Keywords
“House”
incongruity-resolution model
recipient
superiority theory
How to Cite
Abstract
The paramount goal of this paper is to tease out a number of universal communicative phenomena which carry humour appreciated by the recipient of a drama series, based on data culled from a famous medical drama series, “House”. This broad-range study aims to shed light on the humorous phenomena in dramatic discourse, which evinces greater similitude than comedy discourse. It is argued that conversational humour is prevalent in dramatic discourse, manifesting itself in rhetorical figures (e.g. creative metaphor or irony) and pragmatic types (e.g. teasing), which can also be categorised depending on whether or not they display genuine aggression. Two more humour types are also presented as part of conversational humour, namely: non-verbal expression and (non-)parodic impersonation. Additionally, several other sources of humour are distinguished, such as: a character’s quirky behaviour (including participatory behaviour and impoliteness), uncanny events, situational irony, and deception. While the humorous capacity of such concepts has already been recognised, their position in the research on film discourse and in humour studies is not yet well-established. It will be argued that these phenomena manifest humorousness to the hearer on the second communicative level, the recipient, and are not necessarily humorous at the characters’ level. All the humour forms distinguished are neatly captured by incongruity theory, specifically the incongruity-resolution model, coupled with superiority theory in the case of disaffiliative humour.
References
Apter, Michael. (1982a). ‘Fawlty Towers: A reversal theory analysis of a popular television comedy series’. Journal of Popular Culture, 16, pp. 128-138.
Apter, Michael. (1982b). The Experience of Motivation: The Theory of Psychological Reversals. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Apter, Michael & Smith, K.C.P. (1977). ‘The Theory of Humorous Reversals’, in A.J. Chapman & H.C. Foot (eds.) It’s a Funny Thing, Humour, New York: Pergamon.
Attardo, Salvatore. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humor. New York: Mouton.
Attardo, Salvatore. (2000). ‘Irony as relevant inappropriateness’. Journal of Pragmatics 32, pp. 793-826.
Attardo, Salvatore. (2001). Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.
Attardo, Salvatore & Raskin, Victor. (1991). ‘Script theory revis(it)ed: Joke similarity and joke representation model’. Humor 4, pp. 293-348.
Barbe, Katherina. (1993). ‘Isn’t it ironic that, ...: Explicit irony’. Journal of Pragmatics, 6, pp. 579-590.
Bednarek, Monika. (2010). The Language of Fictional Television: Drama and Identity. London/New York: Continuum.
Bednarek, Monika. (2011). ‘The stability of the televisual character: A corpus stylistic case study’, in R. Piazza, M.
Bednarek & F. Rossi (eds.), Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 185-204.
Berger, Arthur. (1993). An Anatomy of Humor. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Berlyne, Daniel. (1969). ‘Laughter, humor, and play’, in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 795-852. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bok, Sissela. (1978). Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. New York: Random House.
Bousfield, Derek & Haugh, Michael. (2012). ‘Mock impoliteness in interactions amongst Australian and British speakers of English’. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, pp. 1099-1114.
Bousfield, Derek. (2007). ‘Beginnings, middles and ends: A biopsy of the dynamics of impolite exchanges’. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, pp. 2185-2216.
Bousfield, Derek. (2008). Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Boxer, Diana & Cortés-Conde, Florencia. (1997). ‘From bonding and biting: Conversational joking and identity display’. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp. 275-295.
Brock, Alexander. (2011). ‘Bumcivilian. Systemic aspects of humorous communication in comedies’, in R. Piazza, M.
Bednarek & F. Rossi (eds.), Telecinematic Discourse: Approaches to the Language of Films and Television Series, pp. 263-280.
Brône, Geert. (2008). ‘Hyper– and misunderstanding in interactional humour’. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, pp. 2027-2061.
Cantor, Joanne & Zillmann, Dolf. (1973). ‘Resentment toward victimized protagonists and severity of misfortunes they suffer as factors in humor appreciation’. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 6, pp. 321-329.
Charney, Maurice. (2005). Comedy: A Geographic and Historical Guide. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Chiaro, Delia. (1992). The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play. London: Routledge.
