The Study of Sarcasm in Political Discourse
Keywords:sarcasm, political, discourse, phenomenon, sarcastic
Sarcasm is a complicated linguistic phenomenon especially in written language because changing the tone of speech makes sarcasm more apparent. Sarcasm often refers to a specific, recognizable individual and it implies criticism. Incongruity is the main characteristic that sarcastic speech contains in addition to opposition and negativity. Everyday interaction usually includes sarcasm, which affects the nature of nearly every exchange. As a result, sarcasm offers a chance for in-depth linguistic research. In this study, the researcher sets the following aims: showing which types of speech acts are used more than other types in the political contexts; shedding a light on the social functions that sarcasm serves in the political texts; and knowing the linguistic mechanisms which are employed in the political texts to reflect sarcasm. Accordingly, some hypotheses are put which are as follows: expressives are used more than other types of speech acts in the political texts; social control is the main function that sarcasm serves in the political texts; and metaphor is used frequently in political texts as a mechanism to reflect sarcasm. The researcher adopts an eclectic model which consists of three theories: Searle and Vanderveken's Speech Acts Theory (1985); Ducharme's Functions of Sarcasm (1994); and Tabacaru's Linguistic Mechanisms of Sarcasm. The analysis of the chosen political texts shows the following conclusions: assertive speech acts are used more than other types of speech acts; humorous aggression is a very common function of sarcasm in the employed political texts; and the most utilized linguistic mechanism to express sarcasm is metaphor.
Attardo, S. (2000). Irony as relevant inappropriateness. Journal of pragmatics, 32(6), 793-826.
Baragona, S. A., & Rambo, E. L. (Eds.). (2018). In Words that tear the flesh: Essays on sarcasm in medieval and early modern literature and cultures . Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Barbe, K. (1995). Irony in context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Camp, E. (2011). Sarcasm, pretense, and the semantics/pragmatics distinction. Noûs, 1-48.
Dews, S., Kaplan, J., & Winner, E. (1995). Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony. Discourse processes, 19, (3), 347-367.
Ducharme, L. J. (1994). Sarcasm and interactional politics. Symbolic interaction, 17(1), 51-62.
Filik, R., Țurcan, A., Thompson, D., Harvey, N., Davies, H., & Turner, A. (2016). Sarcasm and emoticons: Comprehension and emotional impact. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(11), 2130-2146.
Haiman, J. (1998). Talk is cheap: Sarcasm, alienation, and the evolution of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.
Hidayat, A. (2016). Speech acts: Force behind words. English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 9(1), 1-12.
Joshi, A., Bhattacharyya, P., & Carman, M. J. (2018). Investigations in computational sarcasm. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
Kashikar, A. V., & Ramteke, J. (2019). Dual Sentiment Classification with Sarcasm Identification. In 2019 IEEE Bombay Section Signature Conference (IBSSC) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Mufiah, N. S., & Rahman, M. Y. N. (2019). Speech acts analysis of Donald Trump’s speech. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 1(2), 125-132.
Nilsen, A. P., & Nilsen, D. L. (2018). The language of humor: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R., and Vanderveken, D., (1985). Foundations of illocutionary logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tabacaru, S. (2019). A Multimodal Study of Sarcasm in Interactional Humor. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 Prof. Dr. Zainab Kadhim Iqaab, Marwa Jasim Wehail
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.