Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
This thesis intends to interpret English and Vietnamese jokes from a pragmatic perspective and explores about the way language used for humor to raise the awareness of pragmatics for the interpreter.
ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE JOKES: FROM A PRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVE (Phân tích truyện cười Anh- Việt trên bình diện ngữ dụng học) M.A. Minor Programme Thesis Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 15 Course: 17 1 ABSTRACT This thesis intends to interpret English and Vietnamese jokes from a pragmatic perspective and explores about the way language used for humor to raise the awareness of pragmatics for the interpreter. To accomplish this research, the theoretical preliminaries of pragmatics and humor are worked out for the interpretations. The five English jokes and five Vietnamese jokes are taken from the reliable sources according to certain criteria concerning the structure of jokes, joke context and a variety of situations. The findings from the analysis have revealed that we can analyze the set- up of each joke based on the speech acts of Austin and Searle and find humor through the punch line due to violating and flouting the conversational maxims of Grice. What's more, the study provides the interpreter the better understanding of pragmatics and useful pedagogical implications. Hopefully, this will be a valuable material for those who are interested in the aspects of pragmatics. 2 ABBREVIATIONS CP : The Cooperative Principle QUAL. : Quality QUAN. : Quantity QDA. : Qualitative data analysis REL. : Relevance MAN. : Manner EFL : English as a Foreign Language E. joke : English joke V. joke : Vietnamese joke PART A: INTRODUCTION 1. Rationale of the study One of the best ways to understand people is to know what makes them laugh. (H. Golden) 3 It is worth saying that we can laugh when reading or hearing jokes if we can understand what make us laugh. Hence, we should know the communication between the participants in jokes, the context jokes take place, and the language used. Pragmatics, therefore, will let us know what make us laugh and then we may say jokes are interesting for our life. And we now also understand that we should pay more attention to the study of jokes pragmatically as semantic analysis, sociological analysis, etc. on jokes have been studied quite extensively over the years. Pragmatic analysis is, thus, a relatively new approach of language. And quite different from other linguistic studies, pragmatics puts more attention on language users and the context in which the language is used. And in fact, in analyzing jokes pragmatically, we might find a harmony between language for humor, language users and contexts. It is so much hoped that the study may bring a good understanding of pragmatics and concepts of pragmatics via English and Vietnamese jokes. When analyzing jokes, the author is trying to reveal how the matters are interpreted in the jokes. Another reason is that, as a teacher of English, the author wants to help Ha Tinh university learners of English not only read a regular text but understand its functions in context. The study is also hoped to offer a suggestion about the pragmatic reading of any jokes, which, in turn, help shaping a scientific view towards pragmatics. Lastly, the author wants to share a significant reference of jokes for others who are willing to make another further pragmatic research. 2. Aims of the study The aims of this study are: • To provide whether the theory of speech acts and theory of conversational maxims has explanatory power on humor in English and Vietnamese jokes. • To figure out a brief account of possible similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes in terms of the speech acts and conversational maxims. • To provide some proposals for further study and pedagogical implications for raising Ha Tinh university students’ pragmatic awareness. 3. Scope of the study 4 Many fields of pragmatics related to jokes need to be explored and a variety of jokes can be selected. However, due to the limited time, the study is confined to the following aspects: • Only five English jokes and five Vietnamese jokes are selected to test the theoretical preliminaries, and the jokes chosen must have the set- up and the punch line (two way- communication). • Speech acts of Austin including locutionary, illocutionary and perlocutionary act are explored to interpret the set- up of English and Vietnamese jokes. • Types of Searle’s illocutionary act including directives, commissives, expressives, representatives and declaratives are used to identify speech acts. • Non- observance of conversational maxims looked at only due to flouting and violating. • The inferences made in context to interpret the way of conducting conversational maxims of joke participants. • This is a linguistic study for academic purpose only. 4. Methodology of the study The methodology employed is a qualitative research. This is a study of grounded theory. It has been acknowledged that with this method, the researcher as an instrument for gathering data during the study. The