Clark, Herbert & Gerrig, Richard. (1984). ‘On the pretense theory of irony’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, pp. 121-126.
Coates, Jennifer. (1989). ‘Gossip revisited: language in all-female groups’, in Women in their Speech Communities, J.
Coates and D. Cameron (eds.), 94-121. London: Longman
Coates, Jennifer. (1996). Women Talk: Conversation Between Women Friends. Oxford: Blackwell.
Coates, Jennifer. (2007). ‘Talk in a play frame: More on laughter and intimacy’. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, pp. 29-49.
Colston, Herbert & Raymond Gibbs. (2007). ‘A brief history of irony’, in Irony in Language and Thought. A Cognitive Science Reader, in R. Gibbs & H. Colston (eds.). Routledge, pp. 3-24.
Coulson, Seana. (2001). Semantic Leaps. Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coulson, Seana, Urbach, Thomas & Kutas, Marta. (2006). ‘Looking back: Joke comprehension and the space structuring model’. Humor, 19, pp. 229-250.
Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield & Anne Wichmann. (2003). “Impoliteness revisited: with special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects’. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp. 1545-1579.
Culpeper, Jonathan. (1998). ‘(Im)politeness in drama’, in J. Culpeper, M. Short and P. Verdonk (eds.), Studying Drama: From Text to Context, 83-95. London: Routledge.
Culpeper, Jonathan. (2001). Language and Characterisation: People in Plays and Other Texts. London: Longman.
Culpeper, Jonathan. (2005). ‘Impoliteness and entertainment in the television show: “The Weakest Link”’. Journal of Politeness Research, 1, pp. 35-72.
Culpeper, Jonathan. (2011). Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dalton, Mary M. & Linder, Laura R. (eds). (2005). The Sitcom Reader: America Viewed and Skewed. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Dews, Shelly, Kaplan, Joan & Ellen Winner. (1995). ‘Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony’. Discourse Processes, 19, pp. 347-367.
Dilmon, Rakefet. (2009). ‘Between thinking and speaking – linguistic tools for detecting a fabrication’. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, pp. 1152-1170.
Dynel, Marta. (2009a). Humorous Garden-Paths: A Pragmatic-Cognitive Study. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Dynel, Marta. (2009b). ‘Beyond a joke: Types of conversational humour’. Language and Linguistics Compass. Semantics and Pragmatics, 3, pp. 1284-1299.
Dynel, Marta. (2009c). ‘Metaphor is a birthday cake: Metaphor as the source of humour’. Metaphoric.de 17/2009: 27-48. http://www.metaphorik.de/17/dynel.pdf
Dynel, Marta. (2010a). ‘Friend or foe? Chandler’s humour from the metarecipient's perspective’, in I. Witczak-Plisiecka (ed.). Pragmatic Perspectives on Language and Linguistics 2009. Vol.II: Pragmatics of Semantically Restricted Domains. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 175-205.
Dynel, Marta. (2010b). ‘How do puns bear relevance?’, in Marta Kisielewska-Krysiuk, A. Piskorska & E. Wałaszewska (eds.). Relevance Studies in Poland Vol. 3. Exploring Translation and Communication Problems. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, pp. 105-124.
Dynel, Marta. (2010c). ‘Not hearing things - Hearer/listener categories in polylogues’. mediAzioni 9. http://www.mediazioni.sitlec.unibo.it/images/stories/PDF_folder/document-pdf/2010/dynel_2010.pdf
Dynel, Marta. (2011a). ‘I’ll be there for you: On participation-based sitcom humour’, in M. Dynel (ed.). The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 311-333.
Dynel, Marta. (2011b). ‘‘You talking to me?’ The viewer as a ratified listener to film discourse’. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, pp. 1628-1644.
Dynel, Marta. (2011c). ‘Stranger than fiction. A few methodological notes on linguistic research in film discourse’. Brno Studies in English, 37.1, pp. 41-61.
Dynel, Marta. (2011d). ‘Joker in the pack: Towards determining the status of humorous framing in conversations’, in M. Dynel (ed.). The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 217-241.
