Traditional theories of sarcasm treat it as a case of a speaker's meaning the opposite of what she says. Recently, 'expressivists' have argued that sarcasm is not a type of speaker meaning at all, but merely the expression of a dissociative attitude toward an evoked thought or perspective. I argue that we should analyze sarcasm in terms of meaning inversion, as the traditional theory does; but that we need to construe 'meaning' more broadly, to include illocutionary force (...) and evaluative attitudes as well as propositional content. I distinguish four subclasses of sarcasm, individuated in terms of the target of inversion. Three of these classes raise serious challenges for a standard implicature analysis. (shrink)

This essay looks at two young English-speaking Iraqi bloggers whose internationally recognized writings describe the chaos in post-Saddam Iraq. It examines sarcasm as a mode of resistance as employed by Salam Pax, characterized by BBC Radio in 2003 as “the most famous diarist in the world,” and Riverbend, whose blog was published as a book and translated into several languages. By subjecting the colonial discourse to ridicule, they not only successfully convey the angst their people suffer, but also mock (...) a stereotypical rhetoric that haunts the Western mentality regarding the Middle East. This essay negotiates their use of sarcasm as a means of non-violent resistance. It demonstrates how, for instance, they shift from the sarcastic to the absurd to unravel the banality of the colonial mind and the conceited position of its liberating enterprises. The aim of the paper is, therefore, to shed light on the emergence of a digitalized group of subalterns who write back to the center in the wake of the American intervention to topple the Baath regime in Iraq. Pax and Riverbend distinctively succeed in subverting the colonial and hegemonic gaze by unravelling the encroaching uncertainties of war through the deployment of sarcasm to signify resistance, and by transforming the coalition forces’ theatre of war into a theatre of the absurd. (shrink)

Irony and sarcasm are two quite different, sometimes morally dubious, linguistic tropes. We can draw a distinction between them if we identify irony as a speech act that calls what is bad good and, correspondingly, sarcasm calls good bad. This allows us to ask, which one is morally worse. My argument is based on the idea that the speaker can legitimately bypass what is good and call it bad, which is to say that she may literally mean what (...) she says. This is not true of the opposite case: one cannot bypass what is bad and, therefore, she paradoxically does not mean what she says. In other words, irony is a morally less guilty trope. What is bad has its faults and thus it can be ironized; what is good is without blemish and thus it is difficult to know how it could be called bad. Also, irony can be freely intended, or verbal, or it can be situational in social context. I also discuss dramatic irony in Classical context. Sarcasm does not allow such complexity. Instead, we speak of cynicism and even nihilism as moral attitudes that accompany sarcasm and give it its typical force; or sarcasm may lead to cynicism and nihilism, that is, to the denial of values. Irony does not entail any corresponding attitudes or moral positions. This paper is a philosophical contribution to the ethics of communication and language. (shrink)

Pairing bright, hilarious illustrations with witty one-liners that most people would never dare say out loud, each Co-edikit book is a celebration of the human experience and the kind of gift that ensures its reader will maintain a laughing perspective on life. "I don't like morning people...or mornings...or people." On those days when life gets on your last nerve, Sarcasm is the perfect pick-me-up!

Recognition of sarcastic statements has been a challenge in the process of sentiment analysis. A sarcastic sentence contains only positive words conveying a negative sentiment. Therefore, it is tough for any automated machine to identify the exact sentiment of the text in the presence of sarcasm. The existing systems for sarcastic sentiment detection are limited to the text scripted in English. Nowadays, researchers have shown greater interest in low resourced languages such as Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, Arabic, Chinese, Dutch, Indonesian, (...) etc. To analyse these low resource languages, the biggest challenge is the lack of available resources, especially in the context of Indian languages. Indian languages are very rich in morphology which pose a greater challenge for the automated machines. Telugu is one of the most popular languages after Hindi among Indian languages. In this article, we have collected and annotated a corpus of Telugu conversation sentences in the form of a question followed by a reply for sarcasm detection. Further, a set of algorithms are proposed for the analysis of sarcasm in the corpus of Telugu conversation sentences. The proposed algorithms are based on hyperbolic features namely, Interjection, Intensifier, Question mark and Exclamation symbol. The achieved accuracy is 94%. (shrink)

We examined the contextual factors that may trigger sarcasm in conversations between close friends and colleagues. Experiment 1 provided situations in which a close friend behaved in neutral or non-neutral (silly/annoying) manners. Sixty participants freely responded and rated the level of sarcasm of their responses and their communicative intent. These self-reported ratings were compared to ratings provided by 360 external observers in Experiment 2, who evaluated the same situations and responses. Both self- and other-reported ratings were higher when (...) the preceding context was perceived as non-neutral, and when the intended/perceived intent was to mock the addressee or make clever remarks. Only observers associated higher sarcasm ratings with the intent to criticize. Experiment 3 tested sarcasm-triggering context types in finer granularity and textually manipulated the social relationship between interlocutors. Situations in which the addressee failed to recognize their own flaws, behaved silly, or talked about uninteresting topics triggered stronger sarcasm use than neutral situations. Situations in which the addressee behaved in entitled or demanding manners triggered stronger sarcasm if the speaker found them funny, but weaker sarcasm if they found them annoying. The social relationship between the speaker and the addressee did not affect the frequency of sarcasm use. Taken together, sarcasm was consistently associated with a light level of negativity, which appeared when the context evoked emotional reactions such as silliness or annoyance. Nonetheless, speakers and observers alike evaluated sarcasm as a humorous and bond-enhancing tool of communication in general. (shrink)

