Making sense of nonliteral language, like irony, has been a hot topic in pragmatics and psycholinguistics for quite some time. Since the '70s, there's been an ongoing debate on whether context helps us grasp figurative language early on or if we always default to the basic, context-independent meanings of words. This paper digs into the specifics of irony processing, focusing on key psycholinguistic theories that aim to shed light on how people interpret ironic expressions.
Among these theories, three stand out: the standard pragmatic model (Grice 1975; Searle 1985), the direct access view (Gibbs 1994), and the graded salience hypothesis (Giora 1997; 1999). The graded salience hypothesis, in particular, suggests that we always start with the most obvious, context-independent meanings of words.
Recent research by Giora, Givoni, and Fein (2015), however, challenges this idea. They propose that sentences with explicit negation of extreme or highly positive statements default to an ironic interpretation. This goes against the graded salience hypothesis, which says that the most obvious meanings always come first.
To untangle this debate, this paper presents findings from an online questionnaire study. The focus is on sentences with explicit negation in different contexts. Participants have to choose between literal and ironic interpretations, giving us insights into how context affects the understanding of ironic statements.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Empirical findings: Figurative language comprehension
- 2.1 Characteristics of irony
- 2.1.1 Definition of irony
- 2.1.2 Features of verbal irony: Functions and cues for ironic interpretations
- 2.2 Psycholinguistic models of irony comprehension
- 2.2.1 The standard pragmatic model
- 2.2.2 The direct access view
- 2.2.3 The graded salience hypothesis
- 2.1 Characteristics of irony
- 3. Online study
- 3.1 Goals of the questionnaire study
- 3.2 Methodology
- 3.2.1 Participants
- 3.2.2 Procedure
- 3.3 Results
- 3.4 Discussion
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This thesis investigates the comprehension of ironic utterances, specifically focusing on the debate between two prominent psycholinguistic models: Giora's graded salience hypothesis and Gibbs' direct access view. The study aims to explore whether the literal meaning is always accessed first, or if contextual information can directly lead to the ironic interpretation. An online questionnaire study is conducted to examine how participants interpret sentences containing explicit negation of extreme/highly positive assessments, both in isolation and within a context of disagreement.
- The processing of ironic language and the role of context.
- Comparison of the graded salience hypothesis and the direct access view.
- The influence of contextual cues on the interpretation of ironic sentences.
- The impact of sentence position (first vs. second turn) on interpretation.
- Analysis of the interplay between literal and nonliteral meaning in irony comprehension.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the central question of how ironic utterances are interpreted: Do we process the literal meaning first, or can context lead directly to the ironic interpretation? It outlines the two main approaches to figurative language processing—Giora's graded salience hypothesis and Gibbs' direct access view—which posit different models for how the brain processes irony. The chapter establishes the context of the debate surrounding bottom-up (data-driven) and top-down (context-driven) processing in language comprehension and sets the stage for the thesis's investigation into these competing theories.
2. Empirical findings: Figurative language comprehension: This chapter delves into the characteristics of irony, offering definitions and exploring the functions and cues that signal ironic interpretations. It then provides detailed explanations of the three major psycholinguistic models of irony comprehension: the standard pragmatic model (prioritizing literal meaning), the direct access view (allowing direct access to ironic meaning based on context), and the graded salience hypothesis (always accessing the most salient meaning first, regardless of context). This section lays the theoretical groundwork for the empirical study described in the following chapter, highlighting the complexities and contradictions within existing research.
3. Online study: This chapter details the methodology and results of an online questionnaire study designed to test the competing hypotheses presented in Chapter 2. Participants were presented with sentences containing explicit negation of positive assessments, both in isolation and within a context suggesting disagreement. The chapter meticulously outlines the experimental procedure, participant demographics, and statistical analysis of the results. The findings demonstrate how the presence or absence of preceding contextual cues significantly influences the participants' interpretation of the target sentences, offering crucial empirical data to evaluate the validity of the competing theoretical models.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
Irony comprehension, figurative language processing, graded salience hypothesis, direct access view, context effects, pragmatics, psycholinguistics, literal meaning, nonliteral meaning, online study, experimental methodology, negation, contextual cues, bottom-up processing, top-down processing.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Language Preview
What is the main topic of this thesis?
This thesis investigates the comprehension of ironic utterances, specifically focusing on the debate between Giora's graded salience hypothesis and Gibbs' direct access view regarding how the brain processes irony. It explores whether literal meaning is always accessed first or if contextual information can directly lead to the ironic interpretation.
What are the key research questions addressed in this thesis?
The study aims to determine the role of context in processing ironic language, compare the graded salience hypothesis and the direct access view, and analyze how contextual cues influence the interpretation of ironic sentences. It also examines the impact of sentence position (first vs. second turn) and the interplay between literal and nonliteral meaning in irony comprehension.
What methodologies were used in this research?
The research employs an online questionnaire study. Participants were presented with sentences containing explicit negation of positive assessments, both in isolation and within a context suggesting disagreement. The study meticulously outlines the experimental procedure, participant demographics, and statistical analysis of the results.
What are the key findings of the online study?
The findings demonstrate how the presence or absence of preceding contextual cues significantly influences participants' interpretation of the target sentences. This provides empirical data to evaluate the validity of the competing theoretical models (graded salience hypothesis and direct access view).
What are the core theoretical models discussed in the thesis?
The thesis focuses on three psycholinguistic models of irony comprehension: the standard pragmatic model (prioritizing literal meaning), the direct access view (allowing direct access to ironic meaning based on context), and the graded salience hypothesis (always accessing the most salient meaning first, regardless of context).
What are the main characteristics of irony discussed in the thesis?
The thesis explores the definitions, functions, and cues that signal ironic interpretations. It examines how these features contribute to the complexities and contradictions within existing research on irony comprehension.
What is the structure of the thesis?
The thesis is structured into three main chapters: an introduction outlining the central research question and theoretical frameworks; an empirical findings chapter detailing the characteristics of irony and the competing psycholinguistic models; and a chapter presenting the methodology, results, and discussion of an online questionnaire study designed to test these models.
What are the keywords associated with this thesis?
Keywords include: Irony comprehension, figurative language processing, graded salience hypothesis, direct access view, context effects, pragmatics, psycholinguistics, literal meaning, nonliteral meaning, online study, experimental methodology, negation, contextual cues, bottom-up processing, top-down processing.
What is the overall contribution of this thesis?
The thesis contributes to the understanding of irony comprehension by providing empirical evidence to evaluate the competing theoretical models of Giora and Gibbs. It sheds light on the role of context and the interplay between literal and nonliteral meaning in the interpretation of ironic utterances.
- Quote paper
- Kim-Cheyenne Greiner (Author), 2016, Testing Psycholinguistic Theories of Irony Comprehension, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1440768
