Cover not available
Part of
Playing with Mental Models: Humour in the BBC comedy series The Office
Henri de Jongste
[Topics in Humor Research 9] 2020
► pp. 277–294

References

“guest393609”, 2002. Office, The Review – I could catch a Monkey! [URL]. Accessed 1 September 2014.
Adler, Nancy J., 1986. International dimensions of organizational behavior. Kent Pub. Co., Boston, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Apter, Michael J., 1982a. Fawlty Towers: A Reversal Theory Analysis of A Popular Television Comedy Series. The Journal of Popular Culture 16 (3), 128–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1982b. The experience of motivation: The theory of psychological reversals. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
, 1984. Reversal Theory, Cognitive Synergy and the Arts, In: Crozier, W. R., Chapman, Anthony J. (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in the Perception of Art. Elsevier, pp. 411–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1989. Reversal theory: A new approach to motivation, emotion and personality. Anuario de psicología 42 (3), 19–29.Google Scholar
, 1991. A structural phenomenology of play, In: Kerr, John H., Apter, Michael J. (Eds.), Adult play: A reversal theory approach. Swets & Zeitlinger, pp. 13–29.Google Scholar
, 2013. Developing reversal theory: Some suggestions for future research. Journal of Motivation, Emotion, and Personality 1, 1–8.Google Scholar
Apter, Michael J., Desselles, Mitzi, 2012. Disclosure humor and distortion humor: A reversal theory analysis. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 25 (4), 417–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Apter, Michael J., Smith, K. C. P., 1977. Humour and the theory of psychological reversals, In: It’s a funny thing, humour. Proceedings of The International Conference on Humour and Laughter. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 95–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archakis, Argiris, Tsakona, Villy, 2005. Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 18 (1), 41–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Ben, Aroesti, Rachel, Bakare, Lanre, Bish, Joe, Golby, Joel, Jodelka, Filipa, Lyne, Charlie, MacInnes, Paul, Mumford, Gwilym, Parkinson, Hannah J., Sampson, Issy, Richards, Sam, 2014. From Python to Seinfeld–are these 12 classic comedies still funny? They’re known as “comedy gold” – but are they? Really? Our critics cast an unsentimental eye over 12 from the hall of fame. The Guardian, October 25.Google Scholar
Arundale, Robert B., 2008. Against (Gricean) intentions at the heart of human interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 5 (2), 229–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2012. On understandings of communication: A response to Wedgwood. Intercultural Pragmatics 9 (2), 137–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, 1994. Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
, 2001. Humorous texts: A semantic and pragmatic analysis. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2002. Cognitive stylistics of humorous texts, In: Semino, Elena, Culpeper, Jonathan (Eds.), Cognitive stylistics. Language and cognition in text analysis. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 231–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2008. A primer for the linguistics of humor, In: Raskin, Victor (Ed.), The Primer of Humor Research, vol. 8. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 101–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2015. Humor and laughter, In: Tannen, Deborah, Hamilton, Heidi E., Schiffrin, Deborah (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA, pp. 168–188.Google Scholar
Attardo, Salvatore, Raskin, Victor, 1991. Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 4 (3–4), 293–347.Google Scholar
Bain, Alexander, 1875. The emotions and the will. Longmans, Green, and Co., London.Google Scholar
Baker, Chris L., Saxe, Rebecca, Tenenbaum, Joshua B., 2009. Action understanding as inverse planning. Cognition 113 (3), 329–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bara, Bruno G., 2011. Cognitive pragmatics: The mental processes of communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 8 (3), 443–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardon, Adrian, 2005. The philosophy of humor, In: Charney, Maurice (Ed.), Comedy. A geographic and historical guide. Praeger, Westport, Conn, pp. 462–476.Google Scholar
Bargh, John A., Chartrand, Tanya L., 1999. The unbearable automaticity of being. American psychologist 54 (7), 462–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barnett, Lynn, 1990. Playfulness: Definition, design, and measurement. Play & Culture 3, 319–336.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, Simon, 2001. Theory of mind in normal development and autism. Prisme 34, 174–183.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, Simon, Leslie, Alan M., Frith, Uta, 1985. Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition 21 (1), 37–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barrett, Deirdre, 2010. Supernormal stimuli: How primal urges overran their evolutionary purpose. W.W. Norton & Co., New York, London.Google Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence W. (1999): Perceptual symbol systems. In Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, pp. 577–660.Google Scholar
Bateson, Gregory, 1953. The position of humor in human communication, In: Foerster, Heinz v. (Ed.), Cybernetics. Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation, New York, pp. 1–47.Google Scholar
BBC, 2011. The Office: 10th Anniversary Edition. BBC Worldwide, London.Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika, 2010. The language of fictional television: Drama and identity. Continuum, London, New York.Google Scholar
Bell, Nancy, 2009a. Impolite responses to failed humor, In: Norrick, Neal R., Chiaro, Delia (Eds.), Humor in interaction. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 143–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, Nancy D., 2006. Interactional adjustments in humorous intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics 3 (1), 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009b. Responses to failed humor. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (9), 1825–1836. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, Nancy D., Attardo, Salvatore, 2010. Failed humor: Issues in non-native speakers’ appreciation and understanding of humor. Intercultural Pragmatics 7 (3), 423–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin K., 2007. Experimental methods for simulation semantics, In: Gonzalez-Marquez, Monica, Mittelberg, Irene, Coulson, Seana, Spivey, Michael J. (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 277–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2012. Louder than words: The new science of how the mind makes meaning. Basic Books, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Bergen, Benjamin, Coulson, Seana, 2006. Frame-shifting humor in simulation-based language understanding. IEEE Intelligent Systems 21 (2), 59–62.Google Scholar
Bergson, Henri, 1900/2002. Le rire: Essai sur la signification du comique. J.-M. Tremblay, Chicoutimi.Google Scholar
, 1911. Laughter: an essay on the meaning of the comic. Authorized translation by Cloudesley Brereton and Fred Rothwell. MacMillan, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Billig, Michael, 2005. Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of laughter. SAGE, London, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
Bilmes, Alex, 2015. Heeeere’s Ricky! [URL]. Accessed 27 October 2018.