As the use of automated social media analysis tools surges, concerns over accuracy of analytics have increased. Some tentative evidence suggests that sarcasm alone could account for as much as a 50% drop in accuracy when automatically detecting sentiment. This paper assesses and outlines the prevalence of sarcastic and ironic language within social media posts. Several past studies proposed models for automatic sarcasm and irony detection for sentiment analysis; however, these approaches result in models trained on training data (...) of highly questionable quality, with little qualitative appreciation of the underlying data. To understand the issues and scale of the problem, we are the first to conduct and present results of a focused manual semantic annotation analysis of two datasets of Twitter messages, associated with; hashtags commonly employed in automated sarcasm and irony detection approaches, and tweets relating to 25 distinct events, including, scandals, product releases, cultural events, accidents, terror incidents, etc. We also highlight the contextualised use of multi-word hashtags in the communication of humour, sarcasm and irony, pointing out that many sentiment analysis tools simply fail to recognise such hashtag-based expressions. Our findings also offer indicative evidence regarding the quality of training data used for automated machine learning models in sarcasm, irony and sentiment detection. Worryingly only 15% of tweets labelled as sarcastic were truly sarcastic. We highlight the need for future research studies to rethink their approach to data preparation and a more careful interpretation of sentiment analysis. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to shed some light on the linguistic concept of implicit offensiveness. On the one hand, implicitness will be juxtaposed with indirectness as the two concepts are not conceived of here as synonymous. On the other hand, a typology of offensiveness (vs offensive language and vs offendedness) will be proposed, as well as the overarching term ‘covert meaning’ that will span figurative implicitness and non-figurative implicitness. The gradability of various forms of covert meaning and its (...) overlap with overt meaning (subsuming explicit literal meaning and implicit literal meaning) will also be discussed. In the analysis, two sample implicit concepts will be examined (irony vs sarcasm) based on corpus data (of general English and dedicated offensiveness corpus) and using non-contextual embeddings. Theory-wise, the paper demonstrates that implicitness is a complex term which is fuzzy and gradable; methodology-wise, it shows how computational tools can be used to attest theoretical assumptions related to offensive covert terms. (shrink)

Although sarcasm is commonly used worldwide, little is known about the interpretation of sarcasm in intercultural communications. We conducted an experiment investigating the effect of common ground in intercultural communication by manipulating communicators’ cultural background, with high common ground communicators from the same culture and low common ground communicators from different cultures. Specifically, 201 UK participants and 201 Chinese participants read scenarios describing speakers and recipients from the UK or China. The target comment was either literal or sarcastic (...) criticism. Participants rated the critical comment in terms of how sarcastic, aggressive, amusing, and polite they perceived it to be. Results showed that critical comments made between characters who had low common ground (i.e. UK speaker and Chinese recipient, Chinese speaker and UK recipient) were considered as being more aggressive than those with high common ground (i.e. UK speaker and UK recipient, Chinese speaker and Chinese recipient). Sarcastic criticism, specifically, was viewed as being less amusing when characters had low common ground compared to those with high common ground. The findings have implications for theories developed to explain the social functions of sarcasm, specifically, mutual knowledge shared between communicators plays an important role in sarcasm interpretation in intercultural communications. (shrink)

Findings from two experiments argue in favor of the superiority of default, preferred interpretations over non-default less favored counterparts, outshining degree of non-salience, non-literalness, contextual strength, and negation. They show that, outside of a specific context, the default interpretation of specific negative constructions is a non-salient interpretation 1; their non-default interpretation is a salience-based alternative. In contrast, the default interpretation of the affirmative counterparts is a salience-based interpretation ; their non-default interpretation is a non-salient alternative. When in equally strongly supportive (...) contexts, default yet non-salient negative sarcasm is processed faster than non-default, non-salient yet affirmative sarcasm and faster than non-default yet salience-based negativ.. (shrink)

Verbal irony is used daily in social interactions, fulfilling various functions in human communication. As much as about 8% of all conversational turns among English-speaking friends living in the...

