Irony as a communicative and pragmatic superstrategy of mock politeness

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/2617-3921.2023.24.178-186

Keywords:

irony, ironic utterance, mock politeness, mock politeness strategy, mock politeness tactics.

Abstract

The article explores irony as a complex linguistic phenomenon characterized by intricate structure and semantics. In contemporary linguistics, the study of irony extends beyond literary works and becomes a subject of examination through the lens of its role in everyday communication. The author of the article places special emphasis on the category of mock politeness and its role in the communicative paradigm, particularly in the context of postmodern literature where dialogues of characters are marked by complexity, allegory, and irony. A comprehensive analysis of irony as a communicative and pragmatic superstrategy of mock politeness in the English language is conducted in the article. Various mock politeness strategies and tactics employed by characters in postmodern fiction to achieve diverse communicative intentions during interactions are discussed, highlighting the multifaceted nature of contemporary communication. Special attention is paid to the role of context in understanding irony. Recognizing the speaker's intentions and correctly comprehending ironic utterances necessitates consideration of not only linguistic but also cultural, psychological, and philosophical aspects. It is elucidated that irony is a significant element of modern communication, and understanding its purpose and expressive means is crucial for successful communication in contemporary society. Irony serves as a strategic means for speakers to convey specific communicative intentions. Irony is used in various circumstances, such as humor, expressing disagreement, mockery, etc., employing diverse means to achieve these ends. However, every ironic utterance is designed to assert the opposite of what is stated. Context plays a pivotal role in determining irony, and isolated ironic utterances lose their illocutionary force and have no impact on the listener. The investigation of irony as a communicative and pragmatic category contributes to a better understanding of linguistic practice and its influence on communication.

References

Гнатюк Л. Прагматичні й функціонально-комунікативні особливості імплікатури іронії. Лінгвістичні студії. 2011. № 23. С. 131–137.

Ланчуковська Н. В. Прагматичний аспект інтонації в реалізації іронії в англомовному художньому тексті (експериментально-фонетичне дослідження): автореф. дис. ... канд. філол. наук : 10.02.04. Одеса, 2003. 22 с.

Шкіцька І. Ю. Cпособи та засоби вербалізації іронії в маніпулятивному дискурсі позитиву. Лінгвістичні дослідження. 2018. № 47. С. 213–221.

Bailey E. Hidden flame. Richmond, Surrey : Mills & Boon, 1993. 253 p.

Brett S. Murder unprompted. UK : Futura Pub. Ltd, 1984. 164 p.

Brown P., Levinson S. C. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1987. 345 p.

Forbes C. Shockwave. London : Pan Books Ltd, 1990. 558 p.

Frye N. Anathomy of Criticism. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, 1957. 408 p.

Giora R. On irony and negation. Discourse Processes. 1995. Vol. 19, № 2. P. 239–264.

Grice H. P. Logic and conversation. Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3 : Speech Acts / P. Cole, J. L. Morgan (Eds.). New York : Academic Press, 1975. P. 41–58.

Hamamoto H. Irony from a cognitive perspective. Relevance Theory : Applications and Implications / R. Carston, S. Uchida (Eds.). Amsterdam :

John Benjamins, 1998. P. 257–270.

Leech G. N. Principles of Pragmatics. New York : Longman, 1983. 250 p.

Nash E. Strawberries and wine. Cheltenham : New Author Pub, 1993. 476 p.

Searle J. Literal meaning. Expression and Meaning / J. Searle. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1979. P. 117–136.

Sperber D., Wilson, D. Pragmatics, modularity and mind-reading. Mind and Language. 2002. Vol. 17, № 1–2. P. 3–23.

Published

2023-12-21