Birdwhistell, Ray L., 1968. Kinesics: Inter- and intra-channel communication research. Social science Information 7 (6), 9–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1970. Kinesics and context: Essays on body motion communication. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Booth, Simon, 2007. Inspirational variations? Culture and leadership in England, In: Chhokar, Jagdeep S., Brodbeck, Felix C., House, Robert J. (Eds.), Culture and leadership across the world. The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 335–359.Google Scholar
Boyd, Brian, 2004. Laughter and Literature: A Play Theory of Humor. Philosophy and Literature 28 (1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009. On the origin of stories: Evolution, cognition, and fiction. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyd, Robert, Richerson, Peter J., 2009. Culture and the evolution of human cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 364 (1533), 3281–3288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyer, Pascal, 2001. Religion explained: The human instincts that fashion gods, spirits and ancestors. Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Bratman, Michael, 1987. Intention, plans, and practical reason. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Brock, Alexander, 2004. Blackadder, Monty Python und Red Dwarf: Eine linguistische Untersuchung britischer Fernsehkomödien. Stauffenburg, Tübingen.Google Scholar
, 2006 [1996]. Wissensmuster im humoristischen Diskurs. Ein Beitrag zur Inkongruenztheorie anhand von Monty Python’s Flying Circus, In: Kotthoff, Helga (Ed.), Scherzkommunikation. Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung. Verlag für Gesprächsforschung, Radolfzell, pp. 21–48.Google Scholar
, 2009. Humour as a Metacommunicative Process. Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2), 177–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2015. Participation frameworks and participation in televised sitcom, candid camera and stand-up comedy, In: Dynel, Marta, Chovanec, Jan (Eds.), Participation in public and social media interactions. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 27–47.Google Scholar
, 2016. The borders of humorous intent – The case of TV comedies. Journal of Pragmatics 95, 58–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, Fraser, Colin, 1979. Speech as a marker of situation, In: Scherer, Klaus R., Giles, Howard (Eds.), Social markers in speech. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 33–62.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, Levinson, Stephen C., 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena, In: Goody, Esther N. (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 56–311.Google Scholar
, 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Stuart L., Vaughan, Christopher C., 2009. Play: How it shapes the brain, opens the imagination, and invigorates the soul. Avery, New York.Google Scholar
Burgoon, Judee K., 1993. Interpersonal Expectations, Expectancy Violations, and Emotional Communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 12 (1–2), 30–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, Judee K., Ebesu Hubbard, Amy S., 2005. Cross-cultural and intercultural applications of expectancy violations theory and interaction adaptation theory, In: Gudykunst, William B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, Calif, pp. 149–171.Google Scholar
Byrne, Donn, Clore, Gerald L., 1970. A reinforcement model of evaluative responses. Personality: An international journal 1 (2), 103–128.Google Scholar
Byrne, Donn E., 1971. The attraction paradigm. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Byrne, Ruth M. J., 2002. Mental models and counterfactual thoughts about what might have been. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6 (10), 426–431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cantor, Joanne R., Bryant, Jennings, Zillmann, Dolf, 1974. Enhancement of humor appreciation by transferred excitation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30 (6), 812–821. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carrell, Amy, 2008. Historical views of humor, In: Raskin, Victor (Ed.), The Primer of Humor Research. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 303–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Castelli, Fulvia, Happé, Francesca, Frith, Uta, Frith, Chris D., 2000. Movement and mind: a functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. Neuro Image 12 (3), 314–325.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L., 2007. The importance of not being earnest: The feeling behind laughter and humor. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charniak, Eugene, Goldman, Robert P., 1990. Plan recognition in stories and in life, In: Henrion, Max, Kanal, Laveen N., Lemmer, John F., Shachter, Ross D. (Eds.), Uncertainty in artificial intelligence 5. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 343–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chhokar, J. S., Brodbeck, F. C., House, R. J. (Eds.), 2007. Culture and leadership across the world: The GLOBE book of in-depth studies of 25 societies. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chothia, Jean, 1978. Forging a Language: A Study of Plays of Eugene O’Neill. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Clark, Andy, 2013. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3), 181–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., 1996. Using language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Brennan, Susan E., 1991. Grounding in communication. Perspectives on socially shared cognition 13, 127–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Fox Tree, Jean E., 2002. Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition 84 (1), 73–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., Krych, Meredyth A., 2004. Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding. Journal of Memory and Language 50 (1), 62–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colle, Livia, Becchio, Cristina, Bara, Bruno G., 2008. The non-Problem of the other minds: A neurodevelopmental perspective on shared intentionality. Human Development 51 (5–6), 336–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Condon, John W., Crano, William D., 1988. Inferred evaluation and the relation between attitude similarity and interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (5), 789–797. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, Seana, 2001. Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2015. Frame-shifting and frame semantics: Joke comprehension on the space structuring model, In: Brône, Geert, Feyaerts, Kurt, Veale, Tony (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics and humor research. De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, pp. 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creeber, G., Miller, T., Tulloch, J. (Eds.), 2001. The television genre book. BFI, London.Google Scholar