This chapter explores the use of humor, particularly irony and sarcasm, in advertising and its intersection with legal and ethical considerations. It argues that humorous advertising has a strong influence on consumer engagement and brand recall, but its legal boundaries are ambiguous due to the subjective nature of humor. They analyze the extent to which freedom of expression protects humorous content in ads, focusing on comparative advertising, where humor is often used to highlight a product's superiority without disparaging competitors. (...) Drawing on international legal frameworks such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the article addresses the challenges of regulating humor in advertisements to avoid misleading or harmful content. The authors conclude that humor in ads should balance creativity and ethics, respecting both legal limitations and cultural sensitivities. They emphasize that humor in advertising can be effective, but must be applied cautiously to prevent ethical violations and avoid unintended negative consequences on competitors and consumers. (shrink)

Emoji appear to be an important cue to judge whether a statement is sarcastic in computer-mediated communication. In this study, we investigated whether the smiling emoji, an indicator of sarcastic intention in the Chinese culture, exerts an influence on sarcasm interpretation across the lifespan. Statements accompanied with or without a smiling emoji were compared in unambiguous (Experiment 1) and ambiguous (Experiment 2) contexts. The results of Experiment 1 illustrated that for teenagers and the 20-year-olds the smiling emoji enhanced the (...) perceived sarcasm of sarcastic statements significantly. However, there was no difference in interpreting sarcastic statements with or without a smiling emoji in other age groups. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1. We found both teenagers and the 20-year-olds were more likely to arrive at a sarcastic interpretation of the ambiguous statement followed by a smiling emoji, which were less frequent in participants aged in their 30s, 40s, 50s and individuals over 60 years old. This might be because people of varying ages differ in decoding the emotions of the emoji. Age-related differences in the use of sarcasm and participants’ experiences with using emoji might be possible factors that were closely related to the interpretation of emoji-based sarcasm. (shrink)

This experiment investigated the relative contribution of context and tone of voice in the perception of sarcasm in short utterances. Eighty-two participants heard short stories read in a monotone voice reflecting either a positive or a negative context, followed by a relevant statement in a sarcastic or sincere tone of voice. Context and tone of voice were either congruent (e.g., positive context with sincere tone) or incongruent (e.g., positive context with sarcastic tone). Participants were asked to rate from 1 (...) to 7 whether they perceived the statement as very sincere (1) or very sarcastic (7). Results indicated a significant context by tone interaction on both ratings and response time. Specifically, mid-range ratings and longer reaction times were obtained when context and tone were incongruent compared to when they were congruent. The discussion emphasizes the interplay of context and tone of voice in the perception of a sarcastic statement. (shrink)

ABSTRACTThis study aimed to investigate the emotional impact of sarcasm. Previous research in this area has mainly required participants to answer questions based on written materials, and results have been mixed. With the aim of instead examining the emotional impact of sarcasm when used in a more conversational setting, the current study utilized animated video clips as stimuli. In each clip, one individual answered general knowledge questions while the other provided feedback that could be delivered either literally or (...) sarcastically, and either complimented or criticized the question answerer’s performance. Participants rated the feedback based on the anticipated emotional impact on the recipient, how the speaker intended the recipient to feel, and whether the speaker intended to be humorous. Results overall supported the Tinge Hypothesis, showing that sarcastic criticism was rated as less negative than literal criticism, and sarcastic compliments were rated as... (shrink)

In the present study, we examined the role of comic styles in mediating the relationship between personality traits and the use of verbal irony/sarcasm. We tested a group of 848 participants from the UK, Canada, and the USA with the Comic Style Markers (CSM) and the Sarcasm Self-Report Scale (SSS). We found that comic styles significantly influence how personality traits such as neuroticism, agreeableness, and openness to experience/intellect affect the use of sarcasm and irony. These results suggest (...) that the connection between personality and humor use is complex, with comic styles altering the direct influence of personality traits. By showing how specific comic styles can amplify or reduce the effects of personality on humor use, our study challenges the straightforward linkage of personality traits to humor styles. (shrink)

Theorists have debated whether our ability to understand sarcasm (pertaining here to verbal irony) is principally determined by the context or by properties of the comment itself. The current research investigated an alternative view that broadens the focus on the comment itself, suggesting that mitigating a highly positive concept by using negation generates sarcastic interpretations by default. In the current study, pretests performed on the target utterances presented in isolation established their default interpretations; novel affirmative phrases (e.g., He is (...) the best lawyer) were interpreted literally, whereas equally novel negative counterparts (e.g., He isn’t the best lawyer) were interpreted sarcastically. In Experiment 1 (an eye-tracking study), prior context biased these utterances toward literal or sarcastic interpretations. Results showed that target utterances were easier to process in contexts supporting their default interpretations, regardless of affirmation/negation. Results from a second eye-tracking experiment suggested that readers’ tendency to interpret negative phrases sarcastically is related to their own tendency to use malicious humor. Our findings suggest that negation leads to certain ambiguous utterances receiving sarcastic interpretations by default and that this process may be further intensified by personality factors. (shrink)

