Irony in conversation: salience, role, and context effects

Negation and Polarity: Experimental Perspectives

“…In Kotthoff (2003), for instance, dinner-table conversations among friends exhibited resonance with incompatible, salience-based interpretations of (German) sarcastic remarks; the reverse pattern, however, prevailed among strangers participating in TV talk-shows. In Giora and Gur (2003), an hour long (Hebrew) conversation between friends also exhibited higher percentage (75 %) of resonance with incompatible, salience-based interpretations than with context-based sarcastic interpretations. 11 Similar results were also obtained when resonance in written discourses was examined (Giora et al 2014b).…”

Disrupted vs. sustained humor in colloquial conversations in peninsular Spanish

“…In contrast, research based on corpora corroborate their use as cohesive devices, i.e. for maintaining solidarity in situations of social equality (Anolli et al, 2001;Gibbs and Colston, 2001;Norrick, 2003;Giora and Gur, 2003); as differentiating factors in terms of gender (Lampert and Ervin-Tripp, 1998, 2006, 2006Davies, 2003Davies, , 2006Norrick andSpitz, 2008, 2010); and even in an intercultural and contrastive context (Dynel and Sinkeviciute, 2017;Mullan and B eal, 2018;Haugh and Weinglass, 2018;Priego-Valverde, Bigi, Attardo, Pickering and Gironzetti, 2018;Sinkeviciute and Dynel, 2019;Mullan et al, 2020). 3 Focused on irony and humor in spontaneous conversation, a line of research is devoted to the type of response provided by the listener (Eisterhold et al, 2006;Attardo et al 2011Attardo et al , 2013Attardo 2019Attardo , 2020.…”

9. Happy New War – The role of salient meanings and salience-based interpretations in processing utterances

“…For instance, in Giora and Gur (2003), 75 % of the conversational ironies exchanged among friends were responded to by reference to their salience-based but incompatible interpretations. In Kotthoff (2003), dinner-table conversations among friends abounded in responses to "what is said" -the salience-based but incompatible interpretations of the ironies; responses to "what is meant" -the non-salient compatible interpretation -were significantly less frequent (the reverse was true of such exchanges between adversaries participating in TV talk-shows).…”