Humour in online comments regarding Montenegro’s accession to NATO

Milena Dževerdanovic-Pejović

Abstract


The empirical analysis in this paper deals with establishing humour examples based on script opposition patterns in online comments regarding Montenegro’s accession to NATO. It is established that the opposing scripts prevailing in the comments on political setting in Montenegro are heavily dependent on Montenegro’s turbulent history and dominant collective scripts such as pride and bravery. As online comments are an emerging genre, a reference to the influence of computer-mediated communication was also made, where pragmatic interpretation called for the help of critical discourse analysis.  The results show that the script opposition parameters enable not only linguistic but also pragmatic revelations about Montenegrin people and their chief values or scripts. Script opposition examples within commenters’ standpoints are explained with reference to diachronic level and the modern values in Montenegro.

Keywords


humour, script opposition, critical discourse analysis, online comments

Full Text:

VIEW FULL TEXT

References


Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic Theories of Humour. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Attardo, S. (2001). Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Behnke, A. (2013). NATO’s Security Discourse after the Cold War: Representing the West. London and New York: Routledge.

Conrad, M. (2011). NATO–Russia Relations under Putin: The Emergence and Decay of the Security Community? An Analysis of the Russian Discourse of NATO (2000-2008). Berlin: Lit Verlag.

Greenberg, D. R. (2006). Language and Identity in the Balkans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gruber, H. (2008). “Analyzing Communication in the New Media”. In Wodak R. & Krzyzanowski M. (eds.), Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences, Basingstoke: Palgrave, MacMillan, pp. 54-77.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. New York: Longman.

Habermas, J. (1991). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of a Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Jones, H. R. (2008). “Technology, Democracy and Participation in Space”, in Wodak R. & Koller V. (eds), Handbook of Communication in Public Sphere, Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 429-446.

Koncewicz- Dziduch, E. (2017). Commentary piece: The Sociocultural Characteristics of Montenegrins – The negative message in positive jokes. European Journal of Humour Research 5 (2) 71-79. Available at: https://europeanjournalofhumour.org/index.php/ejhr/article/view/198.

Macdonald, M. (2003). Exploring Media Discourse. London: Arnold.

McMillan, S. R. (2013). Threads of Deliberation: A Textual Analysis of Online News Comments, master’s thesis. Available at:

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=ohiou1368025601&disposition=inline.

Paschalis M. K. (2006). ‘The Enlightenment in Southeast Europe’, in Trencsényi B. & Kopeček M. (eds.), Discourses of Collective Identity in Central and Southeast Europe (1770-1945): Texts and Commentaries, Budapest & New York: Central European University Press, pp. 45-57.

Pavićević, Đ. & Đurović S. (2009). Relations between Montenegro and Serbia from 1991 to 2006: An Analysis of Media Discourse, in Pål Kolstø (ed.), Media Discourse and the Yugoslav Conflicts: Representations of Self and Other, England: Ashgate, pp. 129-153.

Riva, G. (2001). ‘Communicating in CMC: Making Order out of Miscommunication’, in Anolli L., Ciceri R., & Giuseppe R. (eds.), Say Not to Say: New perspectives on miscommunication, Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 204-230.

Sowers, C.A. Changes in Branding Strategy: A Discourse Analysis of NATO publications and speech regarding its Russian relationship and the NATO-Russia council, master thesis, available at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/communication_theses/60/

Šarić, Lj. & Radanović Felberg T. (2014). ‘Means of Expressing and Implying Emotions and Impoliteness in Croatian and Montenegrin Public Discourse’. Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne, 9, pp. 123-148.

Torfing J. (2005) ‘Discourse Theory: Achievements, Arguments and Challenges’, in Torfing J. & Howarth, D. (eds.), Discourse Theory in European Politics: Identity, Policy and Governance, London: Palgrave, pp.1-32.

Van Dijk, Teun A. (2001). ‘Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis’, in Wetherell M, Taylor S, and Yates J. S. (eds.), Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader, London: Sage Publications, pp. 300-317.

Van Dijk, Teun A. (2009). Society and Discourse: How Social Contexts Influence Text and Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vučetić, S. (2004). “Identity is a Joking Matter: Intergroup Humor in Bosnia”. Available at: http://soi.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/soi/article/view/8011/7167 (accessed 25 February 2017).

Wierzbicka, A. (2006). English: Meaning and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (2005). Emotions across Languages and Cultures: Diversity and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. London: Palgrave.

Wodak, R, de Cillia R, Reisigl M. & Liebhart K. (2009). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2018.6.2.245.dzeverdanovic

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Publication ethics and malpractice statement