In this article, the aim is to explore Lebanese folklore through proverbs and to demonstrate how the dynamic field of imagination behind concise oral statements influences contemporary society and anchors, in the collective thinking of several generations, the values of a community, whether they are well-founded or not. Although Lebanese society is patriarchal, men are often depicted as beasts, frequently domestic and specifically as draft animals. The parody, satire, and humor that generally characterize proverbs feed into the images that circulate (...) in the collective unconscious. Durand's theriomorphic symbolism and its resulting ramifications, while referring to Bourdieu's “male domination,” highlight customs and traditions that devalue women and represent them as inferior beings or even as the embodiment of evil on earth. As one facet of folklore, these popular expressions sometimes originate from mythical, biblical, or traditional stories that are the result of beliefs and rituals passed down through centuries. (shrink)

Critique of Sarcastic Reason is a philosophical dissertation that combines several different fields in order to pave the way for those studying sarcasm at the neurobiological, communicative and socio-political levels of analysis where sarcasm appears, respectively, through associated brain activity, between two or more individuals with higher level metabeliefs, and as a method by which political, religious and other social ideologies are attacked (i.e., one form of "biting sarcasm"). The academic disciplines involved in Critique of Sarcastic Reason (...) include social cognitive and developmental psychology, neuroscience, critical theory, modern and contemporary philosophy of mind, evolutionary biology, logic, metaphysics and epistemology. Sarcasm is argued to only function at the highest levels of metacognition, and sarcasm occurs within social situations during which there are tendencies for two or more people to form desires and disgusts directly related to beliefs about beliefs. Sarcasm is compared to deception and is argued to be best analyzed as either spontaneous or rehearsed. (shrink)

-/- Irony is an intriguing topic, central to the study of meaning in language. This book provides an introduction to the pragmatics of irony. It surveys key work carried out on irony in a range of disciplines such as semantics, pragmatics, philosophy and literary studies, and from a variety of theoretical perspectives including Grice's approach, Sperber and Wilson's echoic account, and Clark and Gerrig's pretense theory. It looks at a number of uses of irony and explores how irony can be (...) misunderstood cross-culturally, before delving into the key debates on the pragmatics of irony: is irony always negative? Why do speakers communicate via irony, and which strategies do they usually employ? How are irony and sarcasm different? Is irony always funny? To answer these questions, basic pragmatic notions are introduced and explained. It includes multiple examples and activities to enable the reader to apply the theoretical frameworks to actual everyday instances of irony. (shrink)

A lie commits the speaker to the truth of an assertion they believe false. But a speaker uttering a falsehood in jest or sarcasm arguably neither asserts that falsehood nor lies. The insincere speaker essentially “uncommits” to the truth of their remark. Social media posters, criminal defendants, and politicians facing pushback regularly appeal to the sarcasm defense as a get-out-of-accountability-free card, often supporting this move by citing a purported insincerity marker accompanying the critical utterance. But proffered plausible deniability (...) may be implausible, resulting in legal or public disputes. How credible is the sarcasm or “only joking” defense, particularly when retroactively invoked? In Grice’s terms, how do we distinguish what a speaker says from what a speaker makes as if to say? This study surveys modes of “uncommitment” and the interactional and grammatical properties of devices associated with signals of insincerity that have been employed from twenty-two centuries ago to today. (shrink)

This chapter examines cases that are generally thought of as non-serious, echoic, or pretenseful uses of utterances. In particular, it explores sarcasm, which is described as an invitation to explore the contrast between the apparent contributions of an utterance and the way things actually are. It then turns to literary irony, which is described as an invitation to engage with an imagined speaker. Finally, the chapter explores humor, which seems to involve, among other things, an invitation for the hearer (...) to appreciate a surprising pair of contrasting perspectives. A series of observations establishes the distinctive status of these kinds of figurative language. All three are creative and open-ended, knitting together the interpretation of extended discourses and affording indefinite opportunities for deeper appreciation. However, although the figures can be combined with one another, they can be clearly distinguished from one another with simple cases. (shrink)

Criticism and sarcasm are interspersed with description and analysis throughout Marx's work. Most of the criticism is aimed at one or another side of a single target: what Marx sees as capitalism's pretensions of freedom, equality, and prosperity in the face of exploitation and recurrent crises. But the remarks on commodity fetishism in the first volume of Capital seem to be directed at a different target. Here Marx tells us that a commodity is ‘a queer thing, abounding in metaphysical (...) subtleties and theological niceties.’ But instead of going on to reveal the nature of commodites-the task that occupies him for the preceding 30 and subsequent 700 pages-Marx takes the opportunity to explore their ‘mystical’ character. The passage repays careful consideration. It is one of the few places in his mature writings in which Marx returns to the tone of his youthful works. It is also the passage in which commentators have claimed to find grounds for attributing a doctrine of ‘false consciousness’ to Marx. (shrink)

