Humorous Fictions in Conversation.” Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2): 195–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kreuz, Roger
2000 “The Production and Processing of Irony.” Metaphor and Symbol 15: 99–107. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kyratzis, Sakis
2003 “Laughing Metaphorically: Metaphor and Humour in Discourse.” In Acts of the 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. http://​wwwling​.arts​.kuleuven​.ac​.be​/iclc​/papers​/kyratzis​.pdf (latest access 11/02/2012).
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
2011 [1980]Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lampert, Martin, and Susan Ervin-Tripp
2006 “Risky Laughter: Teasing and Self-Directed Joking among Male and Female Friends.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 51–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W.
2001 “Discourse in Cognitive Grammar.” Cognitive Linguistics 12 (2): 143–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford Universiy Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013aEssentials of Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2013b “Interactive Cognition: Toward a Unified Account of Structure, Processing, and Discourse.” International Journal of Cognitive Linguistics 3 (2): 95–125.Google Scholar
Langlotz, Andreas
2008 “Contextualization Cues as Mental Space Builders.” In Du fait grammatical au fait cognitif. From Gram to Mind: Grammar as Cognition, ed. by Jean-Rémi Lapaire, Guillaume Desagulier, and Jean-Baptiste Guignard, 345–366. Pessac: Presses universitaire de Bordeaux.Google Scholar
2010 “Social Cognition.” In Interpersonal Pragmatics, ed. by Miriam A. Locher, and Sage L. Graham, 167–204. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013 “Yo, Who Be the Main Gangsta in Our Phat Gang?– Linguistic Creativity and the Construction of Hyperpersonal Identity.” In Creativity and the Agile Mind. A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon, ed. by Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville, 159–179. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1983The Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lerner, Gene H.
1991 “In the Syntax of Sentences-in-Progress.” Language in Society 20: 441–458. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002 “Turn-Sharing: The Choral Co-Production of Talk-in-Interaction.” In The Language of Turn and Sequence, ed. by Cecilia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox, and Sandra Thompson, 225–256. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen
1988 “Putting Linguistics on a Proper Footing: Explorations in Goffman’s Concepts of Participations.” In Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, ed. by Paul Drew, and Anthony Wootton, 161–227. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1990Pragmatik. Translated by Ursula Fries. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
1992 [1979] “Activity Types and Language.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2000Presumptive Meanings. The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “Cognition at the Heart of Human Interaction.” Discourse Studies 8 (1): 85–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David K.
1969Convention: A Philosophical Study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam, and Richard Watts
2008 “Relational Work and Impoliteness: Negotiating Norms of Linguistic Behavior.” In Impoliteness in Language: Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, ed. by Derek Bousfield, and Miriam Locher, 77–101. New York: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Long, Debrah L., and Arthur Graesser
1988 “Wit and Humor in Discourse Processing.” Discourse Processes 11: 35–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luckmann, Thomas
1986 “Grundformen der gesellschaftlichen Vermittlung des Wissens: Kommunikative Gattungen.” In Kultur und Gesellschaft. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft 27, ed. by Friedhelm Neidhardt, M. Rainer Lepsius, and Johannes Weiss, 191–211. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Mayes, Patricia
2003Language, Social Structure and Culture. A Genre Analysis of Cooking Classes in Japan and America. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mazzone, Marco
2013 “A Pragmatic Pandora’s Box: Regularities and Defaults in Pragmatics.” In Beyond Words. Content, Context, and Inference, ed. by Frank Liedtke, and Cornelia Schulze, 307–329. Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McGhee, Paul
1979Humor. Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Mečkovskaja, Nina B.
