HUMOR MARKERS IN COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION: EMOTION PERCEPTION AND RESPONSE

• Authors: Farnia Maryam , Karimi Keihaneh

Abstracts

EN

This paper aimed at investigating humor in text-based computer mediated communication (CMC). To this end, 200 turns exchanged by a number of 50 English language teachers on Viber, a messaging application, were randomly selected and analyzed based on Adam’s (2012) classification of humor to examine emoticons, punctuations (question mark, exclamation mark, and ellipsis), laughter (textual and acronym), formatting (spelling variations, capital/small letters, and elongation), and explicit markers in the corpus. The findings showed that emoticons outweighed other humor markers while laughter rated the least used marker in the corpus.

Keywords

EN

Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC); emotion perception; humor; Viber; social networks

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 19
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 15

Contributors

author

Farnia Maryam

• Payame Noor University

author

Karimi Keihaneh

References

• Adams, A. (2012). Humor Markers in Computer-Mediated Communication. Master’s Thesis. Texas A&M University-Commerce.
• Archakis, A., & Tsakona, V. (2005). Analyzing conversational data in GTVH terms: A new approach to the issue of identity construction via humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 18(1), 41-68. DOI:10.1515/humr.2005.18.1.41
• Apte, M. L. (1985). Humor and Laughter: An Anthropological Approach. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
• Attardo, S. (2009). Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI:10.1515/9783110219029
• Baleghizadeh, S. & Ghoreishi, A. (2014). An evaluation of the use of humor in ELT coursebooks. International Journal of Languages and Literatures, 2(2), 187-201.
• Baron, N. S. (1984). Computer mediated communication as a force in language change. Visible Language, 18(2), 118-141.
• Bell, N. D. (2009). Responses to failed humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(9), 1825-1836. DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.010
• Carlson, J. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1994). Channel expansion theory: A dynamic view of medial and information richness perceptions. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 280-284. doi:10.5465/ambpp.1994.10344817
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991.). Grounding in communication. In L. B.Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition (pp. 127-149). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
• Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Daft, R. L., &Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. DOI:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
• Davies, C. (2010). Jokes as the truth about Soviet socialism. Folklore, 46, 9-32. DOI:10.7592/fejf2010.46.davies
• Derks, D., Bos, A. E. R., & Grumbkow, J. von (2007). Emoticons and social interaction on the Internet: the importance of social context. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 842-849. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.013
• DiDomenico, S. R. (2015). Humor. The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication, 1-6. Doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic056
• Doell, W. (2006). Creation and Analysis of a Corpus of Internet Relay Chat. Ottawa: National
• Library of Canada.
• Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the non-verbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20, 249-268.
• Eisterhold, J., Attardo, S., & Boxer, D. (2006). Reactions to irony in discourse: evidence for the least disruption principle. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(8), 1239-1256. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.12.003
• GhaneiMolagh, F., Motallebzade, K. & Fatemi, M. A. (2014). On the effects of teacher’s sense of humor on Iranian’s EFL learners’ reading comprehension ability. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(4), 1-5. DOI:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.4p.1
• Günther, U. (2003). What’s in a Laugh? Humor, Jokes and Laughter in the Conversational Corpus of the BNC. Freiburg: Albert-Ludwigs-Universität.
• Hall, J. A. (2013). Humor in long-term romantic relationships: The association of general humor styles and relationship-specific functions with relationship satisfaction. Western Journal of Communication, 77(3), 272-292. DOI:10.1080/10570314.2012.757796
• Hancock, J. T. (2004). Verbal irony use in face-to-face and computer-mediated conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 447-463. DOI:10.1177/0261927x04269587
• Hancock, J. T., & Duhnham, P. J. (2001). Impression formation in Computer-Mediated Communication revisited. Communication Research, 28(3), 325-347. DOI:10.1177/009365001028003004