(Eds.), 2008. The television genre book, 2. ed. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.Google Scholar
Damasio, Antonio R., 1994. Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Avon Books, New York.Google Scholar
, 2000. The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. Harcourt, San Diego.Google Scholar
, 2010. Self comes to mind: Constructing the conscious brain. Pantheon Books, New York.Google Scholar
Davies, Catherine E., 1984. Joint joking: Improvisational humorous episodes in conversation, in: Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 360–371.Google Scholar
de Jongste, Henri, 2013. Negotiating humorous intent, In: Dynel, Marta (Ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 179–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2016. Mental models and humorous intent. Journal of Pragmatics 95, 107–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2017. Culture and incongruity in The Office (UK). Language & Communication 55, 88–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2018. Mental models, humorous texts and humour evaluation. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16 (1), 98–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C., 1987. The intentional stance. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel C., Haugeland, 1987. Intentionality, In: Gregory, Richard L. (Ed.), The Oxford Companion to the Mind. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, pp. 383–386.Google Scholar
Dessau, Bruce, 2002. Ricky Gervais & Stephen Merchant. BFI. [URL]. Accessed 19 April 2014.
Dunbar, Robert I. M., 2014. Mind the gap: or why humans aren’t just great apes, In: Dunbar, Robert I. M., Gamble, Clive, Gowlett, John A. J. (Eds.), Lucy to language. The benchmark papers, First edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duranti, A., 2010. Husserl, intersubjectivity and anthropology. Anthropological Theory 10 (1–2), 16–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, M., Chovanec, J. (Eds.), 2015. Participation in public and social media interactions. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta, 2008. Introduction to Special Issue on Humour: A Modest Attempt at Presenting Contemporary Linguistic Approaches to Humour Studies. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4 (1), 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009a. Beyond a Joke: Types of Conversational Humour. Language and Linguistics Compass 3 (5), 1284–1299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009b. Humorous garden-paths: A pragmatic-cognitive study. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.Google Scholar
, 2010. Not hearing things – Hearer/listener categories in polylogues. mediAzioni 9, [URL].
, 2011a. Revisiting Goffman’s postulates on participant statuses in verbal interaction. Language and Linguistics Compass 5 (7), 454–465. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2011b. Stranger than Fiction? A Few Methodological Notes on Linguistic Research in Film Discourse. Brno Studies in English 37 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2011c. “You talking to me?” The viewer as a ratified listener to film discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 43 (6), 1628–1644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2012. Garden Paths, Red Lights and Crossroads: On Finding Our Way to Understanding the Cognitive Mechanisms. Israeli Journal of Humor Research 1 (1), 6–28.Google Scholar
, 2013. Humorous phenomena in dramatic discourse. European Journal of Humour Research 1 (1), 22–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2014. On the part of ratified participants: Ratified listeners in multi-party interactions. Brno Studies in English 40 (1), 27–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2016. With or without intentions: Accountability and (un)intentional humour in film talk. Journal of Pragmatics 95, 67–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2017. But seriously: On conversational humour and (un)truthfulness. Lingua 179, 83–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta, Brock, Alexander, de Jongste, Henri, 2016. A burgeoning field of research: Humorous intent in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 95, 51–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J., Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), 2006. Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Berg, Oxford, New York.Google Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J., 2006. Social consequences of common ground, In: Enfield, Nicholas J., Levinson, Stephen C. (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Berg, Oxford, New York, pp. 399–430.Google Scholar
, 2008. Common ground as a resource for social affiliation, In: Kecskés, István, Mey, Jacob (Eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 223–254.Google Scholar
Ermida, Isabel, 2008. The language of comic narratives: Humor construction in short stories. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin et al. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erten-Buch, Christiane, Fischer, Anja, 2001. Englische Kulturstandards aus österreichischer Sicht, In: Fink, Gerhard, Meierewert, Sylvia (Eds.), Interkulturelles Management. Österreichische Perspektiven. Springer, Wien, New York, pp. 17–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, Dylan, 2001. Emotion: The science of sentiment. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York.Google Scholar
Eysenck, Hans J., 1942. The appreciation of humour: An experimental and theoretical study. British Journal of Psychology. General Section 32 (4), 295–309.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, 1985. Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
, 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., New York, NY, USA. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, Turner, Mark, 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Ferraro, Gary P., Briody, Elizabeth K., 2013. The cultural dimension of global business, 7th ed. Pearson, Boston.Google Scholar
Festinger, Leon, 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R., 1957. Papers in linguistics: 1934–1951. Oxford University Press, London, New York.Google Scholar
Flamson, Thomas, Barrett, H. C., 2008. The encryption theory of humor: A knowledge-based mechanism of honest signaling. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 6 (4), 261–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flamson, Thomas J., Bryant, Gregory A., 2013. Signals of humor, In: Dynel, Marta (Ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 49–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flood, Michael, 2013. Male and female sluts. Australian Feminist Studies 28 (75), 95–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forabosco, Giovannantonio, 1992. Cognitive aspects of the humor process: the concept of incongruity. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 5 (1–2), 45–68.Google Scholar