Dynel, Marta. (2011e). ‘Blending the incongruity-resolution model and the conceptual integration theory: The case of blends in pictorial advertising’. International Review of Pragmatics, 3.1, pp. 59-83.
Dynel, Marta. (2011f). ‘Pragmatics and linguistic research into humour’, in M. Dynel (ed.) The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 1-15.
Dynel, Marta. (2011g). ‘Entertaining and enraging: The functions of verbal violence in broadcast political debates’, in V. Tsakona & D. Popa (eds.). Studies in Political Humour. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, , pp. 109-133.
Dynel, Marta. (2011h). ‘A web of deceit: A neo-Gricean view on types of verbal deception’. International Review of Pragmatics, 3.2, pp. 137-165.
Dynel, Marta. (2012a). ‘Setting our House in order: The workings of impoliteness in multi-party film discourse’. Journal of Politeness Research, 8, pp. 161-194.
Dynel, Marta. (2012b). ‘Garden-paths, red lights and crossroads: On finding our way to understanding the cognitive mechanisms underlying jokes’. Israeli Journal of Humor Research: An International Journal, 1, pp. 6-28.
Dynel, Marta. (2012c). ‘Humour on the House: Interactional construction of metaphor in film discourse’, in J. Chovanec & I. Ermida. Language and Humour in the Media. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 83-106.
Everts, Elisa. (2003). ‘Identifying a particular family humor style: A sociolinguistic discourse analysis’. Humor, 16, pp. 369-412.
Ferguson, Mark & Ford, Thomas. (2008). ‘Disparagement humor: A theoretical and empirical review of psychoanalytic, superiority, and social identity theories’. Humor, 21, pp. 283-312.
Festinger, Leon. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.
Fónagy, Ivan. (1982). ‘He is only joking (joke, metaphor and language development), in F. Kiefer (ed.), Hungarian Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 31-108.
Forabosco, Giovannantonio. (1992). ‘Cognitive aspects of the humour process: The concept of incongruity’. Humor, 5, pp. 9-26.
Forabosco, Giovannantonio. (2008). ‘Is the Concept of Incongruity Still a Useful Construct for the Advancement of Humor Research?’. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 4, pp. 45-62.
Friend, Stacie. (2010). ‘Getting carried away: Evaluating the emotional influence of fiction film’. Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXXIV: Film and the Emotions, 34, pp. 77-105.
Geyer, Naomi. (2010). ‘Teasing and ambivalent face in Japanese multi-party discourse’. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, pp. 2120–2130.
Gibbs, Raymond. (2011). ‘Are ironic acts deliberate?’. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, pp. 104-115.
Gibbs, Raymond, Jennifer O’Brien & Shelley Doolittle. (1995). ‘Inferring meanings that are not intended: speakers’ intentions and irony comprehension’. Discourse Processes 20, pp. 187-203.
Grady, J, T. Oakley & Seana Coulson. (1999). ‘Blending and metaphor’, in G. Steen and R. Gibbs (eds), Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 101-124
Gray, Jonathan. 2006. Watching with the Simpsons: Television, Parody, and Intertextuality. London: Routledge.
Grimes, Wilma H. (1995). ‘A theory of humor for public address: the mirth experience’. Speech Monographs, 22, pp. 217-226.
Gruner, Charles. (1978). Understanding Laughter: The Workings of Wit and Humor. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Gruner, Charles. R. (1997). The Game of Humor: A Comprehensive Theory of Why We Laugh. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Haugh, Michael. (2010). ‘Jocular mockery, (dis)affiliation, and face’. Journal of Pragmatics 42, pp. 2106-2119.
Haverkate, H. (1990). ‘A speech-act analysis of irony’. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, pp. 77-109.
Hay, Jennifer. (1995). Gender and humour: Beyond a joke. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
Hay, Jennifer. (2000). ‘Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women.’ Journal of Pragmatics, 32, pp. 709-742.
Hirsch, Galia. (2011). ‘Between irony and humor: A pragmatic model’. Pragmatics and Cognition, 19:3, pp. 530-561.
Hobbes, Thomas. (1996 [1651] ). Leviathan. New York: Oxford University Press.