Mobsters and others engaged in risky forms of social coordination and coercion often communicate by saying something that is overtly innocuous but transmits another message ‘off record’. In both ordinary conversation and political discourse, insinuation and other forms of indirection, like joking, offer significant protection from liability. However, they do not confer blanket immunity: speakers can be held to account for an ‘off record’ message, if the only reasonable interpreta- tions of their utterance involve a commitment to it. Legal liability (...) for speech in the service of criminal behavior displays a similar profile of significant protection from indirection along with potential liability for reasonable interpretations. Specifically, in both ordinary and legal contexts, liability depends on how a reasonable speaker would expect a reasonable hearer to interpret their utterance in the context of utter- ance, rather than on the actual speaker’s claimed communicative intentions. (shrink)

Nature of irony -- Sarcasm -- Impersonal irony -- Self-disparaging irony -- Ingenu irony -- Irony of self-betrayal -- Irony of simple incongruity -- Dramatic irony -- General irony -- Romantic irony.

This chapter considers the role of open-ended inference in interpretation. It introduces examples that provide plausible cases of non-conventionalized patterns of interpretation: metaphor; non-serious utterances, including cases of sarcasm, irony, and humor; and hinting. Grice and many others have sought to explain the figurative and evocative character of such cases through general pragmatic mechanisms; in particular, the chapter reviews Gricean accounts that derive new implicated meaning by appeal to flouting of the Cooperative Principle and its associated maxims. What such (...) explanations miss is that different interpretive effects recruit different imaginative mechanisms, rather than homogeneous interpretive reasoning. The chapter lays the groundwork for the case studies in the remainder of Part III that substantiate the heterogeneous reasoning required to interpret different kinds of figurative and evocative utterances. (shrink)

Irony and sarcasm are common linguistic tropes. They are both based on falsehoods that the speaker pretends to be true. I briefly characterize their differences. A third trope exists that works when the relevant propositions are true – yet its rhetorical effect resembles irony and sarcasm, I call it mocking. It is mimetic evil: an agent copies another so that the result ridicules him. The image is, in a limited way, true of him and it hurts; we all (...) are vulnerable. I provide a systematic framework for understanding this phenomenon, mocking, in terms of emulation and simulation. Finally, I introduce an idea of universal mimesis and discuss René Girard’s theory of desire. He argues that desires are copies of a model. This may not be possible, and I suggest a modification to his theory. I pay attention to his idea of mimetic desire as a source of hatred, which is obviously related to what I call here mimetic mocking. (shrink)

A philosopher’s case for the importance of good—if ethically questionable—humor. A good sense of humor is key to the good life, but a joke taken too far can get anyone into trouble. Where to draw the line is not as simple as it may seem. After all, even the most innocent quips between friends rely on deception, sarcasm, and stereotypes and often run the risk of disrespect, meanness, and harm. How do we face this dilemma without taking ourselves too (...) seriously? In Wisecracks, philosopher David Shoemaker examines this interplay between humor and morality and ultimately argues that even morally suspect humor is an essential part of ethical life. Shoemaker shows how improvised “wisecracks” between family and friends—unlike scripted stand-up, sketches, or serials—help us develop a critical human skill: the ability to carry on and find the funny in tragedy. In developing a new ethics of humor in defense of questionable gibes, Wisecracks offers a powerful case for humor as a healing presence in human life. (shrink)

Compiled by disciples of Confucius in the centuries following his death in 479 B.C.E., _The Analects of Confucius_ is a collection of aphorisms and historical anecdotes embodying the basic values of the Confucian tradition: learning, morality, ritual decorum, and filial piety. Reflecting the model eras of Chinese antiquity, the Analects offers valuable insights into successful governance and the ideal organization of society. Filled with humor and sarcasm, it reads like a casual conversation between teacher and student, emphasizing the role (...) of the individual in the attainment of knowledge and the value of using historical events and people to illuminate moral and political concepts. Confucius's teachings focus on cultural and peaceful pursuits and the characteristics of benevolent and culturally distinguished government. He also discusses ancestor worship and other rites performed for the spirits of the dead. The single most influential philosophical work in all of Chinese history, _The Analects of Confucius_ has shaped the thought and customs of China and neighboring countries for centuries. Burton Watson's concise translation uses the pinyin romanization system and keeps explanatory notes to a minimum, yet his intimate knowledge of the Confucian tradition and precise attention to linguistic detail capture the original text's elegance, cogency, and wit. (shrink)

How do social actors get addressees to stop retreating to metadiscussions that derail ground-level discussions, and why do they expect the strategies to work? The question is of both theoretical and practical interest, especially with regard to ground-level discussions of systemic sexism and racism derailed by qualifying “not all men” and “not all white people” perform the sexist or racist actions that are the topic of discussion. I use a normative pragmatic approach to analyze two exemplary messages designed to halt (...) retreats to metadiscussions about using “not all men” and “not all white people” qualifiers in discussions of systemic sexism and racism. I find that social actors use strategies that may at first glance appear to be out of bounds in an ideal critical discussion—e.g., demanding, shouting, cussing, sarcasm, name-calling—to cultivate a context where using not-all qualifiers becomes increasingly costly. The strategies are designed to get addressees to recognize that using not-all qualifiers is not an epistemic correction of a hasty generalization or ethical intervention to halt promulgation of stereotypes about men and white people. Instead, the strategies display that using not-all qualifiers is a fallible sign of willful hermeneutical ignorance, willful ignorance, and an attempt to reassert a measure of social dominance. These findings affirm the need to investigate the various strategies and normative materials social actors actually bring to bear to regulate disagreement. (shrink)

