scholarly journals “Joking, kidding, teasing”: Slippery categories for cross-cultural comparison but key words for understanding Anglo conversational humor

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 487-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cliff Goddard

Abstract Terms like to joke (and joking) and to tease (and teasing) have a curious double life in contrastive and interactional pragmatics and related fields. Occasionally they are studied as metapragmatic terms of ordinary English, along with related expressions such as kidding. More commonly they are used as scientific or technical categories, both for research into English and for cross-linguistic and cross-cultural comparison. Related English adjectives, such as jocular and mock, are also much-used in a growing lexicon of compound terms, such as jocular abuse, mock abuse, jocular mockery, and the like. Against this background, the present paper has three main aims. In the first part, it is argued that the meanings of the verbs to joke and to tease (and related nouns) are much more English-specific than is commonly recognized. They are not precisely cross-translatable even into European languages such as French and German. Adopting such terms as baseline categories for cross-cultural comparison therefore risks introducing an Anglocentric bias into our theoretical vocabulary. Nor can the problem be easily solved, it is argued, by attributing technical meanings to the terms. Detailed analysis of the everyday meanings of words like joking and teasing, on the other hand, can yield insights into the ethnopragmatics of Anglo conversational humor. This task is undertaken in the second part of the paper. The important English verb to kid and the common conversational formulas just kidding and only joking are also examined. The semantic methodology used is the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach, which depends on paraphrase into simple, cross-translatable words. Building on the NSM analyses, the third part of the paper considers whether it is possible to construct a typological framework for conversational humor based on cross-translatable terminology.

1998 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Indre R. Antanaitis

Three sets of symbolic material from sites of the East Baltic Neolithic non-Corded Ware culture c. 6500–3500 bp are presented and compared in order to interpret certain aspects of the ideology of these prehistoric communities, specifically as it relates to their faunal environment and gender distinctions. Approaches taken consist of: 1) statistical analysis of a data base of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic symbols, and grave good inventories as they relate to gender; 2) comparison of frequencies of faunal types represented in the economy and in zoomorphic symbols; and 3) a cross-cultural comparison of contexts of the most frequently occurring Neolithic animal symbols in East Baltic historic mythology, folkore, and ethnography. It is hoped that the results of these multiple and varied approaches can serve as a middle ground between vague abstract theorizing about Neolithic ideology on the one hand, and a wealth of infrequently addressed symbolic material on the other.


1999 ◽  
Vol 84 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1189-1196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Zaromatidis ◽  
Aspasia Papadaki ◽  
Alissa Gilde

The present study compares the attitudes of 101 Greeks and 98 Greek-Americans toward persons with disabilities. The Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons Scale was used to assess subjects' attitudes. Religiosity, education, and amount and type of contact with persons with disabilities were also measured. Analyses indicated that ethnicity accounted for a significant portion (28%) of the variance, with more positive attitudes among Greek-Americans. Also, opportunity to work with persons with disabilities accounted for 3% of the variance. The other variables did not significantly affect attitudes.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul H. P. Hanel ◽  
Gregory R. Maio ◽  
Ana Karla Silva Soares ◽  
Antony Manstead

In this paper, we investigate lay conceptions of creativity towards science as compared to art. In three studies across Brazil and the UK, we investigated whether science is less strongly associated with creativity compared to art. In Study 1, we found that art is more spontaneously associated with creativity among British but not Brazilian participants. Science and scientists were not spontaneously associated with creativity. In Study 2, art professions were perceived to be more creative compared to professions from the everyday life and science domains, and this effect was stronger in the British than Brazilian sample. However, when actual objects were displayed, this effect reversed in both countries (Study 3). Objects related to engineering – but not mathematics – were perceived as more creative compared to art related objects. Implications for the study of stereotypes about scientists and the emerging study of cross-cultural creativity are discussed.


2006 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 160-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Senokozlieva ◽  
Oliver Fischer ◽  
Gary Bente ◽  
Nicole Krämer

Abstract. TV news are essentially cultural phenomena. Previous research suggests that the often-overlooked formal and implicit characteristics of newscasts may be systematically related to culture-specific characteristics. Investigating these characteristics by means of a frame-by-frame content analysis is identified as a particularly promising methodological approach. To examine the relationship between culture and selected formal characteristics of newscasts, we present an explorative study that compares material from the USA, the Arab world, and Germany. Results indicate that there are many significant differences, some of which are in line with expectations derived from cultural specifics. Specifically, we argue that the number of persons presented as well as the context in which they are presented can be interpreted as indicators of Individualism/Collectivism. The conclusions underline the validity of the chosen methodological approach, but also demonstrate the need for more comprehensive and theory-driven category schemes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 568-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haram J. Kim ◽  
Shin Ye Kim ◽  
Ryan D. Duffy ◽  
Nguyen P. Nguyen ◽  
Danni Wang

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nobuko Takeuchi ◽  
Caroline Davis ◽  
Donald R. McCreary

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document