Holdcroft, David. (1983). ‘Irony as trope, and irony as discourse. Poetics Today, 4, pp. 493-511.
Holmes, Janet. (2006). ‘Sharing a laugh: pragmatic aspects of humour and gender in the workplace’. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, pp. 26-50.
Horton, Andrew. (1991). Comedy/Cinema /Theory. Oxford: University of California Press.
Hurley, Matthew, Dennett, Daniel & Adams, Reginald. (2011). Inside Jokes: Using Humor to Reverse-Engineer the Mind. The MIT Press.
Kant, Immanuel. (1951[1790] ). Critique Of Judgment. Translated by John Bernard. New York: Hafner Publishing Company.
Kapogianni, Eleni. (2011). ‘Irony via “surrealism”’, in M. Dynel (ed.), The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 51-68.
Keith-Spiegel, Patricia. (1972). ‘Early conceptions of humour: varieties and issues’, in J. Goldstein and P. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humour, New York: Academic Press, pp. 3-39.
Koestler Arthur. (1964). The Act of Creation. London: Hutchinson.
Kotthoff, Helga. (1996). ‘Impoliteness and conversational humor’. Folia Linguistica Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 30, pp. 299-327.
Kotthoff, Helga. (1999). ‘Coherent keying in conversational humour: Contextualising joint fictionalisation’, in W. Bublitz, U.
Lenk & E. Ventola (eds.), Coherence in spoken and written discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 125-150.
Kotthoff, Helga. (2003). ‘Responding to irony in different contexts: On cognition in conversation’. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp. 1387-1411.
Kotthoff, Helga. (2006). ‘Pragmatics of performance and the analysis of conversational humor’. Humor, 19, pp. 271-304.
Kotthoff, Helga. (2007). ‘Oral genres of humor. On the dialectic of genre knowledge and creative authoring’. Pragmatics, 12, pp. 263-296.
Kozić, Milena. (2012). ‘Framing communication as play in the sitcom: Patterning the verbal and the nonverbal in humour’, in J. Chovanec & I. Ermida. Language and Humour in the Media. Newcastle upon Tyne : Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 107 - 138.
Kozloff, Sarah. (2000). Overhearing Film Dialogue. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kreuz, Roger & Roberts, Richard. (1993). ‘On satire and parody: The importance of being ironic’. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 8, pp. 97–109.
Kumon-Nakamura, Sachi, Glucksberg, Sam & Brown, Mary. (1995). ‘How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, pp. 3–21.
LaFave, Lawrence. (1972). ‘Humor judgments as a function of reference groups and identification classes’, in J. Goldstein and P. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humor. New York: Academic Press, pp. 195-210.
La Fave, Lawerence, Haddad, Jay & A. Maesen, William. (1996 [1976] ). ‘Superiority, enhanced self-esteem, and perceived incongruity humor theory’, in A. Chapman, & H.Foot (eds.), Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Wiley and Sons, pp. 63-91.
Lampert, Martin & Susan Ervin-Tripp. (2006). ‘Risky laughter: Teasing and self-directed joking among male and female friends’. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, pp. 51–72.
Leech, Geoffrey. (1969). A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry, London: Longman
Lucariello, Joan. (1994). ‘Situational irony: A concept of events gone awry’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, pp. 129-145.
MacCormac, Earl. (1985). A Cognitive Theory of Metaphor, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Mahon, James. (2007). ‘A definition of deceiving’. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 21, pp. 181-194.
Marc, David. (1997). Comic Visions: Television Comedy and American Culture. New York, NY: Blackwell.
Martin, Rod. (2007). The Psychology of Humor. An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Martin, Rod, Puhlik-Doris, Patricia, Larsen, Gwen, Gray, Jeanette & Weir, Kelly. (2003). ‘Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the Humor Styles Questionnaire’. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, pp. 48–75.
McGhee, Paul. (1971). ‘The role of operational thinking in children’s comprehension of humor’. Child Development 42-3, pp. 733-744.
McGhee, Paul. (1972). ‘On the cognitive origins of incongruity humor: Fantasy assimilation versus reality assimilation’, in J. Goldstein & P. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humor. NY: Academic Press, pp. 61-80.