Recourse to meta-argument is an important feature of successful argument exchanges; it is where norms are made explicit or clarified, corrections are offered, and inferences are evaluated, among much else. Sadly, it is often an avenue for abuse, as the very virtues of meta-argument are turned against it. The question as to how to manage such abuses is a vexing one. Erik Krabbe proposed that one be levied a fine in cases of inappropriate meta-argumentative bids (2003). In a recent publication (...) (2022) Beth Innocenti expands on this notion of a penalty, arguing that some meta-arguments should be halted with “shouting, cussing, sarcasm, name-calling.” In this essay, we review Innocenti’s case that these confrontations and haltings improve the argumentative circumstances. We provide three reasons that this promise is not well-founded. First, that such confrontations have a significant audience problem, in that they are more likely to be interpreted as destroying the argumentative context than improving it. Second, that Innocenti’s procedural justification, that those who lose meta-discussions should pay a penalty, is not satisfied if the meta-discussion is halted. And third, there is a boundary problem for the cases, since it seems there is no principled reason to restrict halting meta-arguments just to these cases (especially if there is no meta-discussion on the matter to make the bounds explicit). Though expressions of anger can be appropriate in argument, we argue, it cannot take the place of argument. (shrink)

The view put forward in this chapter about slur terms is that their interpretations require expansive, open-ended engagement with an utterance and its linguistic meaning, through a host of distinctive kinds of reasoning. This reasoning may include inferences about the speaker’s psychology and her intentions—in light of the full social and historical context—but it may involve approaching the utterance through strategies for imaginative elaboration and emotional attunement, as required, for example, for metaphor, poetic diction, irony, sarcasm, and humor. In (...) the face of their heterogeneity and open-endedness, these interpretive strategies are most perspicuously elucidated through critical attention to the psychological, social, historical, and even artistic considerations at play in specific cases. Thus, in contrast to the common practice in philosophy and linguistics, this chapter will not offer a general account of the interpretation of slur terms. It puts forward that there can be no such thing. (shrink)

What Nietzsche Really Said gives us a lucid overview -- both informative and entertaining -- of perhaps the most widely read and least understood philosopher in history. Friedrich Nietzsche's aggressive independence, flamboyance, sarcasm, and celebration of strength have struck responsive chords in contemporary culture. More people than ever are reading and discussing his writings. But Nietzsche's ideas are often overshadowed by the myths and rumors that surround his sex life, his politics, and his sanity. In this lively and comprehensive (...) analysis, Nietzsche scholars Robert C. Solomon and Kathleen M. Higgins get to the heart of Nietzsche's philosophy, from his ideas on "the will to power" to his attack on religion and morality and his infamous Übermensch (superman). What Nietzsche Really Said offers both guidelines and insights for reading and understanding this controversial thinker. Written with sophistication and wit, this book provides an excellent summary of the life and work of one of history's most provocative philosophers. (shrink)

This paper considers four lines of objection to the efficacy or worth of Grice's cancellability test for conversational implicatures – the coherence objection, the entailment objection, the sarcasm objection, and the ambiguity objection. I argue that the test survives these objections relatively unscathed; and hence conclude that the cancellability test is still a significant, useful, reliable indicator at the semantics/pragmatics interface.

Humor and cruelty can be the best of friends. Many cruel domains have facilitated hilarity of all kinds, whether experienced directly or vicariously, stretching from the torture chamber to the living room—or wherever else a screen is to be found. Conversely, many jests have provided the vehicle with which to dispense cruelty, whether callously or gleefully, in myriad settings, from public events to intimate family dinners. Combining the sources and resources of the humanities and social sciences, this book investigates the (...) mutually supportive liaisons of humor and cruelty. We unearth the brutal, aggressive, and/or sadomasochistic roots of mockery and self-mockery, sarcasm and satire, whilst addressing contemporary debates in humor studies focusing on the thorny ethics and existential challenges arising from the acceptance of the much-appreciated yet seldom innocent channel for human interaction called "humor.". (shrink)

