References
Beardsley, M. (1958). Aesthetics. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Becker, I. (2015). The good, the not good, and the not beautiful: On the non-obligatoriness of suppression following negation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 11(2), 255–283. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Becker, I. (2016).
The negation operator is not a suppressor of the concept in its scope: In fact, quite the opposite. Unpublished MA thesis, Tel Aviv University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Becker, I., & Giora, R. (submitted). The Defaultness Hypothesis: A quantitative corpus-based study of non/default sarcasm and literalness production.
Bergson, H. (1900/1956). Laughter. In W. Sypher (Ed.), Comedy (pp. 61–190). New York, NY: Doubleday Anchor Book.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena. In E. N. Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56–311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Campbell, J. D., & Katz, A. N. (2012). Are there necessary conditions for inducing a sense of sarcastic irony? Discourse Processes, 49(6), 459–480. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V. (1977). Psychology and language. Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Colston, H. L. (1999). “Not good” is “bad,” but “Not bad” is not “good”: An analysis of three accounts of negation asymmetry. Discourse Processes, 28(3), 237–256. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cori, V., Canestrari, C., & Bianchi, I. (2016). The perception of contrariety and the processing of verbal irony. Gestalt Theory, 38(2–3), 253–266.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dews, S., & Winner, E. (1995). Muting the meaning: A social function of irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 10(1), 3–19. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Du Bois, J. W. (2014). Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fein, O., Yeari, M., & Giora, R. (2015). On the priority of salience-based interpretations: The case of irony. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(1), 1–32. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Filik, R., Howman, H., Ralph-Nearman, C., & Giora, R. (in press). The role of defaultness in sarcasm interpretation: Evidence from eye-tracking. Metaphor and Symbol.
Filik, R., Turcan, A., Thompson, D., Harvey, N., Davies, H., & Turner, A. (2016). Sarcasm and emoticons: Comprehension and emotional impact. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 691, 2130–2146. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fraenkel, T., & Schul, Y. (2008). The meaning of negated adjectives. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(4), 517–540. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gibbs, R. W. (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1–2), 5–27. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R. (1995). On irony and negation. Discourse Processes, 191, 239–264. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 8(3), 183–206. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R. (2016). When negatives are easier to understand than affirmatives: The case of negative sarcasm. In P. Larrivée & C. Lee (Eds.), Negation and negative polarity: Experimental perspectives (pp. 127–143). Cham: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R. (under review). How defaultness affects processing, pleasure, and cueing: The case of default constructional sarcasm and default non-constructional literalness.
Giora, R., Cholev, A., Fein, O., & Peleg, O. (in press). On the superiority of defaultness: Hemispheric perspectives of processing negative and affirmative sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol.
Giora, R., Drucker, A., Fein, O., & Mendelson, I. (2015a). Default sarcastic interpretations: On the priority of nonsalient interpretations. Discourse Processes, 52(3), 173–200. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Fein, O., Ganzi, J., Levi, N. A., & Sabah, H. (2005). On negation as mitigation: The case of negative irony. Discourse Processes, 39(1), 81–100. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Fein, O., Kotler, N., & Shuval, N.. (2015c).
Know Hope: Metaphor, optimal innovation, and pleasure. In G. Brône, K. Feyaerts, & T. Veale (Eds.). Cognitive Linguistics and humor research: Current trends and new developments (pp. 129–146). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Fein, O., Kronrod, A., Elnatan, I., Shuval, N., & Zur, A. (2004). Weapons of mass distraction: Optimal innovation and pleasure ratings. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(2), 115–141. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Fein, O., Laadan, D., Wolfson, J., Zeituny, M., Kidron, R., Kaufman, R., & Shaham, R. (2007). Expecting irony: Context vs. salience based effects. Metaphor and Symbol, 221, 119–146. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Givoni, S., & Fein, O. (2015b). Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(4), 290–313. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Givoni, S. Heruti, V., & Fein, O. (2017). The role of defaultness in affecting pleasure: The Optimal Innovation Hypothesis revisited. Metaphor & Symbol, 32(1), 1–18. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Jaffe I., & Fein, O. (in progress a). Default sarcastic interpretations: The case of rhetorical questions.
Giora, R., Levant, E., & Fein, O. (in progress b). Default affirmative sarcasm: The case of attenuated similes.
Giora, R., Livnat, E., Fein, O., Barnea, A., Zeiman, R., & Berger, I. (2013). Negation generates nonliteral interpretations by default. Metaphor and Symbol, 281, 89–115. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giora, R., Meytes, D. Tamir, A. Givoni, S., Heruti, V., & Fein, O. (2017). Defaultness shines while affirmation pales. In A. Athanasiadou & H. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 219–236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Goldenberg, D. (2011). Default ironic interpretation. Unpublished ms. Tel Aviv University.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heruti, V., Bergerbest, D., & Giora, R. (submitted). A linguistic or pictorial context: Does it make a difference?
Horn, L. R. (1989). A natural history of negation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ilie, C. (1994). What else can I tell you?: A pragmatic study of English rhetorical questions as discursive and argumentative acts. Almqvist & Wiksell International, Stockholm.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kecskés, I. (2003). Situation-bound utterances in L1 and L2. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The sketch engine: Ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7–36. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mashal, N., & Faust, M. (2009). Conventionalization of novel metaphors: A shift in hemispheric asymmetry. Laterality, 14(6), 573–589. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2012). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mukařovský, J. (1932/1964). Standard language and poetic language. In P. L. Garvin (Ed.), A Prague school reader on esthetics, literary structure, and style (pp. 17–30). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mukařovský, J. (1978). Structure, sign and function. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paolazzi, C. (2013). “Do you really think it?”: Testing hypotheses on default nonliteral interpretations. University of Trento, Italy. Unpublished ms.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Partington, A. (2011). Phrasal irony: Its form, function and exploitation. Journal of Pragmatics, 431, 1786–1800. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schwoebel, J., Dews, S., Winner, E., & Srinivas, K. (2000). Obligatory processing of the literal meaning of ironic utterances: Further evidence. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1–2), 47–61. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shklovsky, V. (1917/1965). Art as technique. In L. T. Lemon & M. J. Reis (Eds. and Trans.), Russian formalist criticism: Four essays (pp. 3–57). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sulis, E., Hernandez Farias, D. I., Rosso, P., Patti, V., & Ruffo, G. (2016). Figurative messages and affect in Twitter: Differences between #irony, #sarcasm and #not. Knowledge-Based Systems, 1081, 132–143. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Veale, T. (2012). Exploding the creativity myth: The computational foundations of linguistic creativity. London/New York: Continuum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Veale, T. (2013). Humorous similes. Humor, 26(1), 3–22. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wason, P. C. (1965). The contexts of plausible denial. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4(1), 7–11. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ziv, Y. (2013).
Staam: Maintaining consistency in discourse. In M. Florentin (Ed.), Collection of articles on language (pp. 151–159). Jerusalem: Hebrew Academy (In Hebrew).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zuanazzi, A. (2013). Italian affirmative rhetorical questions generate ironic interpretations by default. University of Trento, Italy. Unpublished ms.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)