McGhee, Paul. (1979). Humor, Its Origin and Development. San Francisco: Freeman.
Mills, Brett. (2005). Television Sitcom. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Mills, Brett. (2009). The Sitcom. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh.
Mio, Jeffery & Graesser, Arthur. (1991). ‘Humor, language, and metaphor’. Metaphor and Symbol, 6, pp. 87-102
Morreall, John. (1987). ‘Introduction’, in J. Morreall (ed), The Philosophy of Laughter and Humour, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press
Morreall, John. (1989). ‘Enjoying incongruity’. Humor 2, pp. 1-18.
Morreall, John. (2008). ‘Philosophy and religion’, in V. Raskin (ed). The Primer of Humor Research, Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gryuter, pp. 211-242.
Morreall, John. (2009). Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor (Wiley-Blackwell.
Muecke, Douglas. (1969). The Compass of Irony. London: Methuen.
Mulkay, Michel. (1988). On Humour: Its Nature And Its Place In Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Nash, Walter. (1985). The Language of Humor: Style and Technique in Comic Discourse. London: Longman.
Neale, Stephen & Frank Krutnik. (1990). Popular Film and Television Comedy. London: Routledge.
Nerhardt, Göran. (1976). ‘Incongruity and funniness: Towards a new descriptive model’, in A. Chapman & H. Foot (eds.), Humour and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications. London: Transaction Publishers, pp. 55-62.
Norrick, Neal. (1984). ‘Stock conversational witticisms’. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, pp. 195-209.
Norrick, Neal. (1986). ‘A frame-theoretical analysis of verbal humor: Bisociation as schema conflict’. Semiotica, 60, pp. 225-245.
Norrick, Neal. (1987). ‘From wit to comedy: Bisociation and intertextuality’. Semiotica, 61, pp. 113-125.
Norrick, Neal. (1989). ‘Intertextuality in Humor’. Humor, 2, pp. 117-139.
Norrick, Neal. (1993). Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Norrick, Neal. (2001). ‘On the conversational performance of narrative jokes: Toward an account of timing’. Humor 14, pp. 255-274.
Norrick, Neal. (2003). ‘Issues in conversational joking’. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp. 1333-1359.
Norrick, Neal. (2004). ‘Non-verbal humor and joke performance’. Humor 17, pp. 401-409.
Norrick, Neal & Chiaro, Delia (eds.). (2009). Humor in Interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Oring, Elliott. (2003). Engaging Humor. Urbana. IL: University of Illinois Press.
Palmer, Jerry. (1987). The Logic of the Absurd. On Film and Television Comedy. London: BFI Publishing.
Palmer, Jerry. (1994). Taking Humour Seriously. London: Routledge.
Partington, Alan. (2006). The Linguistics of Laughter. A Corpus-assisted Study of Laughter-talk. Oxon: Routledge Studies in Linguistics.
Partington, Alan. (2007). ‘Irony and reversal of evaluation’. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1547-1569.
Partington, Alan. (2008a). ‘From Wodehouse to the White House: a corpus-assisted study of play, fantasy and dramatic incongruity in comic writing and laughter-talk’. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 4, pp. 189-213.
Partington, Alan. (2008b). ‘Teasing and the White House: A corpus-assisted study of face work and performing and responding to teases’, Text & Talk, 28, pp. 771-792
Pien, Diana & Rothbart, Mary. (1976). ‘Incongruity and resolution in children’s humor: A reexamination’. Child Development, 47, pp. 966-971.
Pollio, Howard. (1996), ‘Boundaries in humor and metaphor’, in J. Mio & A. Katz (eds.), Metaphor, Implications and Applications. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 231-253.
Quaglio, Paulo. (2009). Television Dialogue: The Sitcom Friends vs. Natural Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Ritchie, Graeme. (2004). The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. London: Routledge.
Rossen-Knill, Deborah & Richard Henry. (1997). ‘The pragmatics of verbal parody’. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, pp. 719-752.
Rothbart, Mary. (1976). Incongruity, problem-solving and laughter’, in A. Chapman & H. Foot (eds.), Humour and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications, London: Wiley, pp. 37-54.