2007 “Fenomen ‘smešnogo’ v reči, ego jazykovye i vnejazykovye pervoėlementy i vnejazykovye mechanizmy [The phenomenon of ‘funny’ in speech, its linguistic and nonlinguistic primary elements, and nonlinguistic mechanisms].” In Logičeskij analiz jazyka. Jazykovye mechanizmy komizma [The logical analysis of language. The linguistic mechanisms of humour], ed. by Nina D. Arutjunova, 140–153. Moscow: Indrik.Google Scholar
Michaelis, Laura
2005 “Entity and Event Coercion in a Symbolic Theory of Syntax.” In Construction Grammar(s): Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, ed. by Jan-Ola Oestman, and Miriam Fried, 45–87. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Minsky, Marvin
1980 “Jokes and their Relation to the Cognitive Unconscious.” Al Memo 603. http://​citeseerx​.ist​.psu​.edu​/viewdoc​/download​?doi​=10​.1​.1​.18​.4435​&rep​=rep1​&type​=pdf (latest access 21/5/2014)
Morreall, John
1989 “Enjoying Incongruity.” Humor 2 (1): 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “Humor as Cognitive Play.” Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2): 241–260. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Muschner, Annette
1997 “Sprachspiel und Kohärenz.” In Slavistische Linguistik 1996, ed. by Peter Kosta, and Elke Mann, 197–219. München: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Müller, Cornelia
2008Metaphors Dead and Alive, Sleeping and Waking. A Dynamic View. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Klaus
1983 “Formen der Markierung von ‘Spaß’ und Aspekte der Organisation des Lachens in natürlichen Dialogen.” Deutsche Sprache 4: 289–321.Google Scholar
1984Rahmenanalyse des Dialogs. Aspekte des Sprachverstehens in Alltagssituationen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
1992 “Theatrical Moments: On Contextualizing Funny and Dramatic Moods in the Course of Telling a Story in Conversation.” In The Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer, and Aldo di Luzio, 199–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nemesi, Attila
2015 “Levels and Types of Breaking the Maxims: A Neo-Gricean Account of Humor.” Intercultural Pragmatics 12 (2): 249–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nerlich, Brigitte, and David Clarke
2001 “Ambiguities We Live By: Towards a Pragmatics of Polysemy.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (1): 1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norman, Boris Ju
2006Igra na granjach jazyka [The game on the edges of language]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Norrick, Neil R.
1986 “A Frame-Theoretical Analysis of Verbal Humor: Bisociation as Schema Conflict.” Semiotica 60: 225–245. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1987 “From Wit to Comedy: Bisociation and Intertextuality.” Semiotica 61: 113–125.Google Scholar
1989 “Intertextuality in Humor.” Humor 2 (2): 117–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993aConversational Joking. Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
1993b “Repetition in Canned Jokes and Spontaneous Conversational Joking.” Humor 6 (4): 385–402. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1994 “Involvement and Joking in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 22: 409–430. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003 “Issues in Conversational Joking.” Journal of Pragmatics 35: 1333–1359. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Norrick, Neil, and Delia Chiaro
(eds) 2009Humor in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey, Ivan Sag, and Thomas Wasow
1994 “Idioms.” Language 7 (3): 491–538. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oakley, Todd, and Seana Coulson
2008 “Connecting the Dots. Mental Spaces and Metaphoric Language in Discourse.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Okaley, and Anders Hougaard, 27–50. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oakley, Todd, and Anders Hougaard
(eds) 2008Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ogiermann, Eva
2009On Apologizing on Positive and Negative Politeness Cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Partington, Alan
2006The Linguistics of Laughter: A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pascual, Esther
2014Fictive Interaction: The Conversation Frame in Thought, Language, and Discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pike, Kenneth
1967Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of Structure of Human Behavior (2nd ed.). The Hague: Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1993Talk, Thought and Thing: The Emic Road toward Conscious Knowledge. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Plungjan, Vladimir
2008 “O pokazatel’jach čužoj reči i nedostovernosti v russkom jazyke: mol, jakoby, i drugie [On markers of reported speech and uncertainty in Russian: mol, jakoby, i drugie].” In Lexikalische Evidenzialitätsmarker in slavischen Sprachen, ed. by Björn Wiemer, and Vladimir Plungjan, 285–312. München: Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
Pollio, Howard
1996 “Boundaries in Humor and Metaphor.” In Metaphor. Implications and Application, ed. by Jeffery Scott Mio, and Albert N. Katz, 231–253. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by James Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1986 "Extreme case formulations. A way of legitimizing claims." Human Studies 9, 219-229. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Potter, Jonathan
2006 “Cognition and Conversation.” Discourse Studies 8 (1): 131–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poyatos, Ferdinand
1993 “The Many Voices of Laughter: A New Audible-Visual Paralinguistic Approach.” Semiotica 93: 61–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Priego-Valverde, Beatrice
2012 “Speaking Through Other Voices. Conversational Humour as a Polyphonic Phenomenon.” In Spaces of Polyphony, ed. by Lorda Mur, Clara Ubaldina, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa Terran, 43–54. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Provine, Robert R.