The inferentialism due to Robert Brandom presents a compelling normative-deontic picture of language and discursive practices, and as such it is well positioned to address phenomena like lying. This short work outlines a simple account of how lying can be conceptualized within that framework. To that end, the basic Brandomian position is extended to include a novel type of status – namely, pseudo-commitments, which are unique in their being non-binding. The traditional definition of lying is then given a status-oriented form, (...) such that lying consists in presenting a pseudo-commitment with the intention for it to be attributed as a standard commitment. Importantly, this can be articulated in our scorekeeping practices, which is demonstrated with three example exchanges – one featuring an undetected lie, one featuring a detected lie, and one featuring a bald-faced lie. Though simple, the account works and invites extension to other similar phenomena, like sarcasm, acting, bullshit, etc. The notion of pseudo-commitment may also find application outside of the inferentialist context. (shrink)

We carried out a systematic review of psycholinguistic, empirical, quantitative studies on verbal irony use and individual differences (i.e. psychological, not demographic, traits that significantly differentiate individuals). Out of 5,967 publications screened, 29, comprising 35 studies in total, were included. Following a qualitative content analysis, six thematic clusters were identified, representing areas of research in individual differences in irony use: (a) psychological well-being, (b) personality traits, (c) humor-related traits, (d) cultural factors, (e) social skills, and (f) cognitive factors. The results (...) of the studies in each cluster are summarized and conclusions for further research are presented. In particular, the systematic review suggests that irony and sarcasm should be clearly delineated as separate, yet related phenomena due to differing patterns of correlations with specific individual differences. Additionally, significant methodological heterogeneity between the studies suggests the need for greater standardization of irony use measures. (shrink)

This article contributes to the Jubilee issue of Communications on the occasion of the journal’s 50th birthday. Based on archive material and the publications of Alphons Silbermann in the journal (his editorials, book reviews, essays and articles) the role of the founding editor in establishing a European field of communication research is reflected. This role cannot be underestimated – at least not regarding the German context of the founding of the journal confronting Silbermann with a lot of hostilty from within (...) the field – he answered in both terms, scientifically but also with his typical sarcasm visible in his book reviews. (shrink)

Socratic irony is potentially fertile ground for exegetical abuse. It can seem to offer an interpreter the chance to dismiss any claim which conflicts with his account of Socratic Philosophy merely by crying ‘irony’. If abused in this way, Socratic irony can quickly become a convenient receptacle for everything inimical to an interpretation. Much recent scholarship rightly reacts against this and devotes itself to explaining how Socrates actually means everything he says, at least everything of philosophical importance. But the fact (...) that a commentator needs to argue that Socrates is really serious when he disavows knowledge or claims to be the saviour of Athens is by itself sufficient to establish that there is an abundance of what I will call ‘play’ in the Socratic dialogues. The term ‘play’ refers to occasions when Socrates at least appears not to be speaking straightforwardly. ‘Play’ covers cases of real or apparent humour, mockery, teasing, irony, and sarcasm, without differentiation or further elaboration. When left undefined, as often, the phrase ‘Socratic irony’ seems to be used to refer to what I am calling ‘play’. (shrink)

This paper leads the reader back to the unexplored land of political propaganda produced at the Bavarian court in the first quarter of the seventeenth century. In the light of rarely read or totally ignored historical and political texts, it highlights features of the ‘post-Machiavellian’ or ‘reason-of-state’ political culture of the period and offers an elaborate reconstruction of the ways in which propaganda was managed and orchestrated by a particularly talented ruler, Maximilian I of Bayern, who was pursuing old (dynastic) (...) goals with modern political means, relying on a select group of erudite councillors and diplomats. The paper not only reconstructs the dynamics of propaganda writing at the Bavarian court but also underlines the mounting importance of historical facts in the early modern mindset and the new ways in which fiction and sarcasm were used to distort facts. Some of the various propaganda works studied here went further than addressing target audiences and reached, via the Latin language, large segments of the European learned public. The extraordinary Altera Secretissima instructio (1626), translated into English by Thomas Hobbes, was one of these pamphlets. Its author is identified the first time in history in the last section of the paper. (shrink)

This article focuses onsarcasm, for which the definitions have often been loose and confusing, integrating it into the concept ofirony. My approach is based on a large corpus of examples taken from two contemporary television-series, which help identify the wide range of linguistic processes at the core of sarcastic utterances. I present a quantitative and descriptive analysis of the main processes found in two American television-series:House M.D.andThe Big Bang Theory. The results show the intricate meanings created in sarcasm through (...) various linguistic mechanisms, such as repetition, explicitation, metonymy, metaphor, shift of focus, reasoning, and rhetorical questions. This more holistic analysis, including a broad corpus of instances and a more detailed analysis of the examples, aims to fill the unexplored gaps in more classical analyses, emphasizing the complexities and implications that can be drawn in interaction. (shrink)

