Suchergebnisse

The present investigation focuses on the analysis of ironic comments and memes dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania on 1 January 2015. The analysis relies on the understanding of irony as a clash, or shift, or contrast, between literal and intended (opposite) meaning of an utterance (Ritchie 2005; Garmendia 2014; Gibbs and Izett 2013), often not devoid of (critical) evaluation (Attardo 2000; Garmendia 2014; Dynel 2014, 2014a; Bryant 2012). In communication, ironic utterances are usually rated as less severe than direct critical remarks (Gibbs and Izett 2013: 134). Recent papers have demonstrated that the intended meaning of an ironic utterance is not only concerned with the ironist's intention but might also involve the expectations of the addressee (Gibbs and Colston 2007); irony is not necessarily confined to a single utterance and is employed to negotiate social relationships (Gibbs and Colston 2007; Bryant and Gibbs 2015). The data for the present investigation has been collected from Facebook (posts, comments and memes from personal profiles and Facebook pages) and from reader comments following editorials and news reports found in the most popular news portals in Lithuania: lrytas.lt, delfi.lt and 15min.lt. They cover the period between 10 September 2014 and 2 February 2015. The results suggest that a number of ironic comments are based on metaphor. Differently from innovative metaphors employed in some humorous situations (Dynel 2009), most metaphors employed in ironic comments are dead, such as TIME IS SPACE, MORE IS UP or MONEY IS A PERSON. However, the metaphors are revived by foregrounding an unexpected mapping and/or by echoing metaphors in "ironic chains" (the term adopted from Gibbs and Colston 2007). The echo, a frequent clue of irony (Garmendia 2014; Goatly 2012: 265), is often reproduced partially, i.e. by repeating some words of the original utterance and preserving its pattern as the interaction goes on. Cases of irony combining verbal and visual information also employ metaphors which create multiple oscillating frames clashing between themselves and communicating ironic messages, often bearing political implications. The victims of ironic communication in most cases are people (political figures or their supporters, or unidentified individuals from a crowd) adhering to the Soviet past or having sentiments about the national currency litas and sceptical about the euro and European values. When the focus of contrast is shifted and unexpected and surprising mappings are activated, ironic utterances and memes are also often humorous.

The present investigation focuses on the analysis of ironic comments and memes dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania on 1 January 2015. The analysis relies on the understanding of irony as a clash, or shift, or contrast, between literal and intended (opposite) meaning of an utterance (Ritchie 2005; Garmendia 2014; Gibbs and Izett 2013), often not devoid of (critical) evaluation (Attardo 2000; Garmendia 2014; Dynel 2014, 2014a; Bryant 2012). In communication, ironic utterances are usually rated as less severe than direct critical remarks (Gibbs and Izett 2013: 134). Recent papers have demonstrated that the intended meaning of an ironic utterance is not only concerned with the ironist's intention but might also involve the expectations of the addressee (Gibbs and Colston 2007); irony is not necessarily confined to a single utterance and is employed to negotiate social relationships (Gibbs and Colston 2007; Bryant and Gibbs 2015). The data for the present investigation has been collected from Facebook (posts, comments and memes from personal profiles and Facebook pages) and from reader comments following editorials and news reports found in the most popular news portals in Lithuania: lrytas.lt, delfi.lt and 15min.lt. They cover the period between 10 September 2014 and 2 February 2015. The results suggest that a number of ironic comments are based on metaphor. Differently from innovative metaphors employed in some humorous situations (Dynel 2009), most metaphors employed in ironic comments are dead, such as TIME IS SPACE, MORE IS UP or MONEY IS A PERSON. However, the metaphors are revived by foregrounding an unexpected mapping and/or by echoing metaphors in "ironic chains" (the term adopted from Gibbs and Colston 2007). The echo, a frequent clue of irony (Garmendia 2014; Goatly 2012: 265), is often reproduced partially, i.e. by repeating some words of the original utterance and preserving its pattern as the interaction goes on. Cases of irony combining verbal and visual information also employ metaphors which create multiple oscillating frames clashing between themselves and communicating ironic messages, often bearing political implications. The victims of ironic communication in most cases are people (political figures or their supporters, or unidentified individuals from a crowd) adhering to the Soviet past or having sentiments about the national currency litas and sceptical about the euro and European values. When the focus of contrast is shifted and unexpected and surprising mappings are activated, ironic utterances and memes are also often humorous.