2000Laughter: A Scientific Investigation. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Rachilina, Ekaterina V., and Vladimir V. Plungjan
2010 “Anekdot kak konstrukcija. [Anecdote as a construction]”. In Lingvistika konstrukcii [The linguistic construction], ed. by Ekaterina V. Rachilina, 138–158. Moscow: Azbukovnik.Google Scholar
Raskin, Victor
1981 “The Semantics of Abuse in the Chastushka: Women’s Bawdy.” Maledicta 5: 301–317.Google Scholar
1985Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Rickheit, Gerhard, and Uwe Schade
2000 “Kohärenz und Kohäsion.” In Text- und Gesprächslinguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung, ed. by Klaus Brinker, Gerd Antos, Wolfgang Heinemann, and Sven F. Sager, 275–283. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ritchie, David
2005 “Frame-Shifting in Humor and Irony.” Metaphor and Symbol 20 (4): 275–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, Graeme
2004The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018The Comprehension of Jokes. A Cognitive Science Framework. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1973 “On Some Puns with Some Intimations.” In Report of the 23rd Annual Roundtable Meeting in Linguistics and Language Studies, ed. by Roger Shuy, 135–144. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
1974 “An Analysis of a Joke’s Telling.” In Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking, ed. by Robert Bauman, and Joel Sherzer, 337–353. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1978 “Some Technical Considerations of a Dirty Joke.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction, ed. by John Schenkein, 249–270. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1992 “Sequencing: Utterances, Jokes and Questions (Lecture 12).” In Lectures on Conversation (vol. 1), ed. by Gail Jefferson, 95–103. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sakita, Tomoko
2006 “Parallelism in Conversation. Resonance, Schematization, and Extension from the Perspective of Dialogic Syntax and Cognitive Linguistics.” Pragmatics & Cognition 14 (3): 467–500. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Robert E.
2012 “Strategy and Creativity in Dialogue.” In Spaces of Polyphony, ed. by Clara Ubaldina Lorda Mur, and Patrick Zabalbeascoa Terran, 11–24. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “The Duality of Speaker Meaning: What Makes Self-Repair, Insincerity, and Sarcasm Possible?Journal of Pragmatics 48 (1): 112–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sannikov, Vladimir Z.
2003Russkaja jazykovaja šutka: ot Puškina do našich dnej [The Russian linguistic joke: From Pushkin to nowadays]. Moscow: Agraf.Google Scholar
Schank, Roger, and Robert Abelson
1977Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Function. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Scharloth, Joachim
2009a “Performanz als Modus des Sprechens und Interaktionsmodalität. Zur linguistischen Fundierung eines kulturwissenschaftlichen Konzeptes.” In Oberfläche und Performanz. Untersuchungen zur Sprache als dynamischer Gestalt, ed. by Helmuth Feilke, and Angelika Linke, 233–254. Berlin and New York: Max Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009b “Theatrale Kommunikation als Interaktionsmodalität.” In Theatralität des sprachlichen Handelns. Eine Metaphorik zwischen Linguistik und Kulturwissenschaften, ed. by Mareike Buss, Stephan Habscheid, Sabine Jautz, Frank Liedke, and Jan Geord Schneider, 337–356. Paderborn: Fink. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
1991 “Conversation Analysis and Socially Shared Cognition.” In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, ed. by Lauren Resnick, John Levine, and Stephanie Teasley, 150–171. Washington: American Psychological Association. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001 “Getting Serious: Joke Serious ‘No’.” Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1947–1955. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schenkein, James N.