Affective polarization, characterized by entrenched partisan hostility, is increasingly threatening democratic norms by fostering exclusionary and uncivil discourse, particularly in digital spaces. This study investigates how individuals respond to fact checks that contradict their political beliefs in the polarized and authoritarian context of Turkey. Focusing on 1,543 user comments responding to 23 fact checks published by Teyit.org during the 2023 Turkish presidential elections, this analysis dissects the emotional tone, targets, and rhetorical strategies employed in online political discourse. A key contribution (...) of the study is distinguishing between uncivil comments, profane or insulting remarks primarily targeting political elites, and intolerant discourse, which directs hostility toward marginalized groups, posing a greater risk to democratic pluralism. Findings show that partisans, ignoring factual content, reframe fact checkers as biased actors and use tactics such as whataboutism, sarcasm, and source discrediting to reject inconvenient truths. The results also highlight how online polarization during elections sustains elite-focused antagonisms and facilitates social exclusion and the scapegoating of minorities. These dynamics illustrate that, though designed to promote truth, fact-checking efforts can become entangled in broader struggles over identity, trust, and legitimacy in deeply divided societies. (shrink)

The phenomenon of memes as sources of information lies in their ability to convey complex content in a concise, humorous and often satirical manner. Memes are distinguished by the simplicity of their message and their ability to reach a wide audience quickly, making them particularly e ective in a dynamic world where people often prefer short, informative forms of communication. Thanks to the picture-text form, memes allow even complex ideas to be understood immediately. Another important element of this phenomenon is (...) the humour, irony and sarcasm, which attract attention and make difficult or controversial content easier to absorb. In this way, complex issues become more accessible and audiences are more likely to engage with content that is presented in an entertaining way. Memes are also flexible and can cover a wide range of topics, from politics to popular culture, making them easily adaptable to current events and changing realities. As a result, they can act not only as entertainment but also as information, often serving as a vehicle for social or political commentary. Their universality makes them an effective tool for communication in the public space. The aim of this article is to present research among young adults for whom memes are the primary source of information conducted on a group of 527 respondents in 2024. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:A Rejoinder to MoriThomas M. LennonGianluca Mori and I are broadly in agreement about everything in my paper except the answer to its main question, viz., how Bayle's use of Saint-Evremond is to be understood in the third Eclaircissement. Mori thinks that Bayle's use of Saint Evremond was one of his "provocations aimed at orthodox readers." It is an instance of his thesis that "Bayle's professions of Christian faith, (...) though frequent, are generally far from being above suspicion: indeed almost every one of them raises questions about their actual significance."1 On my view, one line of argument for not taking Bayle's use of Saint-Evremond "at face value in his profession of religious faith... is highly questionable."2 That is, as far as his use of Saint-Evremond is concerned, Bayle should be taken as the fideist that he, here and in many other places, in effect claimed to be.We are in agreement about the nature of the key text itself that Bayle cites from the Conversation. It is a "ridiculous" text, dripping with sarcasm, an ironic parody of the very views that Bayle claims to believe. Moreover, Bayle himself is in agreement with this view of the text, and expresses it in so many words. The knot of our disagreement consists in how Bayle could have used such a text to express fideist views. Mori thinks that the very use of the text itself is sufficient to call those views into doubt. "Bayle was fully aware that the text he presented as a 'clarification' of his fideism had very little right to be considered as Christian orthodoxy,... In a word, Bayle knew full well that his fideism would be regarded as insincere and destructive of faith."3The basis for my view begins with what Bayle says about this text in a statement that Mori has so far not acknowledged either in his book or in his reply to me. Says Bayle after citing Saint-Evremond, "Give this thought a more serious and proper tone and it will become reasonable." It is here that Bayle [End Page 335] acknowledges the inappropriateness of Saint-Evremond's text, but he does so to reject it as it stands. Bayle did not, as Mori claims, present the text "as a clarification of his fideism." Only when the text is given a "more serious and proper tone," that is, when it is stripped of its irony and sarcasm, does it cease to be a parody of his views and become an accurate expression of them. Bayle explicitly dissociates himself from the unamended text, introducing it with the comment that "this thought has been given a ridiculous sense, in the hands of a master."4 But Mori takes this text as it stands to convey Bayle's message, as if Bayle had not commented on it at all. It is as if, to repeat the text at the end of my paper, the Bible were to be cited as stating the claim that there is no God. It does so, of course, but only preceded by the disclaimer that only "the fool hath said in his heart there is no God" (Psalm 14: 1).According to Mori, Bayle's use of Saint-Evremond was provocative. Bayle's text is not provocative, however. Had he intended it to be, he would have directly cited Saint-Evremond, without comment. Instead, he is perfectly clear about whom he is quoting and how that source should be understood. To be sure, such a citation is dramatic, and no doubt designed for effect, but the effect is to show how unexceptional Bayle took his conception of the faith-reason relation to be. Bayle in the Eclaircissement is not trying to convert anyone but to explain his position in a way that makes it acceptable to the Consistory of the Walloon Church. To be sure, it is an irony that Saint-Evremond's text, slightly but importantly corrected, expresses Bayle's view, but it is not an irony in the sense of winking sarcasm.Mori insists that, as a matter of historical fact, Bayle's text was found to be provocative... (shrink)