Meaning extension, including metaphors and metonymies, has traditionally been associated with the language of fiction. Cognitive linguistics has given this area a new impetus by unravelling the metaphoricity of our everyday language and various discourses ranging from spoken to written, from learner language to academic or professional (legal, medical, political). Lakoff (1991 and 1995), Cienki (2005), Schmidt (2003), Cibulskienė (2006), Vaičenonienė (2002) and many other researchers seem to give preference to political and socio-economic discourse which has generated within this branch of linguistics a large amount of research all over the world.Academic discourse (AD) and its multiple layers of meaning, however, has received less attention since it is generally believed that AD aims at discovering the truth, explaining and arguing, it is rigid, critical and unambiguous. According to Hyland (2004, 87), AD depends upon the demonstration of absolute truth, empirical evidence or flawless logic. Its persuasive potency is seen as grounded in rationality and based on exacting methodologies, dispassionate observation, and informed reflection. (…) We see this form of persuasion as a guarantee of reliable knowledge, and we invest it with cultural authority, free of the cynicism with which we view the partisan rhetoric of politics and commerce.So this paper attempts to provide evidence for the claim that AD, like any other discourse, is equally inclined to meaning extension, specifically, metaphors and metonymies. The paper is structured around several key issues: first, it gives background to the study, including a discussion on academic discourse, its relation to other discourse types, the contrastive parameter of investigation and other methodological issues and second, it identifies major types of metonymical and metaphorical extensions as reflected in the data corpus and manifested in linguistic texts in English (EN) and Lithuanian (LT). ; traipsnyje nagrinėjamas lingvistinio diskurso tekstai, kurių pagrindinė funkcija, kaip ir bet kurio kito mokslinio teksto, tiksliai ir nedviprasmiškai pateikti informaciją bei argumentus. Todėl iš pirmo žvilgsnio atrodytų, kad perkeltinė reikšmė tokiuose tekstuose yra mažai tikėtina. Tačiau pasitelkus konceptualiosios metaforos teoriją bei kontrastyvinės lingvistikos metodus ir išnagrinėjus medžiagą paaiškėjo, kad akademiniai tekstai paklūsta bendrosioms natūraliosios kalbos tendencijoms. Tyri­mo rezultatai rodo, kad metonimija ir metafora yra pagrindiniai reikšmės perkėlimo mechanizmai. Dažniausios metaforos akademiniame tekste yra kalba/tyrimas/samprotavimasyra pastatas/ struk­tūra, kalba/tyrimas/ mokymasisyra matuojami, kalba/ mokymasis yra ekonominė veikla, kalba/tyrimas/ rašymasyra scena ir t.t. Antropocentrinis kalbos aspektas pasirodė esąs pagrindinis meto­nimijų kūrimo principas bei konceptualizacijos įrankis.Tiek metonimijų, tiek metaforų analizė atskleidė įdomių tarpkalbinių/tarpkultūrinių ypatumų, atsispindinčių junglumo modeliuose.