Ruch, Willibald. (1992). ‘Assessment of appreciation of humor: studies with the 3WD humor test’. In C. Spielberger & J. Butcher (eds.), Advances in Personality Assessment, Vol. 9, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 27-75.
Ruch, Willibald. (2008). ‘Psychology of humor’, in V. Raskin (ed.), The Primer of Humor Research, 17-100. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gryuter.
Ruch, Willibald & Hehl, Franz-Joseph. (1998). A two-mode model of humor appreciation: its relation to aesthetic appreciation and simplicity-complexity of personality’, in W. Ruch (ed.), The Sense of Humor: Explorations of a Personality Characteristic. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 109-142.
Senzani, Alessandra. (2010). ‘Class and gender as a laughing matter? The case of Roseanne’. Humor, 23, 229-253.
Shultz, Thomas. (1972). ‘The role of incongruity and resolution in children’s appreciation of cartoon humor’. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 13, pp. 456-477.
Simpson, Paul. (2011). ‘That’s not ironic, that’s just stupid: Towards an eclectic account of the discourse of irony’, in M. Dynel (ed.). The Pragmatics of Humour across Discourse Domains. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 33-50.
Stokoe, Elizabeth. (2008). ‘Dispreferred actions and other interactional breaches as devices for occasioning audience laughter in television sitcoms’. Social Semiotics, 18, pp. 289-307.
Suls, Jerry. (1972). ‘A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: An information processing analysis’, in J. Goldstein & P. McGhee (eds.), The Psychology of Humor. New York: Academic Press, pp. 81-100.
Suls, Jerry. (1977). ‘Cognitive and disparagement theories of humour’, in A. J. Chapman & H. Foot (eds.), It’s a Funny Thing, Humour. London: Pergamon Press, pp. 41-45.
Suls, Jerry. (1983). ‘Cognitive processes in humor appreciation’, in P. McGhee & J. Goldstein (eds.) Handbook of Humor Research, vol. I, New York: Springer Verlag, pp. 39-57.
Trueth, Michael. (2005). Laughter in the Living Room: Television Comedy and the American Home Audience. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Vandaele, Jeroen. (2002). ‘Humor mechanisms in film comedy: Incongruity AND superiority’. Poetics Today, 23(2), pp. 221-249.
Veale, Tony. (2003), ‘Metaphor and metonymy: The cognitive trump-Cards of linguistic humour’. A paper presented at the International Linguistic Cognitive Conference, La Rioja. ms available at http://afflatus.ucd.ie/papers/iclc2003.pdf
Veale, Tony, Feyaerts, Kurt & Brône, Geert. (2006). ‘The cognitive mechanisms of adversarial humor’. Humor, 19, pp. 305-340.
Wyer, Robert & Collins, James. (1992). ‘A theory of humor elicitation’. Psychological Review, 99, pp. 663-688.
Zillmann, Dolf. (1980). Anatomy of suspense’, in P. H. Tannenbaum (ed.), The Entertainment Functions of Television. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 133-163.
Zillmann, Dolf. (1983) ‘Disparagement humor’, in P. McGhee & J. Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of Humor Research, Vol. 1. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 85-107.
Zillmann, Dolf. (1996). ‘The psychology of suspense in dramatic exposition’, in P. Vorderer, H. J. Wulff, & M. Friedrichsen (Eds.), Suspense: Conceptualizations, theoretical analyses, and empirical explorations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 199-231.
Zillmann, Dolf. (2000). ‘Humor and comedy’, in D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer. Media Entertainment: The Psychology of Its Appeal. Mahawah: Lawrence Erblaum, pp. 37-57.
Zillmann, Dolf & Cantor, Joanne. (1972). ‘Directionality of transitory dominance as a communication variable affecting humor appreciation’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, pp. 191-198.
Zillmann, Dolf & Cantor, Joanne. (1976). ‘A disposition theory of humor and mirth’, in A. Chapman & Hugh C. Foot (eds.), Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Wiley and Sons, pp. 93-116.
Ziv, Avner. (1984). Personality and Sense of Humor. New York: Springer.