Irony in Linguistics and Literary Theory: Towards a Synthetic Approach

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Inés Lozano-Palacio
{"title":"Irony in Linguistics and Literary Theory: Towards a Synthetic Approach","authors":"Inés Lozano-Palacio","doi":"10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20196341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Irony has been approached by different disciplines concerned with language. The more socio-historical approach taken by literary theorists contrasts with the more analytical bias of linguistic accounts. A comparative study of both perspectives reveals the need to enhance mutual cross-disciplinary dialogue with a view to producing a constructive integrated perspective. Following this premise, this paper puts forward an approach that combines insights from inferential pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, and literary theory. It acknowledges the centrality of the relevance-theoretic notion of echo, taken as a cognitive mechanism rather than just as a pragmatic phenomenon. In this view, irony arises from the clash between an echoed and an observed scenario, which reveals the speaker’s attitude. The construction of the former is constrained by socio-cultural, communicative, and personal factors. This view allows for a distinction between different types of ironist (communicator) and interpreter (addressee), a study of their roles in the ironic event, and a classification of echoed scenarios from the standpoint of their grounding in an array of personal and presumed interpersonal beliefs, and in socio-cultural stereotypes. It also allows for a correlation between irony types and echoed scenario types and reveals the gradable character of the pragmatic felicity of the ironic act.","PeriodicalId":35132,"journal":{"name":"Miscelanea","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Miscelanea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20196341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Irony has been approached by different disciplines concerned with language. The more socio-historical approach taken by literary theorists contrasts with the more analytical bias of linguistic accounts. A comparative study of both perspectives reveals the need to enhance mutual cross-disciplinary dialogue with a view to producing a constructive integrated perspective. Following this premise, this paper puts forward an approach that combines insights from inferential pragmatics, cognitive linguistics, and literary theory. It acknowledges the centrality of the relevance-theoretic notion of echo, taken as a cognitive mechanism rather than just as a pragmatic phenomenon. In this view, irony arises from the clash between an echoed and an observed scenario, which reveals the speaker’s attitude. The construction of the former is constrained by socio-cultural, communicative, and personal factors. This view allows for a distinction between different types of ironist (communicator) and interpreter (addressee), a study of their roles in the ironic event, and a classification of echoed scenarios from the standpoint of their grounding in an array of personal and presumed interpersonal beliefs, and in socio-cultural stereotypes. It also allows for a correlation between irony types and echoed scenario types and reveals the gradable character of the pragmatic felicity of the ironic act.
语言学与文学理论中的反讽:走向综合研究
与语言有关的不同学科都在研究反讽。文学理论家所采取的更具社会历史意义的方法与语言叙述的更具分析偏见形成了鲜明对比。对这两种观点的比较研究表明,有必要加强相互的跨学科对话,以期产生建设性的综合观点。在此前提下,本文提出了一种结合推理语用学、认知语言学和文学理论的方法。它承认回声的关联理论概念的中心地位,它被视为一种认知机制,而不仅仅是一种语用现象。在这种观点中,反讽产生于回声和观察到的场景之间的冲突,这揭示了说话人的态度。前者的构建受到社会文化、交际和个人因素的制约。这种观点允许区分不同类型的讽刺者(传播者)和口译员(接受者),研究他们在讽刺事件中的角色,并从他们基于一系列个人和假定的人际信仰以及社会文化刻板印象的角度对呼应的场景进行分类。它还允许反讽类型和呼应情景类型之间的相关性,并揭示了反讽行为的语用得体性的分级特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Miscelanea
Miscelanea Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信