Humour is part of human communication and can serve as an effective means for making contact, finding a way out of an embarrassing situation, or mitigating different political and social tensions. However, not all humans are born capable of generating and processing humour and it remains an open question whether it is possible to learn and develop this ability. Therefore, a sense of humour, but not an *ability of humour, would be a frequent collocation in many languages. Cognitive linguists claim that collocations are not accidental as combinability patterns point to certain conceptualisation processes in the expression of meaning. The cognitive linguistic viewpoint that humour is based on a mismatch, or incongruity, between ideas, otherwise referred to as frame shifting, is adopted as a prerequisite for producing humour in this paper.The focus of this paper is the expression of verbal humour dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania in 2015. Verbal humour is created by employing different linguistic resources: sounds, spelling, word building models, homonymy and polysemy, word combinations and other syntactic structures and larger chunks of texts or discourse. The investigation is based on the main theories of humour: the Semantic Script Theory and the Superiority Theory developed by Attardo (1994) and Raskin (1985). The empirical material consists of 89 cases of verbal humour found in posts and comments in personal profiles and pages on Facebook and in reader comments following different articles in popular news portals written from September 2014 to February 2015. The paper attempts to describe linguistic means contributing to the construction of humour as well as to identify the shifts between frames involved in generating the humorous effect. The results of the investigation suggest that most humorous comments bear content-related political implications, shifting between the frames of the loss of national currency perceived either as the loss of stability or as the loss of national identity and the frame of positive expectations due to the greater integration into the EU. The techniques used to construct humour include wordplay based on sound combinations, similar spelling, non-standard spelling, and code-switching involving English and Russian. An especially productive technique was the construction of existing or non-existing words by code-mixing and the use of metaphor and metonymy. Larger chunks of text also employ intertextuality, parody, switching between registers and different types of echoing. ; Humoras yra svarbi žmogiškosios komunikacijos dalis, ypač kai reikia užmegzti kontaktą, rasti sprendimą sudėtingoje situacijoje ar sušvelninti įvairią politinę ir socialinę įtampą. Tačiau ne visi žmonės geba juokauti ar humorą suprasti, todėl tebelieka neatsakytas klausimas apie tai, ar humoro galima išmokti. Be to, dažnai vartojame žodžių junginį humoro jausmas, tačiau nekalbame apie *humoro gebėjimą. Kognityvinės krypties lingvistai teigia, kad žodžių junginiai nėra atsitiktiniai. Dažniausiai jie atspindi tam tikrus konceptualizacijos procesus. Šio darbo pagrindą sudaro būtent kognityvinis požiūris į humorą, grindžiamą neatitikimu, priešprieša tarp kontekste apčiuopiamų kelių idėjų, situacijų, dažnai vadinamų rėmais.Šio tyrimo objektas – išskirtinai kalbos priemonėmis kuriamas humoras euro įvedimo Lietuvoje 2015 m. tema. Empirinė medžiaga surinkta iš asmeninių Facebook'o puslapių ir skaitytojų komentarų įvairiuose naujienų portaluose nuo 2014 m. rugsėjo iki 2015 m. vasario mėn. Tyrimas iš esmės grindžiamas pagrindinėmis humoro teorijomis: Attardo (1994) ir Raskino (1985) sukurtomis ir išplėtotomis semantine skriptų ir pranašumo teorijomis. Darbe bandoma nustatyti rėmus, kurių neatitikimas sukuria humoro situaciją. Tyrimo rezultatai rodo, kad dauguma komentarų nestokoja politinių implikacijų. Vyrauja priešprieša tarp rėmų, kurie užduoda situaciją, kai nacionalinė valiuta suvokiama kaip stabilumo ir nacionalinio identiteto praradimas ir rėmų, kurie kuria pozityvią nuostatą ES atžvilgiu, susijusią su europietiško gyvenimo lūkesčiais.Darbe taip pat nustatomos dažniausios kalbinės priemonės, padedančios kurti humoro situacijas, tokios kaip garsų sąskambiai, nenorminė rašyba, (lietuvių, anglų, ir rusų) kodų kaita, polisemija ir homonimija. Ypač dažnai pasitaiko egzistuojančių ir neegzistuojančių žodžių kūrybos atvejų, maišomi kodai bei vartojamos metaforos ir metonimijos. Ilgesnėse teksto atkarpose atpažįstamas intertekstualumas, parodija, registrų kaita bei įvairaus pobūdžio nuaidėjimas.

Humour is part of human communication and can serve as an effective means for making contact, finding a way out of an embarrassing situation, or mitigating different political and social tensions. However, not all humans are born capable of generating and processing humour and it remains an open question whether it is possible to learn and develop this ability. Therefore, a sense of humour, but not an *ability of humour, would be a frequent collocation in many languages. Cognitive linguists claim that collocations are not accidental as combinability patterns point to certain conceptualisation processes in the expression of meaning. The cognitive linguistic viewpoint that humour is based on a mismatch, or incongruity, between ideas, otherwise referred to as frame shifting, is adopted as a prerequisite for producing humour in this paper. The focus of this paper is the expression of verbal humour dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania in 2015. Verbal humour is created by employing different linguistic resources: sounds, spelling, word building models, homonymy and polysemy, word combinations and other syntactic structures and larger chunks of texts or discourse. The investigation is based on the main theories of humour: the Semantic Script Theory and the Superiority Theory developed by Attardo (1994) and Raskin (1985). The empirical material consists of 89 cases of verbal humour found in posts and comments in personal profiles and pages on Facebook and in reader comments following different articles in popular news portals written from September 2014 to February 2015. The paper attempts to describe linguistic means contributing to the construction of humour as well as to identify the shifts between frames involved in generating the humorous effect. The results of the investigation suggest that most humorous comments bear content-related political implications, shifting between the frames of the loss of national currency perceived either as the loss of stability or as the loss of national identity and the frame of positive expectations due to the greater integration into the EU. The techniques used to construct humour include wordplay based on sound combinations, similar spelling, non-standard spelling, and code-switching involving English and Russian. An especially productive technique was the construction of existing or non-existing words by code-mixing and the use of metaphor and metonymy. Larger chunks of text also employ intertextuality, parody, switching between registers and different types of echoing.