1972 “Towards an Analysis of Natural Conversation and the Sense of Heheh.” Semiotica 6 (4): 344–377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1994Approaches to Discourse. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
(ed) 2012Cognitive Pragmatics. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Reinhold
1993 “Kontextualisierung und Konversationsanalyse.” Deutsche Sprache 21: 326–354.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Monika
2001 “Establishing Coherence in Text: Conceptual Continuity and Text-World Models.” Logos and Language 2 (1): 15–23.Google Scholar
Schwitalla, Johannes
1994 “Poetisches in der Alltagskommunikation.” In Sprache, Onomatopoiie, Rhetorik, Namen, Idiomatik, Grammatik. Festschrift für Karl Sornig zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Dieter Halwachs, Christine Penzinger, and Irmgard Stütz, 197–212. Graz: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Graz.Google Scholar
2001 “Lächelndes Sprechen und Lachen als Kontextualisierungsverfahren.” In Sprachkontakt, Sprachvergleich, Sprachvariation. Festschrift für Gottfried Kolde zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Kirsten Adamzik, and Helen Christen, 325–344. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret
2000 “The Construction of Units in Conversational Talk.” Language in Society 29 (4): 477–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Birgit Barden, Jörg Bergmann, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, Susanne Günther, Uta Quasthoff, Christoff Meier, Peter Schlobinski, and Susanne Uhmann
1998 “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem (GAT).” Linguistische Berichte 173: 91–122.Google Scholar
Selting, Margret, Peter Auer, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten, Jörg Bergmann, Pia Bergmann, Karin Birkner, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, Arnulf Deppermann, Peter Gilles, Susanne Günthner, Martin Hartung, Friederike Kern, Christine Mertzlufft, Christian Meyer, Miriam Morek, Frank Oberzaucher, Jörg Peters, Uta Quasthoff, Wilfried Schütte, Anja Stukenbrock, Susanne Uhmann
2009 “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem 2 (GAT 2).” Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 10: 353–402.Google Scholar
Sherstinova, Tatjana S.
2009 “The Structure of the ORD Speech Corpus of Russian Everyday Communication.” In Text, Speech, and Dialogue 2009, ed. by Vladimir Matoušek, and Peter Mautner, 258–265. Heidelberg: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shuval, Noa, and Rachel Giora
2005 “Beyond Figurativeness: Optimal Innovation and Pleasure.” In The Literal and Nonliteral in Language and Thought, ed. by Seana Coulson, and Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 239–253. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria
1992Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece. A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sinha, Chris
2005 “Blending out of the Background: Play, Props and Staging in the Material World.” Journal of Pragmatics 37 (10): 1537–1554. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deidre Wilson
1981 “Irony and the Use-Mention-Distinction.” In Radical Pragmatics, ed. by Peter Cole, 295–380. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1986Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stadelmann, Vera
2012Language, Cognition, Interaction. Conceptual Blending as Discursive Practice. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Giessen. http://​geb​.uni​-giessen​.de​/geb​/volltexte​/2012​/8854​/pdf​/StadelmannVera​_2012​_04​_25​.pdf (latest access 7/16/2014).
Stefanowitsch, Anatol
2003The English Imperative: A Construction-Based Approach. Unpublished manuscript. http://​www​.stefanowitsch​.de​/anatol​/files​/ms​-stefanowitsch2003​.pdf (latest access 8/8/2014)
Straehle, Christina
1993 “ ‘Samuel?’ ‘Yes, dear?’ Teasing and Conversational Rapport.” In Framing in Discourse, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 210–229. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Suls, John
1972 “A Two-Stage Model for the Appreciation of Jokes and Cartoons.” In The Psychology of Humor: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Issues, ed. by Jeffry Goldstein, and Peter McGhee, 81–100. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, Eve, and Gilles Fauconnier
1996 “Cognitive Links and Domains: Basic Aspects of Mental Spaces Theory.” In Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar, ed. by Gilles Fauconnier, and Eve Sweetser, 1–28. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Szczepek Reed, Beatrice
2001 “Prosodic Orientation in Spoken Interaction.” Interaction and Linguistic Strategies 27: 6–44.Google Scholar
Šachovskij, Viktor I.