data is analyzed inductively, selected in the form of words, and done before finding out the research questions. The process for the qualitative data analysis (QDA), Corbin and Strauss (1990: 62) will be: • Noticing: This step means gathering English and Vietnamese jokes and the theoretical preliminaries related to the topic. This is done by producing a record of interesting things and coding them. Then, a descriptive scheme is developed for the study. • Collecting: The second step means sorting the date into discrete parts under the analysis. The statistics are done to adopt percentages and scales based on the analysis results for each part to determine significance of data. 5 • Thinking: In this step, English and Vietnamese jokes are firstly examined closely with the theoretical background. Secondly, the constant comparisons are intended to identify similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes. Moreover, questions are always asked about the phenomena as reflected in the data to generalize findings for the study and provide pedagogical implications. The joke collection: • Five sample English jokes are selected from an English linguistic book and two reliable websites: http://rd.com. Reader’s Digest, http://www.basicjokes.com. • Five sample Vietnamese jokes are selected Vietnamese funny story books and two reliable websites: http://www.tuoitrecuoi.com, http://cuoi.net/truyen-cuoi/pstory. The research questions: • How are English and Vietnamese jokes analyzed pragmatically? • What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes as seen from a pragmatic perspective? • What tips are utilized to improve the awareness of pragmatics of learners via the study? The hypotheses of the study are formulated • All the types of speech acts proposed by Austin (1955) and Searle (1969) are found in English and Vietnamese jokes. • Conversational maxims are broken to arouse humor. • Different breakings of maxims result in different ways of producing humor in English and Vietnamese jokes. 5. Format of the study The study begins with declaration, acknowledgement, table of contents, and abbreviation. The main body of the study consists of three parts. They are introduction, development and conclusion. Part one provides a brief account of relevant information about the rationale, aims, scope, methodology and format of the study. 6 Part two includes three chapters • Chapter 1: This chapter is about theoretical notions necessary for the study including the theory of pragmatics, concepts of pragmatics, and theory of jokes. • Chapter 2: This chapter offers an analysis of English and Vietnamese jokes one by one. Firstly, the speech acts and conversational maxims are applied to interpret the set- up and the punch lines of the jokes. Secondly, the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes will be worked out in terms of speech acts and conversational maxims. • Chapter 3: This chapter is about some implication of the study for EFL teaching and learning. Part three includes concluding remarks, limitation of the study, and recommendations for further research. Apart from the three main parts, the references and the appendix of the study are included. PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAl BACKGROUND This chapter will discuss several joke and pragmatic issues which serve as theoretical foundation for the study. First a brief review on theory of jokes such as definitions of jokes and incongruity theory. Then theories of pragmatics related to jokes, mainly definitions of pragmatics, speech act theory, conversational implicature and context, cooperative principle, conversational maxims and principles of conducting maxims are presented. 7 1.1. Theory of jokes 1.1.2. Definition of jokes According to Collins Cobuild English Dictionary (1987: 256), jokes are “something that is said or done to make people laugh, i.e. a funny story.” Suls (1972) cited in Antony (1976: 37) proposed a model for the appreciation of jokes. This involves a two stage- process which relies on the generation and disconfirmation of a listener’s expectations. Raskin (1985) cited in Gruyter (2001: 195) proposed a similar theory of humor, a joke begins by being compatible with one script, and then a script- switch trigger occurs which is inconsistent with the original script. The trigger is usually the punch line. The listener then searches for an alternative, more compatible script. The humor lies in the overlap between the two scripts. Raskin (1994:100) uses the following joke to illustrate his point: • "Is the doctor at home?" The patient asked in his bronchial whisper. "No," the doctor's young and pretty wife whispered in reply. "Come right in." According to Raskin, the joke body activates the doctor- patient script, but the punch line forces the cognitive agent to backtrack and reinterpret the joke in a lover script. Hockett (1972: 84) states that a joke consists of a build-up and a punch. Similarly, Sherzer (1985: 216) defines a joke as “a discourse unit consisting of two parts, the set- up and the punch line”. The set-up (the initial portion) is normally built of a joke, while the punch line (the second part) is the final portion of the joke, which leads to incongruity with the set-up to provoke laughter and demands creating thinking to surprise the readers. The punch line is the funny part of the joke. It can change the situation of the joke in order to make people laugh. It is the climax of the joke in which the amusing part takes place. Therefore, any type of the jokes should have the punch line so readers may laugh. In order to make the incongruous clearer, the following attentions will be given to the incongruity theory. 