• Hay, J. (2001). The pragmatics of humor support. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 14(1), 55-82. DOI:10.1515/humr.14.1.55
• Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@ internet, 4(1), 1-37.
• Herring, S. C. & Androutsopoulo, J. (2015). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin, and H. Hamilton (eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 127-151) Oxford: Blackwell.
• Hine, C. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: Sage Research Method. DOI:10.4135/9780857020277
• Holmes, J. (2006). Sharing a laugh: Pragmatic aspects of humor and gender in the workplace. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(1), 26-50. DOI:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.007
• Holmes, J., & Marra, M. (2002). Having a laugh at work. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(12), 1683-1710. DOI:10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00032-2
• Hübler, M. T., & Bell, D. C. (2003). Computer-mediated humor and ethos: Exploring threads of constitutive laughter in online communities. Computers and Composition, 20(3), 277-294. DOI:10.1016/s8755-4615(03)00036-7
• Ko, K. (1996). Structural characteristics of computer-dediated language: A comparative
• analysis of InterChange discourse. Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved online from: http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/006/3/006315.HTML.
• Kuipers, G. (2006). The social construction of digital danger: debating, defusing and inflating the moral dangers of online humor and pornography in the Netherlands and the United States. New Media & Society, 8(3), 379-400. DOI:10.1177/1461444806061949
• Kuiper, N. A. (2012). Humor and resiliency: Towards a process model of coping and growth. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 8(3), 475-491. DOI:10.5964/ejop.v8i3.464
• Lock, J. V. (2007). Laying the groundwork for the development of learning communities within online courses. In R. Luppicini (Ed.) Online Learning Communities (pp. 129-149). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing Inc.
• Martin, R. A. (2010). The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. London: Elsevier Academic Press.
• Partington, A. (2006). The Linguistics of Laughter: A Corpus-Assisted Study of Laughter-Talk.
• London & New York: Routledge.
• Powell, J. P., & Andresen, L. W. (1985). Humor and teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 10(1), 79-90. DOI:10.1080/03075078512331378726
• Rafiee, M., Kassaian, Z. & VahidDastjerdi, H. (2010). The application of humorous song in EFL classrooms and its effects on listening comprehension. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 100-108.
• Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in computer-mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14(1), 85-108. DOI:10.1177/009365087014001005
• Romero, E. J., & Cruthirds, K. W. (2006). The use of humor in the workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(2), 58-69. DOI:10.5465/amp.2006.20591005
• Saltman, J. M. (1995). Humor in Adult Learning: A Review of Perceptions. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
• Samson, A. C., & Gross, J. J. (2012). Humor as emotion regulation: The differential consequences of negative versus positive humor. Cognition & Emotion, 26(2), 375-384. DOI:10.1080/02699931.2011.585069
• Souhaila, H. (2012). Humour in English foreign language teaching. Langues, Culture et Littérature, 31, 79-88.
• Spitzberg, B. H. (2006). Preliminary development of a model and measure of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) competence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 629-666. DOI:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00030.x
• Tamblyn, D. (2003). Laugh and Learn: 95 Ways to Use Humor for More Effective Teaching and Training. New York: Amacom.
• Tudini V., Liddicoat A.J. (2017) Computer-Mediated Communication and Conversation Analysis. In S. Thorne, S. May (eds.), Language, Education and Technology. Encyclopedia of Language and Education (3rd ed.) (pp. 415-426). Cham: Springer.
• Veale, T. (2004). Incongruity in humor: Root cause or epiphenomenon? Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17(4). 419-128. DOI:10.1515/humr.2004.17.4.419
• Vettin, J., & Todt, D. (2004). Laughter in conversation: Features of occurrence and acoustic structure. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28(2), 93-115. DOI:10.1023/b:jonb.0000023654.73558.72
• Whalen, J. M., Pexman, P. M., & Gill, A. J. (2009). “Should be fun – Not!” Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(3), 263-280. DOI:10.1177/0261927x09335253
• Wilson, S. M., & Peterson, L. C. (2002). The anthropology of online communities. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 449-467. DOI:10.1146/annurev.anthro.31.040402.085436
• Wimer, D. J., & Beins, B. C. (2008). Expectations and perceived humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 21(3), 347-363. DOI:10.1515/humor.2008.016