, 2008. Is the concept of incongruity still a useful construct for the advancement of humor research? Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4 (1), 45–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Kate, 2005. Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behaviour. Hodder and Stoughton, London.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund, 1928. Humor. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 9, 1–6.Google Scholar
, 1970 [1905]. Der Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewußten. S. Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Friedl, John, Pfeiffer, John E., 1977. Anthropology: the study of people. Harper’s College Press, New York.Google Scholar
Fry, William, 1963. Sweet madness: A study of humor. Pacific Books, Palo Alto. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, Vittorio, Goldman, Alvin, 1998. Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 (12), 493–501. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallese, Vittorio, Keysers, Christian, Rizzolatti, Giacomo, 2004. A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8 (9), 396–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold, 1967. Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
Gaut, Berys N., 1998. Just Joking: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Humor. Philosophy and Literature 22 (1), 51–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gervais, Ricky, 2012. As ‘The Office’ Ends, Ricky Gervais Spills Secrets From the Show’s Start. The Wall Street Journal, September 6.Google Scholar
Gervais, Ricky, Merchant, Stephen, 2003a. The office: The scripts, series 1. BBC Worldwide, London.Google Scholar
, 2003b. The office: The scripts, series 2. BBC Worldwide, London.Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel, 1999. On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics 31 (7), 919–929. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving, 1955. On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes 18 (3), 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1967. Interaction ritual; essays on face-to-face behavior. Doubleday, Garden City, N. Y.Google Scholar
, 1971 [1959]. The presentation of self in everyday life. Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middlesex.Google Scholar
, 1981. Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Gordon, Gwen, 2009. What is Play?: In search of a universal definition, In: Kuschner, David S. (Ed.), From children to red hatters. Diverse images and issues of play. University Press of America, Lanham, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Gordon, Mordechai, 2012. Exploring the Relationship between Humor and Aesthetic Experience. The Journal of Aesthetic Education 46 (1), 110–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gosling, Samuel D., Ko, Sei J., Mannarelli, Thomas, Morris, Margaret E., 2002. A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82 (3), 379–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Lindsay T., Sandy, Carson J., Gosling, Samuel D., 2011. Manifestations of individual differences in physical and virtual environments, In: Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas, von Stumm, Sophie, Furnham, Adrian (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 773–800.Google Scholar
Greve, Peter F., 2015. The role of prediction in mental processing: A process approach. New Ideas in Psychology 39, 45–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P., 1957. Meaning. The philosophical review 66 (3), 377–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1975. Logic and conversation, In: Cole, Peter, Morgan, Jerry L. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Volume 3: Speech acts. Academic Press, New York, pp. 22–40.Google Scholar
Gruner, Charles R., 1978. Understanding laughter: The workings of wit & humor. Nelson-Hall, Chicago.Google Scholar
, 1997. The game of humor: A comprehensive theory of why we laugh. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, N.J.Google Scholar
Haidt, Jonathan, 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review 108 (4), 814–834. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Edward T., 1959. The silent language: An anthropologist reveals how we communicate by our manners and behavior. Doubleday, Garden City NY.Google Scholar
, 1969. The hidden dimension: An anthropologist examines man’s use of space in public and in private. Anchor, Garden City, NY.Google Scholar
, 1976. Beyond culture. Anchor, Garden City, NY.Google Scholar
, 1984. The dance of life: The other dimension of time. Anchor, Garden City, N.Y.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Antonia F. de C., 2009. Research review: Goals, intentions and mental states: challenges for theories of autism. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines 50 (8), 881–892. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammer, M. R., Nishida, H., Wiseman, R. L., 1996. The Influence of Situational Prototypes on Dimensions of Intercultural Communication Competence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 27 (3), 267–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, The A., Moniz Pereira, Luís, 2013. State-of-the-Art of Intention Recognition and its use in Decision Making. A Research Summary. AI Communication Journal 26 (2), 237–246.Google Scholar
Haslett, Beth, 1987. Communication: strategic action in context. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael, 2008. Intention in pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics 5 (2), 99–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009. Intention(ality) and the conceptualization of communication in pragmatics. Australian Journal of Linguistics 29 (1), 91–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2012. On understandings of intention: A response to Wedgwood. Intercultural Pragmatics 9 (2), 161–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2013. Speaker meaning and accountability in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 48 (1), 41–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, Jeff, Blakeslee, Sandra, 2004. On intelligence. Times Books, New York.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer, 2001. The pragmatics of humor support. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 14 (1), 55–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heider, Fritz, Simmel, Marianne, 1944. An Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior. The American Journal of Psychology 57 (2), 243–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henricks, Thomas S., 2009. Play and the rhetorics of time: Progress, regression, and the meanings of the present, In: Kuschner, David S. (Ed.), From children to red hatters. Diverse images and issues of play. University Press of America, Lanham, pp. 14–38.Google Scholar
Hickok, Gregory, 2014. The myth of mirror neurons: The real neuroscience of communication and cognition. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas, 1640. The Elements of Law Natural and Politic. [URL]. Accessed 8 December 2013.
