Characterising Irony

Contents

List of figures

List of tables

1 Defining irony

Some important considerations in differentiating verbal irony from its derivatives

Differentiating ironies

Summary and overview of the book

2 What is irony?

Defining irony

The traditional rhetoric view of irony

Literary works on irony

Pragmatics accounts of irony

Other notable accounts of irony

Summary

3 Characterising ironies

Selection of irony candidates for the database

Prototypes

Methods for establishing prototypical irony

Applying the prototypical attributes of irony

Initial selection of central ironies for testing

Summary

4 Pilot database analysis of central ironies

Overview of database analysis of central irony attributes

Analysis of opposition

Results from the analysis of opposition

Results from the analysis of Context Compatibility

Results from the analysis of Polarity

Results of an analysis of the Function Attribute

Results of an analysis of the Assertion Attribute

Results of an analysis of the Participation Attribute

Results of an analysis of the Target Attribute

Results of an analysis of the Signal Attribute

Evaluating the Accessibility Attribute

Simple analysis of three central ironies

Summary and conclusions

5 Towards a systematic and precise analysis of irony candidates

Use of Levinson's Q-, I- and M-principles

Use of Possible Worlds Theory

Analysis of "one of the most exciting conventions"

Analysis of "just as everything was going so well"

Analysis of Mr. Bennet's "you've delighted us long enough"

Implications for central and non-central ironies

6 Clarifying the boundary between irony and non-irony

A clear example of non-irony

Isn't it ironic that�

Examples characterised by playful negation

Dramatic irony

Examples of Flagrant K-world mismatches in Mike Leigh's Vera Drake

Summary and conclusions

7 Analysis of non-central ironies

Selecting, grouping and analysing non-central irony candidates

Analysis of examples with opposition between implicatures (Group A)

Implications for the status of candidates where there is opposition between implicatures

Analysis of examples with feigned ignorance (Group B)

Considerations of the status of candidates where there is feigned ignorance

Analysis of candidates that are characterised by an irony involving a speech act other than straightforward assertions (Group C)

Implications for the status of candidates that are characterised by an irony focus involving a speech act other than straightforward assertions

Analysis of candidates characterised by playful criticism (Group D)

Implications for the status of candidates characterised by playful criticism

Analysis of candidate with pretended underestimation of the targetâs knowledge (Group E)

Implications for the status of candidates characterised by playful criticism

Summary and conclusions

8 Conclusion

Evaluating my approach

Characterising irony

Future studies of irony

Index