1.1.3. Incongruity theory This theory means that humor will happen when there are two things which are in conflict. People will laugh if they can see those contradictions. Sultz (1976) cited in Richie (2004: 48) refers to incongruity as "a conflict between what is expected and what actually occurs in the joke”. This belief is supported by Schopenhauer (1883) cited in 8 Ritchie (2004: 46), "The cause of laughter in every case is simply the sudden perception of the incongruity between a concept and the real objects which have been thought through it in some relation, and laughter itself is just the expression of this incongruity.” However, some linguists disagree with the given definitions, they see the incongruous part cannot make the perceiver laugh, but have to solve the contrary part. The adding stage is called "a two stage- model", incongruity- resolusion. According to this model, the cause of incongruity of joke is the pragmatic is broken and it makes readers astound. The way of creating and resolving the incongruity can be analyzed as follows: • "Is the doctor at home?" The patient asked in his bronchial whisper. "No," the doctor's young and pretty wife whispered in reply. "Come right in." The example says that the answer is seen as incongruous, with "No” ”Come right in" interpreted as an absence of the doctor and an invitation of the patient to enter in the house, but then the resolusion occurs with the realization that there is another interpretation, "the wife wants to have a secret meeting with the patient” basing on the gender of the doctor’s wife, her description as well as the absence of the doctor or her husband. 1.2. Theories of pragmatics related to jokes 1.2.1. Definitions of pragmatics J.L. Austin, a philosopher at Oxford University (1940s-1950s) who was interested in language, laid the groundwork for what was to become pragmatics. Austin wanted to know how humans manage to communicate despite the imperfections in language. One important reason for why Austin was interested in language was that he was convinced that we do not use language to say things (to make statements), but to do things (perform actions), Thomas (1995: 31). According to Levinson (1983: 12), “Pragmatics is the study of all those aspects of meaning not captured in a semantic theory.” This means that it has consequently more to do with the analysis of what people mean by their utterances than what the words or phrases in the utterances might mean by themselves. What is learnt from Crystal (1985: 225), “Pragmatics is often contrasted with semantics”, which deals with meaning without reference to the users and communicative functions of sentences. On the contrary, 9 pragmatics includes the study of how the interpretation and use of utterances depends on knowledge of the real world, how speakers use and understand the speech acts, and how the structure of sentence is influenced by the relationship between the speaker and the hearer. Furthermore, it is significant for participants to share knowledge together so that the hearer may minimize to misinterpret the speaker’s intended meaning. Pragmatics is the branch of linguistics concerned with how humans use language, what the speaker means and how the hearer interprets the words uttered. A sentence uttered by a speaker can be separated into two levels of meaning: firstly the literal-propositional, i.e. the expressed meaning, which remains the same no matter what the context is and secondly the implied meaning, which is what the speaker means on a specific occasion, Thomas (1995: 2-8). The expressed meaning is the meaning that we understand by interpreting the word or phrase based only on the information we get from the words uttered. Considering an example, “Are you thirsty?” The sentence like this is easy to interpret where the obvious meaning is a request for information about the hearer, i.e. if he is thirsty. However, the same sentence can have a different meaning besides the literal-propositional. That meaning will be dependent on the context in which the sentence is uttered. Suppose that the speaker and the hearer are lost in the desert and have had nothing to drink for days; such an utterance might then be uttered as a joke, the hearer is obviously thirsty, in order to embolden in a time of struggle. In another context it could mean that the speaker wants the hearer to get him a drink. This is considered to be an example of speech acts, where the speaker intends the hearer to carry out an action. Although there is no single, generally- accepted definitions of pragmatics and what it encompasses, since the field is broad and diverse, the above definitions of pragmatics sum up on the area that we have focused on analyzing jokes. However, in order to interpret the speaker’s intended meaning in producing jokes, the following concepts of pragmatics should be mentioned. 