Hofstede, Geert H., 1980. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. SAGE, Beverly Hills, Calif.Google Scholar
, 1991. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill, London, New York.Google Scholar
Hofstede, Geert H., Hofstede, Gert J., Minkov, Michael, 2010. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind: intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Hohwy, Jakob, 2013. The predictive mind. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holland, John H., Holyoak, Keith J., Nisbett, Richard E., Thagard, Paul R., 1989. Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovering. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet, Marra, Meredith, 2002. Having a laugh at work. Journal of Pragmatics 34 (12), 1683–1710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Jonathan, 2015. The Office named best TV show of the past 20 years. RadioTimes, February 5.Google Scholar
House, Robert J., Hanges, Paul J., Javidan, Mansour, Dorfman, Peter W., Gupta, Vipin, 2011. Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies, 5th ed. SAGE, Thousand Oaks et al.Google Scholar
Hurley, Matthew M., Dennett, Daniel C., Adams, Reginald B., 2011. Inside jokes: Using humor to reverse-engineer the mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Husserl, Edmund, 1985. Texte zur Phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewusstseins (1893–1917). F. Meiner Verlag, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Hyde, Marina, 2016. Farage is now Britain’s face at the EU: petty, unlovable, essentially terrified. The Guardian, June 28.Google Scholar
Hymes, Dell H., 1974. Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Iacoboni, Marco, 2009a. Imitation, Empathy, and Mirror Neurons. Annual Review of Psychology 60, 653–670. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009b. Mirroring people: The science of empathy and how we connect with others. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.Google Scholar
Jacob, Pierre, 2010. Intentionality, In: Zalta, Edward N. (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fall 2010 ed.Google Scholar
Johansson, Gunnar, 1973. Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception & psychophysics 14 (2), 201–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnson-Laird, Philip N., 1983. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
, 1980. Mental models in cognitive science. Cognitive Science 4 (1), 71–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jorgensen, Julia, 1996. The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics 26 (5), 613–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar Straus and Giroux, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel, 2000/1790. Critique of the power of judgment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kecskés, István, 2010. The paradox of communication: Socio-cognitive approach to pragmatics. Pragmatics and Society 1 (1), 50–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2014. Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Kendon, Adam, 1973. The role of visible behavior in the organization of social interaction, In: Cranach, Mario v., Vine, Jan (Eds.), Social communication and movement. Academic Press, London and New York, pp. 29–74.Google Scholar
, 1980. Gesticulation and speech: Two aspects of the process of utterance, In: Key, Mary R. (Ed.), The relationship of verbal and nonverbal communication. Walter de Gruyter, pp. 207–227.Google Scholar
Kerr, J. H., Apter, M. J. (Eds.), 1991. Adult play: A reversal theory approach. Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Khemlani, Sunny, 2006 – present. Mental models & reasoning. Princeton University. [URL]. Accessed 6 March 2017.
Koestler, Arthur, 1964. The act of creation. Pan Books, London.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, H. (Ed.), 2006a [1996]. Scherzkommunikation: Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung. Verlag für Gesprächsforschung, Radolfzell.Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga, 2006. Pragmatics of performance and the analysis of conversational humor. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 19 (3). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2006b [1996]. Vorwort, In: Kotthoff, Helga (Ed.), Scherzkommunikation. Beiträge aus der empirischen Gesprächsforschung. Verlag für Gesprächsforschung, Radolfzell, pp. 7–20.Google Scholar
, 2009. Joint Construction of Humorous Fictions in Conversation. An Unnamed Narrative Activity in a Playful Keying. Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2), 195–218.Google Scholar
Kozak, Megan N., Marsh, Abigail A., Wegner, Daniel M., 2006. What do I think you’re doing? Action identification and mind attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (4), 543–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kozic, Milena, 2012. Framing communication as play in the sitcom: Patterning the verbal and the nonverbal in humour, In: Chovanec, Ján, Ermida, Isabel (Eds.), Language and humour in the media. Cambridge Scholars Publ, Newcastle, pp. 107–138.Google Scholar
Krach, Sören, Cohrs, Jan C., de Echeverría Loebell, Nicole Cruz, Kircher, Tilo, Sommer, Jens, Jansen, Andreas, Paulus, Frieder M., 2011. Your flaws are my pain: linking empathy to vicarious embarrassment. PLoS ONE 6 (4), e18675. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kress, Gunther R., 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge, London, New York.Google Scholar
Krikmann, Arvo, 2006. Contemporary linguistic theories of humour. Folklore 33, 27–58.Google Scholar
Kuipers, Giselinde, 2006. Good humor, bad taste: A sociology of the joke. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laanen, Judith, 2015. Weekendtips: Missie Aarde, avant-garde kunst en muziekdocumentaires. NRC, January 9.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, 1987. Cognitive models and prototype theory. In Ulric Neisser (Ed.): Concepts and conceptual development. Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 63–100.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, Johnson, Mark, 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Latta, Robert L., 1998. The basic humor process. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C., 1988. Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework, In: Drew, Paul, Wootton, Anthony (Eds.), Erving Goffman. Exploring the interaction order. Polity Press, Oxford, pp. 161–227.Google Scholar
, 2006a. Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies 8 (1), 85–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2006b. On the human “interaction engine”, In: Enfield, Nicholas J., Levinson, Stephen C. (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction. Berg, Oxford, New York, pp. 39–69.Google Scholar
