Lexical and Syntactic Ambiguity in Humor

Humor-International Journal of Humor Research, 2004

1996

The dissertation analyzes the role of linguistic ambiguity in canned linguistic verbal jokes in English. A typology of jokes based on the type of ambiguity underlying the joke is proposed. It is claimed that jokes based on ambiguity contain purposeful textual devices (ambiguators) enhancing the probability of both semantic interpretations being perceived by the recipient.

2009

Language-based jokes find their humorous power through ambiguities apparent in the English language. Some rely on similarities of sounds (sprain the ailment vs. Spain the country), some rely on ambiguous word meaning (trunk of a car vs. trunk of an elephant), while still others rely on similar syntactic representations (rose the flower vs. rose past tense of rise). Prior studies on language-based jokes have focused on how the puns are processed for funny interpretation seems to be a deficit of research regarding categorization, i.e. identifying frequencies of phonological, lexical, or syntactically-based jokes (for examples see . Though a number of studies discuss isolated cases of linguistic ambiguity within the English language (Oaks 1996, Stageberg 1971, few studies comprehensively explore patterns and frequencies of specific types of linguistic ambiguity, especially in the context of language-based jokes.

2010

Abstract. Humour is one of the most amazing characteristics that defines us as human beings and social entities. Its study supposes a deep insight into several areas such as linguistics, psychology or philosophy. From the Natural Language Processing (NLP) perspective, recent researches have shown that humour can be automatically generated and recognized with some success.

Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature

This research is conducted to reveal how humorous utterances are constructed by manipulating semantic meaning especially dealing with lexical semantics. Lexical semantics provides multiple meanings that portray their meanings’ relationship among a word and they are potentially exploited to elicit humor. This research examines utterances manipulating lexical semantics as the strategy of humor creation in Mind Your Language situation comedy. Applying a descriptive qualitative approach, the findings indicate that five types of lexical semantics are utilized as strategies of humorous utterances creation. Those types of lexical semantics are polysemy, homonymy, homophone, hyponymy, dan synonymy. Because of their multiple relation meanings, the speaker can refer to other meanings to construct different meanings with the hearer. The speaker constructs an incongruent meaning between what the hearer’s perception is and what the speaker meant. The deviation of lexical semantics between ...

2009

Abstract. One of the most amazing characteristics that defines the human being is humour. Its analysis implies a set of subjective and fuzzy factors, such as the linguistic, psychological or sociological variables that produce it. This is one of the reasons why its automatic processing seems to be not straightforward. However, recent researches in the Natural Language Processing area have shown that humour can automatically be generated and recognised with success.

2021

Why do we laugh (or groan) at puns? Humour serves as a fascinating topic of study within the field of cognitive linguistics due to the manipulation of form-meaning pairs that create tension and ambiguity. This project explores the dynamic between the social, pragmatic, phonological, syntactic and semantic components of puns to provide insight into these complexities and how they reflect on typical, rather than creative language. By focusing on puns from children's riddle and joke books, the examples used offer especially contrived constructions to better convey the necessary ambiguity to a younger audience, clearly revealing important elements used in this type of wordplay. This project seeks to identify the minimal conditions necessary for a pun to be successful; that is, to force a phonological ambiguity that can be resolved through the semantic elements of the joke. In doing so, this type of wordplay draws attention to our ability to process and reconcile ambiguity with relative ease, even within novel and creative language use. The first chapter provides a brief overview of the relevant scholarship in humour studies, beginning with Raskin's (1985) foundational Script-based Semantic Theory of Humour and including other texts integral to my research (e.g., Coulson 2001, Giora 2003, Partington 2009, Tobin 2018). In addition to providing a theoretical framework for approaching my examples, this chapter summarizes various definitions of puns and illuminates the lack of a unified definition within humour research. The second chapter explores the benefits of using wordplay to help develop complex language use in children by introducing them to polysemy and homophony in creative contexts, which encourage interaction with these concepts. The final chapter outlines three conditions required for puns to be successful: a context setting up multiple semantic frames, a phonologically ambiguous word or phrase that forces reinterpretation of the sentence, and the management and subversion of social and pragmatic expectations in the reader.

2014

This study aims to examine the comprehension of linguistic ambiguity in language based jokes by investigating the responses of a group of EFL learners to twelve English jokes. 70 Turkish university students were asked to read and evaluate whether they have understood the jokes in a questionnaire and then to write the punch lines if they answered yes. They were also asked to judge the funniness of the each joke. Twelve texts, classified as lexical jokes, syntactic jokes and phonological jokes, were given. The results indicated that Turkish EFL learners achieved an average level of performance in understanding linguistic ambiguity in jokes. The results also revealed that the type of joke affected students’ comprehension of ambiguity in jokes. Learners performed better in understanding the jokes composing of lexical ambiguity than in the jokes composing of phonological and syntactic ambiguity. Lexical jokes were also found to be perceived as the funniest. The implications of the findin...

1996

Linguistic ambiguity forms a crucial element of a substantial proportion of jokes.

The focus of the paper is “pun”, as one of the means of expressing humour and its textual functions. It explores the semantic structure of puns and the study of decoding linguistic parameters. The analysis is based on different factors, as humour is a universal phenomenon and as such it deserves cross-disciplinary attention. The study shows how different theories (incongruity, superiority, relief theories) co-exist to explain various functions of humour. Other issues discussed in the paper include different kinds of wordplay: jokes, idiomatic expressions, metaphors, etc in different types of textual context. Also,what is the role of pun in forming (English) humour. Alternatively, humour can be described as a kind of text orginized and interpreted by its own rules. These rules are either language-specific or culture-specific; therefore, there are no jokes which would be considered universally funny. That is why, understanding “pun” involves multiple cognitive processes, which are still to be studied from both theoritical and experimental perspectives. According to this research ambiguity is a convention of punning, but as Attardo points out, not every ambiguous word constitutes a pun (1994, 133). The pun has to have a context to build upon, and be opposed to (Attardo, Linguistic Theories of Humour 133). Research shows that puns often have different references, for example: political, insulting, humorous,etc. People who are not interested in politics or in any other different fields and do not know the certain terms will never find the joke funny. They also will not understand the political sarcasm of sentences. One has to have a certain background/cultural knowledge to understand the humour. People who do not have a certain vocabulary will not understand puns as well. This shows that when telling a joke, you always need to make sure you are telling it to the right people. It should also be mentioned that the discussed classification in the work ( lexical, syntactic and semantic puns) is not strictly defined, as in some cases lexical ambiguity is contrasted with semantic ambiguity and semantic is contrasted in structural and lexical ones as well. Word plays, double meanings, intonation, setting and aspects of culture all have an impact on whether a situation is viewed as ‘funny’ or not and deciphering all the clues can be difficult. However, a life without humour is a dull.