1.2.2. Speech act theory Speech act theory is not the whole of pragmatics, but is perhaps currently the most important established part of the subject. According to this theory, when uttering something, people are not only saying something but doing something. Austin further 10 [...]... English and Vietnamese jokes are analyzed pragmatically and what similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes as seen from a pragmatic perspective First, analyzing jokes one by one basing on speech act theories and conversational maxim violations, then this analysis presents the results and findings Besides, analysis dificulties and discussions will be given to provide an overall picture... research questions 2.5.1 Pragmatic analysis of English and Vietnamese jokes First of all, English and Vietnamese jokes, particularly the set- up parts of the jokes are analyzed one by one by means of speech act theory of Austin (1995) and Searle (1969) The analysis proves that each utterance in the set- up, regardless of English or Vietnamese jokes has three acts at the same time (the locutional, the... Similarities Both English and Vietnamese jokes can be analyzed by means of the same pragmatic mechanism, they are speech act theories and the theory of conversational maxims The analysis illustrates the following basic similar features: The most common feature between English and Vietnamese jokes when Searle's speech acts used to interpret the set- up is the directive act It is said that directives are... to participate in For instance, the teacher first invites students to read a joke named A fly”, and then asks the students to act as the waiter and customer at a restaurant in England Students are required to talk with each other independently This provides a great opportunity for them to think and speak in accordance with foreign social conventions and at the same time they have to understand what... Chart 2: Ratio for non- observance of maxims in English and Vietnamese jokes The chart illustrates the percentage of conversational maxim breakings when English and Vietnamese jokes carried out Different ways of maxim breakings bring about different results for each kind of jokes Overall, flouting occurs more frequently in Vietnamese jokes while violating seems to do in English jokes In Vietnamese jokes, ... pragmatic perspective is that the joke participants do not always state what they meant the same since there are a variety of the speech acts found Another key difference between English and Vietnamese jokes is that most English participants disobeyed the maxims, mainly by violating the maxims In contrast, Vietnamese participants tend to flout all of the maxims on the scale Thus, when violating the maxims... beforehand 3.5 Conversational maxim teaching via English jokes For the inferences made from those jokes were not quite easy, then a familiarity with Grice's cooperative principle will help learners understand participants’ intentions This principle holds that in any utterances both parties are assumed to be cooperating and that any apparent violations of this cooperation compact will be interpreted as... for all jokes selected for the study Finally, the analysis shows that the participants in English and Vietnamese jokes are jolted into laughter in very much the same way They often laugh at the incongruous or unexpected cleverly created by the breaking of the usual conventions of language behavior 2.5.3 Differences 31 One of the differences between English and Vietnamese jokes as seen from a pragmatic. .. an order while the second and the third indicate an invitation and a request respectively 3.3 Utterance meaning teaching via English jokes The teacher is expected to stress the utterance meaning in a specific situation through each joke The approach to interpret the meaning contextually is encouraged, rather than always the one to understand literally Take the sentence “Kim's got a knife” as an example... pragmatic theories related to jokes They are Grice’s Cooperative Principle, Austin and Searle’s Speech Act Theory On the basis of the pragmatic theories, we have carried out sample analyses of jokes At the same time, humor can be caused in the context In short, this chapter has been the theoretical background for the study CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS This chapter is aimed at discovering how English . are English and Vietnamese jokes analyzed pragmatically? • What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes as seen from a pragmatic perspective? • What tips are. study. CHAPTER 2: ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS This chapter is aimed at discovering how English and Vietnamese jokes are analyzed pragmatically and what similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese jokes. humor, language users and contexts. It is so much hoped that the study may bring a good understanding of pragmatics and concepts of pragmatics via English and Vietnamese jokes. When analyzing jokes,