On the nature of “laughables”: Laughter as a response to overdone figurative phrases

Elizabeth Holt

Abstract

In this article I explore the relationship between laugh responses and the turns which they orient to. I consider whether it is possible to identify properties of the prior turns that the recipient may be orienting to in laughing. Thus, I begin by briefly exploring the relationship between laughter and humour in interaction. But I point to some of the difficulties in identifying what it is that makes some discourse humorous, and I argue that laughter is not simply a reaction to the perception of humour. Laughter should be considered as an action in its own right, the occurrence of which may have nothing to do with the presence of humour. Consequently, I consider the notion of the “laughable” and whilst I agree that “(v)irtually any utterance or action could draw laughter, under the right (or wrong) circumstances” (Glenn 2003: 49), I argue it is often possible to identify recurrent properties of turns treated as laughables. These properties concern the design, action and the sequential position of the turns. Thus, it seems that speakers draw from a range of resources in constructing laughables. I illustrate this by exploring a collection of instances of figurative phrases followed by laugh responses from telephone calls. I argue that in responding with laughter, recipients may orient to a cluster of properties in the prior turn. However, because laughter is an action with its own sequential implications, rather than simply a response to a prior turn, whether a recipient orients to a prior candidate laughable by laughing will depend on the nature of his or her contribution to the action sequence.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Attardo, S
(1994) Linguistic theories of humor. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Coser, R.L
(1960) Laughter among colleagues: A study of the social functions of laughter among the staff of a mental hospital. Psychiatry 23: 81-95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P
(1987) Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 25: 219-53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P., and E. Holt
(1988) Complainable matters: The use of idiomatic expressions in making complaints. Social Problems 35: 398-417. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1998) Figures of speech: Figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation. Language in Society 27: 495-522. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C., P. Kay, and M.C. O’Connor
(1986) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of “let alone”. Unpublished manuscript.
Ford, C.E., and B.A. Fox
(2010) Multiple practices for constructing laughables. In D. Barth, E. Reber & M. Selting (eds.), Prosody in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, P
(2003) Laughter in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Haakana, M
(1999) Laughing matters; a conversation analytical study of laughter in doctor-patient interaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Finnish Language, University of Helsinki.
(2002) Laughter in medical interaction: From quantification to analysis, and back. Journal of Sociolinguistics 6.2: 207-235. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Haakana, M., and M.-L. Sorjonen
(2011) Invoking another context: Playfulness in buying lottery tickets at convenience stores. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 1288-1302. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Holt, E
(2000) Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction 33.4: 425-454. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2010) The last laugh: Shared laughter and topic termination. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1513-1525. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G
(1979) A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance declination. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday language studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington, pp. 79-96.Google Scholar
(1984) On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 346-369.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Koestler, A
(1964) The act of creation. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Lavin, D., and D.W. Maynard
(2001) Standardization vs. rapport: How interviewers handle the laughter of respondents during telephone surveys. American Sociological Review 66: 453-479. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Long, D.L., and A.C. Graesser
(1988) Wit and humour in discourse processes. Discourse Processes 11: 35-60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morreall, J
(1983) Taking laughter seriously. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Mulkay, M
(1988) On humour; its nature and its place in modern society. Cambridge: Polity Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Nash, W
(1985) The language of humour. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Raskin, V
(1985) Semantic mechanisms of humour. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Sacks, H
(1974) An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling in conversation. In R. Bauman and J. Sherzer (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. London: Cambridge University Press, pp. 337-353.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., and H. Sacks
(1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica 8: 289-327. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schenkein, J.N
(1972) Towards an analysis of natural conversation and the sense of hehe . Semiotica 6: 344-377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, J
(2010) Conversation Analysis: An introduction. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stivers, T., and F. Rossano
(2010) Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43.1: 3-31. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Suls, J.M
(1977) Cognitive and disparagement theories of humor: A theoretical and empirical synthesis. In A.J. Chapman and H.C. Foot (eds.), It’s a funny thing, humour. Oxford: Pergamon. CrossrefGoogle Scholar