Lim, Tae-Seop, Bowers, John W., 1991. Facework Solidarity, Approbation, and Tact. Human Communication Research 17 (3), 415–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Leigh A., Dale, Claudia, 2009. Using mental models to study cross-cultural interactions, In: Nakata, Cheryl (Ed.), Beyond Hofstede. Culture frameworks for global marketing and management. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, New York, pp. 222–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Livingstone, Sonia, 2013. Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malle, Bertram F., 2002. The relation between language and theory of mind in development and evolution, In: Givón, Talmy, Malle, Bertram F. (Eds.), The evolution of language out of pre-language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 265–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2004. How the mind explains behavior: Folk explanations, meaning, and social interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2011. Attribution theories: How people make sense of behavior, In: Chadee, Derek (Ed.), Theories in social psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Malden, MA, Oxford, pp. 72–95.Google Scholar
Marszalek, Agnes, 2013. “It’s not funny out of context!”: A cognitive stylistic approach to humorous narratives, In: Dynel, Marta (Ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 393–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, Rod A., 2007. The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Elsevier, Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsumoto, David, 2007. Culture, Context, and Behavior. Journal of Personality 75 (6), 1285–1320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayerhofer, Bastian, Schacht, Annekathrin, 2013. Garden path jokes, In: Dynel, Marta (Ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 341–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McAdams, Dan P., 2006. The role of narrative in personality psychology today. Narrative Inquiry 16 (1), 11–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGhee, Paul E., 1979. Humor: Its origin and development. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Meyer, John C., 2000. Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication. Communication Theory 10 (3), 310–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miles, Lynden K., Karpinska, Katarzyna, Lumsden, Joanne, Macrae, C. N., 2010. The meandering mind: vection and mental time travel. PLoS ONE 5 (5), e10825. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, Brett, 2004. Comedy verite: contemporary sitcom form. Screen 45 (1), 63–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2005. Television sitcom. BFI, London.Google Scholar
, 2009. The sitcom. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milner Davis, Jessica, 2014. Bergson’s theory of the comic, In: Attardo, Salvatore (Ed.), Encyclopedia of humor studies, I. SAGE, Los Angeles, US [u.a.], pp. 77–80.Google Scholar
Minsky, Marvin, 1975. A framework for representing knowledge, In: Winston, Patrick Henry, Horn, Berthold K. P. (Eds.), The psychology of computer vision. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 211–281.Google Scholar
Mitchell, David, 2016. Does Amber Rudd hate foreigners, or does she hate us? Guardian, October 9.Google Scholar
Mole, John, 2003. Mind your manners: Managing business cultures in the new global Europe, 3rd ed. Nicholas Brealey Pub., London, Yarmouth, Me.Google Scholar
Moore, C., Dunham, P. J. (Eds.), 1995. Joint attention: Its origins and role in development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J.Google Scholar
Morreall, J. (Ed.), 1987a. The Philosophy of laughter and humor. State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
Morreall, John, 1983. Taking laughter seriously. State University of New York, Albany.Google Scholar
, 1987b. Introduction, In: Morreall, John (Ed.), The Philosophy of laughter and humor. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
, 2009a. Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. Wiley-Blackwell, Chicester. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009b. Humor as Cognitive Play. Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2), 241–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2016. Philosophy of Humor, In: Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2016 ed. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Morris, Desmond, 1967. The naked ape. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Morry, Marian M., 2005. Relationship satisfaction as a predictor of similarity ratings: A test of the attraction-similarity hypothesis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 22 (4), 561–584. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muir, Hugh, Kettle, Martin, Ryan, Frances, Travis, Alan, 2016. Michael Gove launches Tory leadership bid: ‘Whatever charisma is, I don’t have it’. The Guardian, July 1.Google Scholar
Németh T., Eniko, 2008. Verbal information transmission without communicative intention. Intercultural Pragmatics 5 (2), 153–176.Google Scholar
Nerhardt, Göran, 1970. Humor and inclination to laugh: emotional reactions to stimuli of Emotional Reactions to Stimuli of Different Divergence from a Range of Expectancy. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 11, 185–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nishida, Hiroko, 1999. A cognitive approach to intercultural communication based on schema theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 23 (5), 753–777. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2005. Cultural schema theory, In: Gudykunst, William B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, Calif, pp. 401–418.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. R., Chiaro, D. (Eds.), 2009. Humor in interaction. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norrick, Neal R., 2009. A Theory of Humor in Interaction. Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2), 261–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norrick, Neal R., Spitz, Alice, 2010. The interplay of humor and conflict in conversation and scripted humorous performance. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 23 (1), 83–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, Sigrid, 2004. Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge, New York, London. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nuyts, Jan, 2000. Intentionality, In: Verschueren, Jef, Östman, Jan-Ola (Eds.), Key Notions for Pragmatics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
