Nonverbal Humor Analysis

290 Words1 Page

Raskin (1985) introduces his approach as being concerned with ‘verbal humor’, but his analyses are based on all types of humor conveyed in language, that is, our ‘verbally expressed’ humor. The widely-cited general theory of verbal humor (Attardo, 1994), which we have not space to discuss here, is about humor expressed in language, not merely humor dependent on specific language devices. To complicate matters further, Norick (2004) uses non-verbal to describe jokes which cannot be effectively conveyed in written language, since they are dependent on audible material (e.g. tone of voice) or on non-linguistic devices such as gestures; ‘verbal’ jokes would then be those which can be expressed successfully in writing. In this chapter, we will stay with the terms outlined earlier: anything conveyed in language is ‘verbally expressed humor’; ‘verbal humor’ is dependent on language-specific devices, ‘referential humor’ is based solely on meaning. …show more content…

every example falls into one class or the other, but not both) and obvious (i.e. it is always apparent into which class an instance of humor falls), although this view is not unanimous: ‘conceptual humor and verbal humor are not distinct categories, however’ (Armstrong, 2005). There appears to be on strict definition of the boundary between verbal and referential humor, with classification of examples being left to general intuition. Sometimes translability is proposed as the criterion for distinguishing the two types (e.g. Bergson, 1940; Attardo 1994; Armstrong, 2005). It is certainly true that the two types of humor put quite different demands on the translator, but the ‘transable’ criterion is not well-defined: does it mean ‘ it can be translated into every language’ or ‘there is some language somewhere into which it can be

Open Document