Keywords
satire
interdisciplinarity
concept formation
category mistakes
How to Cite
Abstract
The word humour is often taken as an ‘umbrella term’. This article first briefly situates umbrella terms within a context of logically stable and unstable forms of classification. It outlines the reasons why the scope of what is studied as humour justifies the general designation that also encompasses a necessary degree of interdisciplinarity. The implications of this, however, can be at odds with how humour is treated in analysis: there can be few general conclusions about humour per se; global theories of humour, or uniform conceptual vocabularies for its analysis are likely to remain unsatisfactory. The article concludes by pointing to a category mistake analogous to Russell’s set theory paradox when humour, accepted as an umbrella term is then conflated with what the classifier subsumes.
References
Aristotle (2006). Rhetoric. (Freese, J.H. Trans.) Harvard University Press. (Original work published in 4th century BC).
Attardo, S. (2020). The linguistics of humor: An introduction. Oxford University Press.
Attardo, S. (Ed.) (2014). The encyclopedia of humor studies, 2 vols. Sage.
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter.
Billig, M. (2014). How to write badly: How to succeed in the social sciences. Cambridge University Press.
Chapman, A., & Foot, H. (Eds.) (1977). It’s a funny thing, humour. Pergamon Press.
Chiaro, D. (1992). The language of jokes: Analysing verbal play. Routledge.
Condren, C. (2023). Between laughter and satire: Aspects of the historical study of humour. Palgrave Macmillan.
Condren, C. (2017). Political vocabularies: Word change and the nature of politics. Rochester University Press.
Connolly, W.E. (1983). The terms of political discourse (2nd ed). Robertson.
Cooper, A. A. Earl of Shaftsbury (2001). Sensus communis: An essay on the freedom of wit and humour. In D. Den Uyl (Ed.), Characteristics of men, manners, opinions, times, Vol. 1 (pp. 37–94). Liberty Fund. (Original work published in 1709)
Curtis, C. (2006). From Sir Thomas More to Robert Burton: The laughing philosopher in the early modern period. In C. Condren, S. Gaukroger & I. Hunter (Eds.), The philosopher in early modern Europe: The nature of a contested identity (pp. 90-112). Cambridge University Press,
Derrin, D. (2020). Introduction. In D. Derrin & H. Burrows (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of humour, history, and methodology (pp.3-18). Palgrave Macmillan.
Dilthey, W. (1977). Ideas concerning a descriptive and analytic psychology (1884); The understanding of other persons and their expressions of life (1910). (Heiges, K.L. & Zaner, R.M., respectively, Trans.). Nijhof.
Forabosco, G. (2014). Il settimo senso: Psicologia del senso dell’umorismo. con instruzione per l’uso. Tarka.
Gallie, W.B. (1964). Philosophy and the historical understanding. Chatto & Windus.
Gifford, P. (1981). Humour and the French mind: Towards a reciprocal definition. In Modern Language Review, 76(3), 534–548.
Goddard, C. (2020). De-anglicising humour studies. The European Journal of Humour Research, 8(4), pp. 48–58. https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2020.8.4.Goddard
Goddard, C. (2018). Joking, kidding, teasing: Slippery categories for cross-cultural comparison but key words for understanding conversational humor. The Journal of Intercultural Pragmatics, 15(4), 487-514.
Grzebalska, W., Kováts, E., & Petö, A. (2017). Gender as symbolic glue: How gender became an umbrella term for the rejection of the (neo) liberal order. hal-03232926.
Hempelmann, C. (2017). Key terms in the field of humor. In Attardo, S. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and humor (pp. 34-48). Routledge,
Hietalahti, J., & Pennanen, J. (2023). Understanding humor: Four conceptual approaches to the elusive subject. The Philosophy of Humor Yearbook, 4(1), 53-80.
Höpfl, H. (1981). Isms. The British Journal of Political Science, 13, 1-17.
Kardos, P., & Malek, F.A. (2017). The common cold—as umbrella term for acute infections of nose, throat, larynx and bronchi. Pneumologie, 71(4), 221-6.
Knobe, J., Prasada S., & Newman G. (2013). Dual character concepts and the normative dimension of conceptual representation. Cognition, 127, 242-57. Retrieved from: http://experimental- philosophy.yale.edu/dual-character.pdf
Kozintsev, A. (2010). The mirror of laughter. (Martin, R.P. Trans.) Transaction Press.
Kuipers, G. (2009). Humor styles and symbolic boundaries. The Journal of Literary Theory, 3(2), 219-40.
Noonan, W. (2011). Reflecting back: Or what can the French tell the English about humour? Sydney Studies in English, 3,7, 92-115.
Mason, A. (1993). Explaining political disagreement. Cambridge University Press.
Milner Davis, J. & Hofmann, J. (2023). The humor transaction schema: A conceptual framework for researching the nature and effects of humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 36(2), 323-53.
Nilsen, D.L., & Nilsen, A.P. (2018). The language of humor: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Plunkett, D., & Sundell, T. (2013). Dworkin’s interpretivism and the pragmatics of legal dispute. Legal Theory, 19, 242-281.
Quine, W.V. (1976). The ways of paradox: And other essays. Harvard University Press.
Rip, A. & Voss, J.P. (2019). Umbrella terms as mediators in the governance of emerging science. In A. Rip (Ed.), Nanotechnology and its governance (pp. 10-33). Routledge.
Rolfe, M. (2022). The idea of national humour and Americanization in Australia and Britain. In The European Journal of Humour Research, 10(2), pp. 51-73. https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR.2022.10.2.689
Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Hutchinson.
Sainsbury, R. M. (1995). Paradoxes. Cambridge University Press.
Shilikhina, K., & Shcheglova E. (2021). Terminology as a source of misunderstanding: English and Russian humour term systems. The European Journal of Humour Research, 9(1), 7–28. https://doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2021.9.1.Shilikhina
Smet, I. de (1996). Menippean satire and the republic of letters, 1581–1655. Droz.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S., & Jonsen, A.R. (1988). The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. University of California Press.
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding. Vol.1 The Clarendon Press.
Wickberg, D. (1993). The sense of humor in American culture, 1850–1960. [Doctoral dissertation, Yale University].
Veach, T.C. (1988). A theory of humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 11(2), pp. 161-215.
Weinbrot, H. (2005). Menippean satire reconsidered: From antiquity to the eighteenth century. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Wiggins, D. (1988). Identity and spatio-temporal continuity. Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, L. (1969). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. (Pears, D.F. & McGuiness, B.F., Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published in 1921).
Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations. (Anscombe, G.E.M., Trans.). Blackwell. (Original work published in 1953).
Wooden, W. (1972). Thomas More and Lucian: A study in satiric influence and technique. Studies in English, 13 (article 8), 43-57.
Xu, W. (2011). The classical Confucian concepts of human emotion and proper humour. In J. Chey & J. Milner Davis (Eds.), Humour in Chinese life and letters: Classical and traditional approaches (pp. 49-72). Hong Kong University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 The European Journal of Humour Research