Abstract:
The article deals with verbal and non-verbal means of reflecting the present situation of pandemic in humour from linguo-cultural and intercultural point of view. The pandemic brought about numerous outbursts both in traditional mass media and social networks. One of its manifestations is a great number of jokes, anecdotes and memes about COVID-19. Various online platforms present innumerable humorous short texts. Mass media and social networks generate jokes, memes, anecdotes and caricatures. The corpus is drawn from popular social media platforms (Russian and English) and examined through derivational, stylistic, pragmatic and interpretative analyses. The paper explores the ways of creating a humorous effect on the word level (puns based on blends), on the level of short monologues and short dialogues (jokes). Special attention is paid to internet memes – multimodal (polycode) user-generated digital elements consisting of pictures or photos plus captions. The humorous effect in jokes is revealed by means of defeated expectancy when both primary and secondary meanings are manifested. The humorous effect in memes is achieved with the help of text reminiscences displayed by proper names and set phrases typical of various types of texts. The main topics distinguished in these humorous texts are quarantine, social distancing, mask wearing, hand washing and distance learning both in Russia and in English-speaking internet communities. It is shown that humour — even coronavirus and quarantine jokes — bring people together and help them feel connected in the face of adversity and uncertainty. The research will be continued by means of involving German and French humorous texts.
Keywords: Multimodal humor online, jokes, memes, word-building, defeated expectancy, script opposition
For citation: Kulinich M.A. Pandemic as Reflected in English and Russian Humour. Current Issues in Philology and Pedagogical Linguistics. 2021, no 3, pp. 99–110 (In Russ./In Engl.)
Bionote:
Marina A. Kulinich
Samara State University of Social Sciences and Education,
65/67 Maxim Gorkiy Str., Samara, Russian Federation, 443099;
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2582-8934;
Researcher ID: O-5965-2015
References:
1. Nash W. The Language of Humour. Style and Technique in Comic Discourse. Harlow: Longman; 1985. (In Eng.).
2. Freud S. Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious. St. Petersburg–Moscow: University Book AST; 1998. (In Russ.).
3. Frankl V. Man’s Search for meaning. Moscow: Progress; 1990.
4. Dynel M., Poppi FIM. In tragoedia risus: Analysis of dark humour in post-terrorist attack discourse. Discourse & Communication. 2018; 12(4):382–400. DOI: 10.1177/1750481318757777 (In Eng.).
5. Martin R. The Psychology of Humour. An Integrative Approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier; 2007. (In Eng.).
6. Dynel M., Poppi FIM. Caveat emptor: Boycott through digital humour on the wave of the 2019 Hong Kong protests. Information, Communication & Society; 2020. Access: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369 118X.2020.1757134. DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2020.1757134. (In Eng.).
7. Ballard TM. The World Made Meme: Public Conversations and Participatory Media. New Media and Society. 2018; 20(1):431-432. DOI: 10.1177/1461444817733962d. (In Eng.).
8. Ross AS., Rivers DJ. Internet memes as polyvocal political participation. In: Schill, D, Hendricks, JA (eds). The Presidency and Social Media: Discourse, Disruption and Digital Democracy in the 2016 Presidential Election. New York: Routledge, 2018:285–308. (In Eng.).
9. Anisimova EE. Text linguistics and intercultural communication (based on creolized texts). Moscow: Academia; 1993. (In Russ.).
10. Chaplygina YuS., Semochkina YuV., Gromova TV. Verbo-iconic messages: ways of expressing emotiveness. Philological Sciences. Theory and practice. Tambov: Gramota, 2016;12(66):175-179 (In Russ.).
11. Dynel M. COVID-19 memes going viral: On the multiple multimodal voices behind face masks. Discourse and Society. 2020; 32(6). DOI: 10.1177/0957926520970385 (In Eng.).
12. Dynel M. “I has seen Image Macros!” Advice Animals memes as visual- verbal jokes. International Journal of Communication. 2016; 10: 660–670.
13. Smith CA. Weaponized iconoclasm in Internet memes featuring the expression ‘Fake News’. Discourse & Communication. 2019; 13(3): 303–319. DOI: 10.1177/1750481319835639. (In Eng.).
14. Wiggins BE., Bowers GB. Memes as genre: A structurational analysis of the memescape. New Media & Society. 2015; 17(11): 1886–1906. DOI: 10.1177/1461444814535194. (In Eng.).
165. Dmitriyev AV. Structural and semantic features of English telescopic units and their basic models in the focus of derivation. Litera; 2019 (6): 257-263. DOI: 10.25136/2409-8698.2019.6.31615. (In Russ.).
16. Algeo J. Where do All the New Words Come from? American Speech. N.Y., 1980; 55(4): 264-277. (In Eng.).
17. Irwin BJ. Trends in Blends. American Speech. N.Y., 1982; 57(2): 46. (In Eng.)
18. Maurer DWL, High EС. New Words Where Do They Come from and where do They Go? American Speech. N.Y., 1980; 55(3): 45-65. (In Eng.).
19. Kulinich MA. Cultural adaptation in translating English “telescope” words. Sociocultural problems of translation. Edition of Voronezh State University. Voronezh: Unipress; 2015;11:194-204. (In Russ.).
20. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books, 2004:464. In Eng.).
21. Norman BYu. Language: Familiar Stranger. Minsk: Higher School; 1987. (In Russ.).
22. Goatly A. Meaning and Humour. Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press; 2012:361. DOI:10.1080/2040610X.2014. 905074.