Oberman, Lindsay M., Ramachandran, Vilayanur S., 2007. The simulating social mind: The role of the mirror neuron system and simulation in the social and communicative deficits of autism spectrum disorders. Psychological Bulletin 133 (2), 310–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oring, Elliott, 2016. Joking asides: The theory, analysis, and aesthetics of humor. Utah State University Press, Logan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Jerry, 1994. Taking humour seriously. Routledge, London, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panksepp, Jaak, 1998. Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pessoa, Luiz, 2008. On the relationship between emotion and cognition. Nature reviews. Neuroscience 9 (2), 148–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2013. Cognitive-emotional brain: From interactions to integration. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piazza, R., Bednarek, M., Rossi, F. (Eds.), 2011. Telecinematic discourse: Approaches to the language of films and television series. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pien, Diana, Rothbart, Mary K., 1976. Incongruity and resolution in children’s humor: A re-examination. Child Development 47 (4), 966–971. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Premack, David, Woodruff, Guy, 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (4), 515–526. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Priego-Valverde, Béatrice, 2009. Failed humor in conversation: A double voicing analysis, In: Norrick, Neal R., Chiaro, Delia (Eds.), Humor in interaction. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 165–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramachandran, V. S., 2011. The tell-tale brain: A neuroscientist’s quest for what makes us human. W. W. Norton, New York.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, V. S., Blakeslee, Sandra, 1999. Phantoms in the brain: Human nature and the architecture of the mind. Fourth Estate, London.Google Scholar
Raskin, Victor, 1985. Semantic mechanisms of humor. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Ritchie, Graeme D., 1999. Developing the Incongruity-Resolution Theory. Proceedings of AISB Symposium on Creative Language: Stories and Humour, Edinburgh, April 1999, 78–85.Google Scholar
, 2004. The linguistic analysis of jokes. Routledge, London, New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009. Variants of Incongruity Resolution. Journal of Literary Theory 3 (2), 313–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzolatti, Giacomo, Fadiga, Luciano, Fogassi, Leonardo, Gallese, Vittorio, 2002. From mirror neurons to imitation, In: Meltzoff, Andrew N., Prinz, Wolfgang (Eds.), The imitative mind. Development, evolution, and brain bases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K, New York, pp. 247–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruch, Willibald, 1998. Foreword and overview: Sense of humor: A new look at an old concept, In: Ruch, Willibald (Ed.), The sense of humor. Explorations of a personality characteristic, vol. 3. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 3–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, David E., Smolenksy, P., McClelland, James L., Hinton, Geoffrey E., 1986. Schemata and sequential processes in PDP models, In: McClelland, James L., Rumelhart, David E. (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing. Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp. 7–57.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, 1974. An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling in conversation, In: Bauman, R., Sherzer, J. (Eds.), Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 337–353.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de, 1989 [1916]. Cours de linguistique générale: Édition critique par Rudolf Engler. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Schank, Roger C., Abelson, Robert P., 1977. Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J, New York.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Sacks, Harvey, 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8 (4), 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Stefan, Thomas, Alexander, 2003. Beruflich in Großbritannien: Trainingsprogramm für Manager, Fach- und Führungskräfte. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Schnurr, Stephanie, 2010. Humour, In: Locher, Miriam A., Graham, Sage L. (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics, vol. 6. De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, New York, pp. 307–326.Google Scholar
Schopenhauer, Arthur, 1909/1844. The World As Will And Idea. Translated from the German by R. B. Haldane, M.A. and J. Kemp, M.A. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., London.Google Scholar
Schou, Andreas, 2012. Myötähäpeä: Vicarious embarrassment at another’s humiliation. [URL]. Accessed 1 September 2014.
Schroll-Machl, Sylvia, 2011. Doing business with Germans: Their perception, our perception, 4th ed. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen.Google Scholar
Schwind, Kai H., 2015. Like Watching a Motorway Crash: Exploring the Embarrassment Humor of The Office. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 28 (1), 49–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ronald, Scollon, Suzanne B. K., 2001. Intercultural communication: A discourse approach, 2nd edition ed. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Searle, John R., 1983. Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, Stephen V., 2010. Following gaze: gaze-following behavior as a window into social cognition. Frontiers in integrative neuroscience 4, 1–13.Google Scholar
Short, Mick, 1981. Discourse Analysis and the Analysis of Drama. Applied Linguistics II (2), 180–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1994. Discourse analysis and drama, In: Asher, Richard E. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Pergamon Press, Oxford, New York, pp. 949–952.Google Scholar
Shultz, Thomas R., 1972. The role of incongruity and resolution in children’s appreciation of cartoon humor. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 13 (3), 456–477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, 2000. Rapport management: A framework for analysis, In: Spencer-Oatey, Helen (Ed.), Culturally speaking. Managing rapport through talk across cultures. Continuum, London, New York, pp. 11–46.Google Scholar
, 2002. Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations. Journal of Pragmatics 34 (5), 529–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2005. (Im)politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research 1, 95–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2007. Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics 39 (4), 639–656. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Wilson, Deirdre, 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
, 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition, 2. ed. ed. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Suddendorf, Thomas, Corballis, Michael C., 1997. Mental time travel and the evolution of the human mind. Genetic, social, and general psychology monographs 123 (2), 133–167.Google Scholar
, 2007. The evolution of foresight: What is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (3), 299–313; discussion 313–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suls, Jerry M., 1972. A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons, In: Goldstein, Jeffrey H., McGhee, Paul E. (Eds.), The psychology of humor. Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues. Academic Press, New York, pp. 81–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1983. Cognitive processes in humor appreciation, In: McGhee, Paul E., Goldstein, Jeffrey H. (Eds.), Handbook of humor research. Volume 1. Basic Issues. Springer, New York, pp. 39–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swan, Deniselle, 2006–2007. Brentisms– My Thoughts on The Office UK. Blog, [URL].
