Laughter as a Semiotic Problem

Purpose. The article is aimed to substantiate the view on the phenomenon of laughter as a subject of semiotic analysis, which leads to the following tasks: to reveal the possibilities of semiotics application in the study of laughter nature; to analyze the phenomenon of laughter as a cultural and natural phenomenon, as a sign and as an attribute; to consider the place of laughter in culture, which is understood as a sign system. Theoretical basis. The semiotic approach proceeds from the fact that human lives in the world of signs, all the surrounding reality can be interpreted as a sign system. The basic concept of semiotics is the concept of a sign. The theoretical basis of the article is understanding the culture as a sign-symbolic system. Laughter is considered as a phenomenon ontologically rooted in human culture. At the same time, laughter is on the edge of culture. The research is based on the work of semiotic authors, cultural researchers, and the researchers of laughter. Originality. The originality lies in the application of the semiotic method to the research of laughter phenomenon, consideration of the dialectics of natural and cultural, signedness and non-signedness, manifested in the phenomenon of laughter. Conclusions. Laughter is considered as a psychophysiological phenomenon (attribute) and as a cultural phenomenon (sign). Laughter acts as an emotional manifestation, a physiological reaction, but socially and culturally mediated. In any case, laughter indicates an emotional or cognitive state of a human. Laughter acts as a process and result of the interpretation of a sign, a reaction to a sign. Laughter is a form and a means of communication. Being a natural phenomenon, in the process of social evolution, laughter acquires signedness, is integrated by culture as a sign system, and, at the same time, maintains a connection with nature. Thus, laughter occupies an ambivalent position between nature and culture. In the phenomenon of laughter, the dual state of human is revealed. In laughter, boundaries are blurred, the unity and opposition of natural and cultural, biological and social, soul and body, thought and feeling, sign and attribute are manifested.

The ontogeny of human laughter

Human adult laughter is characterized by vocal bursts produced predominantly during exhalation, yet apes laugh while exhaling and inhaling. The current study investigated our hypothesis that laughter of human infants changes from laughter similar to that of apes to increasingly resemble that of human adults over early development. We further hypothesized that the more laughter is produced on the exhale, the more positively it is perceived. To test these predictions, novice ( n = 102) and expert (phonetician, n = 15) listeners judged the extent to which human infant laughter ( n = 44) was produced during inhalation or exhalation, and the extent to which they found the laughs pleasant and contagious. Support was found for both hypotheses, which were further confirmed in two pre-registered replication studies. Likely through social learning and the anatomical development of the vocal production system, infants' initial ape-like laughter transforms into laughter similar to that of adult humans over the course of ontogeny.

The Complexity and Phylogenetic Continuity of Laughter and Smiles in Hominids

Laughter and smiles are often, but not always, associated with positive affect. These expressions of humans help to promote social relationships as well as the development of cognitive and socio-emotional skills and they may have a positive impact on health and well-being, hereby covering a selection of fitness-relevant benefits. Both laughter and smiles of positive affect also occur early in human development and across cultures, suggesting deep roots in human biology. The present work provides an evolutionary reconstruction of the evolution of human laughter and smiles of positive affect in form and function, based on the principle of maximum parsimony. According to the Complexity and Continuity Hypothesis, human laughter and smiles of positive affect must have evolved within the context of play from ancestral species. Furthermore, ancestral ape laughter and their open-mouth faces must already have been complex in form and function and changed over time via categorically different phylogenetic pathways to become characteristic, effective, and pervasive behaviors of everyday social interactions in humans.

Divine and Human Laughter in Later Platonism

Plato’s dialogues contain much laughter, sometimes expressing personal or shared pleasure, but often aggressive or malicious (a phenomenon examined in Philebus). Later Platonists, whose texts did not dramatize social interactions, have less to say about laughter and treat it with reserve. Porphyry’s Plotinus never laughs, though he smiles tolerantly at Porphyry’s misunderstanding of his metaphysics (a scene modeled on a passage in Plato’s Parmenides). So the famous remark that Longinus was philologos but not philosophos was probably not aggressive, but a witty riposte to Longinus’ wordplay in the titles of a pair of texts criticizing Plotinus’ philosophy. Later Platonists increasingly favor a serious demeanor, treating laughter with reserve. For Iamblichus, laughter is a merely human trait that obstructs assimilation to the divine. Yet Syrianus and his pupils find in the laughter of Homer’s gods a celebration of divine providence, inspired by Plotinus’ playfully serious reflections on the seriousness of play.

Commentary on C. Trevor & D. Huron Are Humoresques Humorous? On the Similarity Between Laughter and Staccato

This commentary discusses and comments on the study by Trevor and Huron on the acoustical similarities between human laughter and staccato articulation in music.