2008Lingvističeskaja teorija ėmocij [The linguistic theory of emotions]. Moscow: Gnozis.Google Scholar
Šalina, Irina Vl
(ed) 2011Živaja reč’ ural’skogo goroda: ustnye dialogi i ėpistoljarnye obrazcy [Natural speech of a city in the Ural region: oral dialogues and epistolary samples]. Ekaterinburg: Izdatel’stvo Ural’skogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Ščerba, Lev V.
1955 [1937]Fonetika francuzskogo jazyka [The phonetics of French]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo literatury na inostrannych jazykach.Google Scholar
Ščerbina, Artur A.
1958Suščnost’ i iskusstvo slovesnoj ostroty (kalambura) [The essence and the art of verbal acuity (pun)]. Kiev: Akademija nauk USSR.Google Scholar
Šmeleva, Elena Ja. and Aleksej D. Šmelev
2002Russkij anekdot. Tekst i rečevoj žanr [Russian anecdote. Text and speech genre]. Moscow: Jazyki slavjanskoj kul’turu.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1989Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1993 “What’s in a Frame?” In Framing in Discourse, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 14–56. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah, and Cynthia Wallat
1993 “Interactive Frames and Knowledge Schemas in Interaction: Examples from a Medical Examination/Interview.” In Framing in Discourse, ed. by Deborah Tannen, 57–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina
2005 “Beyond the Micro-Level in Politeness Research.” Journal of Politeness Research 1 (2): 237–262. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Telles Ribeiro, Branca, and Susan M. Hoyle
2009 “Frame Analysis.” In Grammar, Meaning and Pragmatics, ed. by Frank Brisard, Jan-Ola Östman, and Jef Verschueren, 74–90. Philadelphia and Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ten Have, Paul
1999Doing Conversation Analysis. A Practical Guide. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
Thielemann, Nadine
2010Untersuchungen zum weiblichen Diskussionsstil am Beispiel von Gesprächen russischer, ukrainischer und polnischer InteraktionspartnerInnen. München: Otto Sagner. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012a “Fiktionale Szenarien – eine kommunikative Gattung des Humors in zwanglosen Gesprächen.” Wiener Slawistischer Almanach 70: 95–128.Google Scholar
2012b “Kak šutjat v razgovore – ob odnom jumorističeskom žanre razgovornoj reči [How is a joke performed in a conversation – on a genre of humour in colloquial speech].” In Russkij jazyk segodnja [The Russian language today], (vol. 5: Problemy rečevogo obščenija [Problems of speech communication]), ed. by Nina Rozanova, 385–395. Moscow: Flinta.Google Scholar
2013 “Humor as Staging an Utterance.” In Approaches to Slavic Interaction, ed. by Nadine Thielemann, and Peter Kosta, 259–280. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “Humorous Blends in Conversation – From Discourse Structure to Cognition (and Back).” Wiener Slawistischer Almanach 75: 189 – 228.Google Scholar
Thomas, Jenny
1995Meaning in Interaction. An Introduction to Pragmatics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vaid, Jyotsona, Rachel Hull, David Gerkens, and Roberto Ramírez Heredia
2003 “Getting a Joke: The Time Course of Meaning Activation in Verbal Humor.” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (9): 1431–1449. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A.