Taillard, Marie-Odile, 2002. Beyond Communicative Intention. UCL Working papers in linguistics 14, 189–206.Google Scholar
Thomas, Alexander, 1996. Analyse der Handlungswirksamkeit von Kulturstandards, In: Thomas, Alexander (Ed.), Psychologie interkulturellen Handelns. Hogrefe, Göttingen, pp. 107–135.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella, 1994. Face and facework: an introduction, In: Ting-Toomey, Stella (Ed.), The challenge of facework. Cross-cultural and interpersonal issues. State Univ. of New York Press, Albany, NY, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
, 2005. The matrix of face: An updated face-negotiation theory, In: Gudykunst, William B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication. SAGE, Thousand Oaks, Calif, pp. 71–92.Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael, 1995. Joint attention as social cognition, In: Moore, Chris, Dunham, Philip J. (Eds.), Joint attention. Its origins and role in development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 103–130.Google Scholar
, 1999. The cultural origins of human cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
, 2003. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
, 2009. Why we cooperate. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2010. Origins of human communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, London.Google Scholar
, 2014. The ultra-social animal. European Journal of Social Psychology 44 (3), 187–194. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael, Moll, Henrike, 2010. The gap is social: Human shared intentionality and culture, In: Kappeler, Peter M., Silk, Joan B. (Eds.), Mind the gap. Tracing the origins of human universals. Springer, Berlin, London, New York, pp. 331–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toplak, Maggie, Katz, Albert N., 2000. On the uses of sarcastic irony. Journal of Pragmatics 32 (10), 1467–1488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Triezenberg, Katrina E., 2008. Humor in literature, In: Raskin, Victor (Ed.), The Primer of Humor Research, vol. 8. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, pp. 523–542. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trompenaars, Alfons, Hampden-Turner, Charles, 1998. Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in global business, 2nd ed. McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Tsakona, Villy, 2013. Okras and the metapragmatic stereotypes of humour, In: Dynel, Marta (Ed.), Developments in linguistic humour theory, vol. 1. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, pp. 25–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A., 1984. Prejudice in Discourse. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1987. Communicating racism: Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk. Sage Publications, Inc., Newbury Park.Google Scholar
, 1992. Discourse and the Denial of Racism. Discourse & Society 3 (1), 87–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 1999. Context models in discourse processing, In: van Oostendorp, Herre, Goldman, Susan R. (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading. L. Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J, pp. 123–148.Google Scholar
, 2007. Discourse and racism, In: Goldberg, David T., Solomos, John (Eds.), A companion to racial and ethnic studies. Blackwell, Malden, Mass., pp. 145–159.Google Scholar
, 2008. Discourse and context: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2009. Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2014. Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A., Kintsch, Walter, 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, Theo, 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon.Google Scholar
Ventis, Larry, 2015. Thinking fast and slow in the experience of humor. Humor–International Journal of Humor Research 28 (3), 351–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verschueren, Jef, 1999. Understanding pragmatics. Arnold, London.Google Scholar
de Vignemont, Frederique, Singer, Tania, 2006. The empathic brain: how, when and why? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (10), 435–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vischer, Jacqueline C., 2005. Space meets status: Designing workplace performance. Routledge, London, New York.Google Scholar
Walters, Ben, 2005. The Office. BFI, London.Google Scholar
Warneken, Felix, Tomasello, Michael, 2009. The roots of human altruism. British journal of psychology 100, 455–471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wegner, Daniel M., 1989. White bears and other unwanted thoughts: Suppression, obsession, and the psychology of mental control. Viking, New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
Wellman, Henry M., 1992. The child’s theory of mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Willis, Kenneth George, 2002. Making sense of humour. Some pragmatic and political aspects. London: London Metropolitan University.Google Scholar
Wimmer, Heinz, Perner, Josef, 1983. Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition 13 (1), 103–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, Reisigl, Martin, 2015. Discourse and Racism, In: Tannen, Deborah, Hamilton, Heidi E., Schiffrin, Deborah (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA, pp. 576–596.Google Scholar
worldbusinessculture.com. British management style. [URL]. Accessed 27 March 2017.
Wyer, Robert S., Collins, James E., 1992. A theory of humor elicitation. Psychological Review 99 (4), 663–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xenakis, Ioannis, Arnellos, Argyris, Darzentas, John, 2012. The functional role of emotions in aesthetic judgment. New Ideas in Psychology 30 (2), 212–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yentob, Alan, 2013. The misfit 2. [URL]. Accessed 24 June 2014.
Zacks, Jeffrey M., Kumar, Shawn, Abrams, Richard A., Mehta, Ritesh, 2009. Using movement and intentions to understand human activity. Cognition 112 (2), 201–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Žegarac, Vladimir, 2009. A cognitive pragmatic perspective on communication and culture, In: Kotthoff, Helga, Spencer-Oatey, Helen (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural communication. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 31–53.Google Scholar
Zillmann, Dolf, 1983. Disparagement Humor, In: McGhee, Paul E., Goldstein, Jeffrey H. (Eds.), Handbook of humor research. Volume 1. Basic Issues. Springer, New York, pp. 85–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zillmann, Dolf, Stocking, S. H., 1976. Putdown humor. Journal of Communication 26 (3), 154–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, Rolf A., Radvansky, Gabriel A., 1998. Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin 123 (2), 162–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar