Conceptual integration theory and British humour: an analysis of the sitcom Miranda

Joanna Jabłońska-Hood

Abstract


Conceptual integration theory (henceforth CIT), aka conceptual blending, was devised by Fauconnier and Turner (2002) as a model for meaning construction and interpretation. It is based on the notion of a mental space, which originated in Fauconnier's early research (1998). Mental spaces are structures that constitute information pertaining to a particular concept (Fauconnier and Turner 2002: 40). Interestingly, mental spaces can be linked together and blended so as to produce a novel quality not previously present. In this manner, conceptual integration serves the purpose of a theoretical model which throws light on creativity in language use. In my paper, I will apply CIT to British humour in order to use its multiway blending together with its dynamic, online running of the blended contents for the purpose of comedy elucidation. It is crucial to observe that British humour is a complex phenomenon which pertains to many different levels of interpretation, i.e. a linguistic, cultural or a discourse one. CIT possesses a well suited cognitive apparatus which can encompass the complexity of British humour with all its layers. The primary goal of the article is to analyse a selected scene from a sitcom entitled Miranda in order to show the validity of the theory in respect of humour studies. In particular, I will undertake to demonstrate that CIT, with a special emphasis on its principles such as compression and the emergent structure of the blend can deal with many processes that accumulate within British humour and result in laughter. Simultaneously, I will try to demonstrate that frame-shifting, as proposed by Coulson (2015: pp. 167-190), can be of help to CIT in humour explanation.


Keywords


conceptual integration theory, blending, British humour, compression, emergent structure, frame-shifting

Full Text:

VIEW FULL TEXT

References


CED, retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pl/dictionary/english/splatter

Coulson, S. (2015). ‘Frame-shifting and frame-semantics: joke comprehension’, in Brône, G., Feyaerts, K. & Veale, T. (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 167-190.

Fauconnier, G. (1998). Mappings in Language and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fauconnier, G. (2008). ‘How compression gives rise to metaphor and metonymy’. Retrieved 5 September, 2010, from https://youtu.be/kiHw3N6d1Js.

Fauconnier, G. & Turner. M. (1998). ‘Polysemy and conceptual blending’. Retrieved 13 May, 2010 from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1346508&rec=1&srcabs=1457344

Fauconnier, G. & Turner. M. (1999). ‘Metonymy and conceptual integration’, in Panther, K.U. & Radden, G. (eds.). Metonymy in Language and Thought 4, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 77-90.

Fauconnier, G. & Turner. M. (2002). The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.

Fauconnier, G. & Turner. M. (2008a). ‘The origin of language as a product of the evolution of modern cognition’. Retrieved 13 May, 2010, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cmf?abstract_id=1556533.

Fauconnier, G. & Turner. M. (2008b). ‘Rethinking metaphor’, in Gibbs R. (ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, New York: CUP, pp. 53-66.

Gibbs, R.W. (2017). Metaphor Wars: Conceptual Metaphors in Human Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goatly, A. (2007). Washing the Brain - Metaphor and Hidden Ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Grice, P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Jabłońska-Hood, J. (2015). A Conceptual Blending Theory of Humour: Selected British Comedy Productions in Focus. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Jabłońska-Hood, J. (2019).’Is blending a godsend or a curse? An attempt at the theory’s assessment from the cognitive linguistic perspective’. Prace Językoznawcze (forthcoming).

de Jongste, H. (2016). ‘Mental models and humorous intent’. Journal of

Pragmatics 95, pp. 107-119. https://doi.org/10.101/j.pragma.2016.01.006.

Kuźniak, M. (2012). ‘Dylematy teorii integracji pojęciowej w świetle dokonań lingwistyki aksjologicznej’, in: Z. Wąsik and M. Post (eds.). 2012. Papers and Studies in Axiological Linguistics, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Filologicznej, pp. 23–34.

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. London: The University of Chicago Press.

Libura, A. (2007). Amalgamaty kognitywne w sztuce. Cracow: Universitas.

Libura, A. (2010). Teoria przestrzeni mentalnych i integracji pojęciowej. Struktura modelu i jego funkcjonalność. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.

Libura, A. (2012). ‘Kto, komu i dlaczego grób kopie, czyli o sposobach analizy semantycznej zwrotu ‘kopać sobie grób’, in: Z. Wąsik, P. Czajka, and M. Szawerna (eds.). Alternate Construals in Language and Linguistics, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Filologicznej, pp. 43–58.

Ritchie, L.D. (2004). ‘Lost in space: metaphors in conceptual integration theory’. Metaphor and Symbol, 19, pp. 31-50.

Turner, M. (2014). The Origin of Ideas: Blending, Creativity, and the Human Spark. New York: Oxford University Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7592/EJHR2019.7.4.jablonska

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Publication ethics and malpractice statement