On the priority of salience-based interpretations: The case of sarcastic irony

Intercultural Pragmatics

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 1-32

  Fein, Ofer ^a   Yeari, Menahem ^b   Giora, Rachel ^c  

^a ACADEMIC COLLEGE OF TEL AVIV YAFFO   (Israel)

^b BAR ILAN UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Context; Expectation Hypothesis; Irony; Salience; Sarcasm

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925303882     PISSN: 1612295X     EISSN: 1613365X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/ip-2015-0001     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Akimoto, Yoritaka, Shiho Miyazawa, and Toshiaki Muramoto. 2012. Comprehension processes of verbal irony: The effects of salience, egocentric context, and allocentric theory of mind. Metaphor and Symbol 27(3). 217-242.
2. Bates, Elizabeth A. 1999. On the nature and nurture of language. In R. Levi-Montalcini, D. Baltimore, R. Dulbecco and F. Jacob (eds.). Frontere della biologica [Frontiers of biology - The brain of homo sapiens]. Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana fondata da Giovanni Trecanni S.P.A., 241-265.
3. Bates, Elizabeth A., and Brian MacWhinney. 1989. Functionalism and the competition Model. In B. MacWhinney, and E. Bates (eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press, 225-256.
4. Brisard, Frank, Steven Frisson, and Sandra, Dominiek. 2001. Processing unfamiliar metaphors in a self-paced reading task. Metaphor and Symbol 16. 87-108.
5. Burgers, Christian, and Camiel J. Beukeboom. In press. Stereotype transmission and maintenance through interpersonal communication: The irony bias. Communication Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650214534975.
6. Burgers, Christian, Margot van Mulken, and Peter J. Schellens. 2013. The use of co-textual irony markers in written discourse. Humor 26. 45-68.
7. Campbell, John D., and Albert N. Katz. 2012. Are there necessary conditions for inducing a sense of sarcastic irony? Discourse Processes 49. 459-480.
8. Carpenter, Patricia A., and Meredyth Daneman. 1981. Lexical retrieval and error recovery in reading: A model based on eye fixations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20. 137-160.
9. Clark, Herbert H., and Richard J. Gerrig. 1984. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113. 121-126.
10. Colston, Herbert L., and Raymond W. Gibbs. 2002. Are irony and metaphor understood differently? Metaphor and Symbol 17. 57-60.
11. Dews, Shelly, and Ellen Winner. 1997. Attributing meaning to deliberately false utterances: The case of irony. In Ch. Mandell, and A. McCabe (eds.), The problem of meaning: Behavioral and cognitive perspectives, 377-414. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
12. Dews, Shelly, and Ellen Winner. 1999. Obligatory processing of the literal and nonliteral meanings of ironic utterances. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 1579-1599.
13. Duffy, Susan, A., Robin K. Morris, and Keith Rayner. 1988. Lexical ambiguity and fixations times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language 27. 429-446.
14. Filik, Ruth, and Linda M. Moxey. 2010. The on-line processing of written irony. Cognition 116. 421-436.
15. Filik, Ruth, Hartmut Leuthold, Katie Wallington, and Jemma Page. 2014. Testing theories of irony processing using eye-tracking and ERPs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 40(3). 811-828.
16. Fodor, Jerry. 1983. The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1979. Contextual effects in understanding indirect requests. Discourse Processes 2. 1-10.
18. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1986. On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General 115. 3-15.
19. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1994. The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. Gibbs, Raymond W. 2002. A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 457-486.
21. Giora, Rachel. 1997. Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 8. 183-206.
22. Giora, Rachel. 1999. On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 919-929.
23. Giora, Rachel. 2003. On our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative language. New York: Oxford University Press.
24. Giora, Rachel, Ari Drucker, Ofer Fein, and Itamar Mendelson. 2015. Default sarcastic interpretation: On the priority of nonsalient interpretations. Discourse Processes 52.
25. Giora, Rachel, and Ofer Fein. 1999a. Irony: Context and salience. Metaphor and Symbol 14. 241-257.
26. Giora, Rachel, and Ofer Fein. 1999b. On understanding familiar and less-familiar figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics 31. 1601-1618.
27. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Ann Kronrod, Idit Elnatan, Noa Shuval, and Adi Zur. 2004. Weapons of mass distraction: Optimal Innovation and pleasure ratings. Metaphor and Symbol 19. 115-141.
28. Giora, Rachel, Elad Livnat, Ofer Fein, Anat Barnea, Rakefet Zeiman, and Ido Berger. 2013. Negation generates nonliteral interpretations by default. Metaphor and Symbol 28. 89-115.
29. Giora, Rachel, Moshe Raphaely, Ofer Fein, and Elad Livnat. 2014. Resonating with contextually inappropriate interpretations in production: The case of irony. Cognitive Linguistics 25(3). 443-455.
30. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, and Tamir Schwartz. 1998. Irony: Graded salience and indirect negation. Metaphor and Symbol 13. 83-101.
31. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Keren Aschkenazi, and Inbar Alkabets-Zlozover. 2007. Negation in context: A functional approach to suppression. Discourse Processes 43. 153-172.
32. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Ronie Kaufman, Dana Eisenberg, and Shani Erez. 2009. Does an "ironic situation" favor an ironic interpretation? In G. Brône and J. Vandaele (eds.) Cognitive poetics. Goals, gains and gaps. (Applications of Cognitive Linguistics series). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 383-399.
33. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Dafna Laadan, Joe Wolfson, Michal Zeituny, Ran Kidron, Ronie Kaufman, and Ronit Shaham. 2007. Expecting irony: Context vs. salience-based effects. Metaphor and Symbol 22. 119-126.
34. González-Ibáñez, Roberto, Smaranda Muresan, and Nina Wacholder. 2011. Identifying Sarcasm in Twitter: A Closer Look. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: short papers, 581-586, Portland, Oregon. June 19-24, 2011.
35. Ivanko, Stacey L., and Penny M. Pexman. 2003. Context incongruity and irony processing. Discourse Processes 35. 241-279.
36. Jentzsch, Ines, and Werner Sommer. 2002. The effect of intentional expectancy on mental processing: a chronopsychophysiological investigation. Acta Psychologica 111. 265-282.
37. Kawamoto, Alan H. 1993. Nonlinear dynamics in the resolution of lexical ambiguity: A parallel distributed processing account. Journal of Memory and Language 32. 474-516.
38. Katz, Albert. 2009. Commentary on Does an ironic situation favor an ironic interpretation. In G. Brône and J. Vandaele (eds.) Cognitive poetics. Goals, gains and gaps. (Applications of Cognitive Linguistics series). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 401-406.
39. Kirby, John R. 1976. Information processing and human abilities. Alberta: University of Alberta.
40. Keysar, Boaz. 1994. The illusory transparency of intention: Linguistic perspective taking in text. Cognitive Psychology 26. 165-208.
41. Kowatch, Kristy, Juanita M. Whalen, and Penny M. Pexman. 2013. Irony comprehension in action: A new test of processing for verbal irony. Discourse Processes 50. 301-315.
42. Kreuz, Roger J., and Gina M. Caucci. 2007. Lexical influences on the perception of sarcasm. Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Approaches to Figurative Language. 1-4. Rochester, NY. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1611529
43. Kreuz, Roger J., and Kristen E. Link. 2002. Asymmetries in the perception of verbal irony. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 21. 127-143.
44. Laming, Donald R. J. 1968. Information theory of choice-reaction times. London: Academic Press.
45. Laming, Donald R. J. 1969. Subjective probability in choice-reaction experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 6. 81-120.
46. Loftus, Geoffrey R., and Michael E. J. Masson, Michael. 1994. Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1. 476-490.
47. Lucariello, Joan. 1994. Situational irony: A concept of events gone awry. Journal of Experimental Psychology 123. 129-145.
48. Luka, Barbara J., and Cyma Van Petten. 2014. Gradients versus dichotomies: How strength of semantic context influences event-related potentials and lexical decision times. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience 14. 1086-1103.
49. MacWhinney, Brian. 1987. The Competition Model. In B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition, 249-308. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50. McRae, Ken, Michael J. Spivey-Knowlton, and Michael K. Tanenhaus. 1998. Modeling thematic fit (and other constraints) within an integration competition framework. Journal of Memory and Language 38. 283-312.
51. Ortony, Andrew, Diane L. Schallert, Ralph E. Reynolds, and Stephen J. Antos. 1978. Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context on comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17. 465-477.
52. Peleg, Orna, and Rachel Giora. 2011. Salient meanings: The whens and wheres. In: K. M. Jaszczolt and K. Allan (eds.) Salience and Defaults in Utterance Processing. Mouton Series in Pragmatics. Istvan Kecskés (gen. ed.). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 32-52.
53. Peleg, Orna, Rachel Giora, and Ofer Fein. 2001. Salience and context effects: Two are better than one. Metaphor and Symbol 16. 173-192.
54. Peleg, Orna, Rachel Giora, and Ofer Fein. 2004. Contextual strength: The whens and hows of context effects. In I. Noveck and D. Sperber (eds.), Experimental Pragmatics. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 172-186.
55. Peleg, Orna, Rachel Giora, and Ofer Fein. 2008. Resisting contextual information: You can't put a salient meaning down. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4. 13-44.
56. Pexman, Penny M., Todd R. Ferretti, and Albert N. Katz. 2000. Discourse factors that influence irony detection during on-line reading. Discourse Processes 29. 201-222.
57. Rayner, Keith, and Robin K. Morris. 1991. Comprehension processes in reading ambiguous sentences: Reflections from eye movements. In G. B. Simpson (ed.), Understanding word and sentence (Advances in Psychology, No. 77.) Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland, 175-198.
58. Regel, Stefanie, Seana Coulson, and Thomas C. Gunter. 2010. The communicative style of a speaker can affect language comprehension: ERP evidence from the comprehension of irony. Brain Research 1311. 121-135.
59. Schwoebel, John, Shelly Dews, Ellen Winner, and Kavitha Srinivas. 2000. Obligatory processing of the literal meaning of ironic utterances: Further evidence. Metaphor and Symbol 15. 47-61.
60. Sereno, Sara C., Jeremy M. Pacht, and Keith Rayner. 1992. The effect of meaning frequency on processing lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Psychological Science 3. 296-300.
61. Small, Steven L., Gary W. Cottrell, and Michael K. Tanenhaus (eds.), 1988. Lexical ambiguity resolution and language comprehension: Computational, psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic perspectives. San Diego: Morgan-Kaufman.
62. Soetens, Eric, Louis C. Boer, and Johan E. Hueting. 1985. Expectancy or automatic facilitation? Separating sequential effects in two-choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 11. 598-616.
63. Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
64. Swinney, David A. 1979. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18. 645-660.
65. Tartter, Vivien C., Hilary Gomes, Boris Dubrovsky, Sophie Molholm, and Rosemarie V. Stewart. 2002. Novel metaphors appear anomalous at least momentarily: Evidence from N400. Brain and Language 80. 488-509.