1977 “Context and Cognition: Knowledge Frames and Speech Act Comprehension.” Journal of Pragmatics 1 (3): 211–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “Discourse, Context and Cognition.” Discourse Studies 8 (1): 159–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Discourse and Context. A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Veale, Tony, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône
2006 “The Cognitive Mechanism of Adversarial Humor.” Humor 19 (3): 208–234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Veale, Tony, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville
(eds) 2013Creativity and the Agile Mind: A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 “Creativity and the Agile Mind.” In Creativity and the Agile Mind. A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon, ed. by Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville, 15–36. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vöge, Monika
2008All You Need is Laugh: Interactional Implications of Laughter in Business Meetings. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Southern Denmark. http://​static​.sdu​.dk​/mediafiles/​/Files​/Information​_til​/Studerende​_ved​_SDU​/Din​_uddannelse​/phd​_hum​/afhandlinger​/2009​/Voege2008​_Laughter​_in%20​_BusinessMeetings​.pdf (latest access 25/08/2011)
Wagner, Johannes, and Monika Vöge
(eds) 2010 “Laughter in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (6): 1469–1576.Google Scholar
Watts, Richard
2003Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, Janet, and Paul De Palma
1992 “Riddles: Accessibility and Knowledge.” Proceedings of COLING 1992: 1121–1125. Nantes. http://​acl​.ldc​.upenn​.edu​/C​/C92​/C92​-4176​.pdf (latest access 2/9/2013)
1993 “Some Pragmatic Features of Lexical Ambiguity and Simple Riddles.” Language and Communication 13 (3): 183–193. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Robert
2008 “Guided Conceptualizations: Mental Spaces in Instructional Discourse.” In Mental Spaces in Discourse and Interaction, ed. by Todd Oakley, and Anders Hougaard, 209–234. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deidre and Dan Sperber
1992 "On verbal irony." Lingua 81: 53-76.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deidre, and Dan Sperber
2010 “Relevance Theory.” In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, 607–632. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Winchatz, Michaela, and Alexander Kozin
2008 “Comical Hypothetical: Arguing for a Conversational Phenomenon.” Discourse Studies 10 (3): 383–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Ying Choon
2003 “Frame-Shifts in Action: What Spontaneous Humor Reveals about Language Comprehension.” Cognitive Science 17 (2): 1–27. http://​wwwling​.arts​.kuleuven​.ac​.be​/iclc.​/Papers​/YingWu​.pdf (latest access 11/1/2012)
Yamaguchi, Haruhiko
1988 “How to Pull Strings with Words. Deceptive Violations in the Garden-Path Joke.” Journal of Pragmatics 12: 323–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yus, Francisco
2003 “Humor and the Search for Relevance.” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (9): 1295–1331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013a “Analyzing Jokes with the Intersection Circles Model of Humorous Communication.” Lódź Papers in Pragmatics 9 (1): 3–24.Google Scholar
2013b “An Inference-Centred Analysis of Jokes: The Intersecting Circles Model of Humorous Communication.” In Irony and Humor: From Pragmatics to Discourse, ed. by Leonor Ruiz Gurillo, and Maria Belén Alvarado-Ortega, 59–82. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Relevance-Theoretic Treatments of Humor.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, ed. by Salvatore Attardo, 189–203. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zaśko-Zielińska, Monika
2002Przez okno świadomości: Gatunki mowy w świadomości użytkowników języka [Through the window of consciousness: Speech genres in the conciousness of language users]. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.Google Scholar
Zemskaja, Elena A.
1983 “Jazykovaja igra [The language game].” In Russkaja razgovornaja reč‘. Fonetika – Morfologija – Leksika – Žest [Colloquial Russian: Phonetics – Morphology – Vocabulary – Gesture], ed. by Elena A. Zemskaja, 172–214. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
1995a “Sprachspiel.” In Russische Umgangssprache: Phonetik, Morphologie, Syntax, Wortbildung, Wortstellung, Lexik, Nomination, Sprachspiel, ed. by Soja Koester-Thoma, and Elena A. Zemskaja, 267–283. Berlin: Dieter Lenz.Google Scholar
1995b “Zur System der russischen Umgangssprache.” In Russische Umgangssprache: Phonetik, Morphologie, Syntax, Wortbildung, Wortstellung, Lexik, Nomination, Sprachspiel, ed. by Soja Koester-Thoma, and Elena A. Zemskaja, 37–62. Berlin: Dieter Lenz.Google Scholar
Zemskaja, Elena A., and Lidia K. Kapanadze
(eds) 1978Russkaja razgovornaja reč’. Teksty [Colloquial Russian: Texts]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Zima, Elisabeth
2013aKognition in der Interaktion. Eine kognitionslinguistische und gesprächsanalytische Untersuchung. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
2013b “Online Semantic Creativity in Parliamentary Debates.” In Creativity and the Agile Mind: A Multi-Disciplinary Study of a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon, ed. by Tony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts, and Charles Forceville, 139–158. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ziv, Avi
1984Personality and Sense of Humor. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Subjects
BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis
BISAC Subject: LAN009030 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / Pragmatics
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2020017465