Humour is part of human communication and can serve as an effective means for making contact, finding a way out of an embarrassing situation, or mitigating different political and social tensions. However, not all humans are born capable of generating and processing humour and it remains an open question whether it is possible to learn and develop this ability. Therefore, a sense of humour, but not an *ability of humour, would be a frequent collocation in many languages. Cognitive linguists claim that collocations are not accidental as combinability patterns point to certain conceptualisation processes in the expression of meaning. The cognitive linguistic viewpoint that humour is based on a mismatch, or incongruity, between ideas, otherwise referred to as frame shifting, is adopted as a prerequisite for producing humour in this paper. The focus of this paper is the expression of verbal humour dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania in 2015. Verbal humour is created by employing different linguistic resources: sounds, spelling, word building models, homonymy and polysemy, word combinations and other syntactic structures and larger chunks of texts or discourse. The investigation is based on the main theories of humour: the Semantic Script Theory and the Superiority Theory developed by Attardo (1994) and Raskin (1985). The empirical material consists of 89 cases of verbal humour found in posts and comments in personal profiles and pages on Facebook and in reader comments following different articles in popular news portals written from September 2014 to February 2015. The paper attempts to describe linguistic means contributing to the construction of humour as well as to identify the shifts between frames involved in generating the humorous effect. The results of the investigation suggest that most humorous comments bear content-related political implications, shifting between the frames of the loss of national currency perceived either as the loss of stability or as the loss of national identity and the frame of positive expectations due to the greater integration into the EU. The techniques used to construct humour include wordplay based on sound combinations, similar spelling, non-standard spelling, and code-switching involving English and Russian. An especially productive technique was the construction of existing or non-existing words by code-mixing and the use of metaphor and metonymy. Larger chunks of text also employ intertextuality, parody, switching between registers and different types of echoing.

Humour is part of human communication and can serve as an effective means for making contact, finding a way out of an embarrassing situation, or mitigating different political and social tensions. However, not all humans are born capable of generating and processing humour and it remains an open question whether it is possible to learn and develop this ability. Therefore, a sense of humour, but not an *ability of humour, would be a frequent collocation in many languages. Cognitive linguists claim that collocations are not accidental as combinability patterns point to certain conceptualisation processes in the expression of meaning. The cognitive linguistic viewpoint that humour is based on a mismatch, or incongruity, between ideas, otherwise referred to as frame shifting, is adopted as a prerequisite for producing humour in this paper. The focus of this paper is the expression of verbal humour dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania in 2015. Verbal humour is created by employing different linguistic resources: sounds, spelling, word building models, homonymy and polysemy, word combinations and other syntactic structures and larger chunks of texts or discourse. The investigation is based on the main theories of humour: the Semantic Script Theory and the Superiority Theory developed by Attardo (1994) and Raskin (1985). The empirical material consists of 89 cases of verbal humour found in posts and comments in personal profiles and pages on Facebook and in reader comments following different articles in popular news portals written from September 2014 to February 2015. The paper attempts to describe linguistic means contributing to the construction of humour as well as to identify the shifts between frames involved in generating the humorous effect. The results of the investigation suggest that most humorous comments bear content-related political implications, shifting between the frames of the loss of national currency perceived either as the loss of stability or as the loss of national identity and the frame of positive expectations due to the greater integration into the EU. The techniques used to construct humour include wordplay based on sound combinations, similar spelling, non-standard spelling, and code-switching involving English and Russian. An especially productive technique was the construction of existing or non-existing words by code-mixing and the use of metaphor and metonymy. Larger chunks of text also employ intertextuality, parody, switching between registers and different types of echoing.

Humour is part of human communication and can serve as an effective means for making contact, finding a way out of an embarrassing situation, or mitigating different political and social tensions. However, not all humans are born capable of generating and processing humour and it remains an open question whether it is possible to learn and develop this ability. Therefore, a sense of humour, but not an *ability of humour, would be a frequent collocation in many languages. Cognitive linguists claim that collocations are not accidental as combinability patterns point to certain conceptualisation processes in the expression of meaning. The cognitive linguistic viewpoint that humour is based on a mismatch, or incongruity, between ideas, otherwise referred to as frame shifting, is adopted as a prerequisite for producing humour in this paper. The focus of this paper is the expression of verbal humour dealing with the introduction of the euro in Lithuania in 2015. Verbal humour is created by employing different linguistic resources: sounds, spelling, word building models, homonymy and polysemy, word combinations and other syntactic structures and larger chunks of texts or discourse. The investigation is based on the main theories of humour: the Semantic Script Theory and the Superiority Theory developed by Attardo (1994) and Raskin (1985). The empirical material consists of 89 cases of verbal humour found in posts and comments in personal profiles and pages on Facebook and in reader comments following different articles in popular news portals written from September 2014 to February 2015. The paper attempts to describe linguistic means contributing to the construction of humour as well as to identify the shifts between frames involved in generating the humorous effect. The results of the investigation suggest that most humorous comments bear content-related political implications, shifting between the frames of the loss of national currency perceived either as the loss of stability or as the loss of national identity and the frame of positive expectations due to the greater integration into the EU. The techniques used to construct humour include wordplay based on sound combinations, similar spelling, non-standard spelling, and code-switching involving English and Russian. An especially productive technique was the construction of existing or non-existing words by code-mixing and the use of metaphor and metonymy. Larger chunks of text also employ intertextuality, parody, switching between registers and different types of echoing.