Irony and Sarcasm

Key components of any social conversation are language processing and understanding. Sarcasm is determined by cultural and social elements, however these are never taken into account in models of language. As a result, language processing is dependent on the social communication context, the recipient of the statement, and the speaker (Katz, Blasko, & Kazmerski, 2004). Thus, the essay’s goal is to investigate the use of irony and sarcasm in language.

The use of irony and sarcasm in nonliteral utterances has become increasingly important in recent years. As a result, sarcasm is heavily dependent on the social context and discourse to which it is tied. Therefore, irony is way of conveying a direct opposite of the intended message in any form of nonliteral communication. On the other side, sarcasm is a variant of irony and in its use is directed to a specific victim. A child age 4 years cannot easily understand irony and sarcasm unless a number of years have elapsed. The social context and actors have had a tradition of using irony and sarcastic irony in most of their communication in bid to relay their message. This is based on nonexperimental tradition in any social cultural setting. However, for experimental approach, textoids play a role in social context communication. In this regard, insight can be gained about sarcasm depending on statements made in different contexts (Katz, Blasko, & Kazmerski, 2004).

When one focuses on using and understanding sarcasm, figurative language especially aimed at conveying and modulating emotional intensity is key. In this view, a sarcastic statement is closely linked to emotions of person which gives a meaning on how the message will be perceived. Consequently, a person who uses sarcasm is seen to be aggressive and humorous as compared to a literal speaker. Also, sarcastic statements are never considered serious since most listeners perceive it as impolite, ambiguous, and noninstructional. Basing on the classic theoretical positions, obligatory processes determines sarcastic language at the initial stages of language comprehension. However, on the later stages, pragmatic and contextual effects come into play. In this regard, the nonliteral language processing always takes more time to understand compared to literal language (Katz, Blasko, & Kazmerski, 2004).

Psychological perspectives dwell much on off-line studies than on-line which give an interpretation pertaining language comprehension. For off-line studies, concluding what is in the mind is the basis of its interpretation. Also, the components such as cultural and social are core in producing sarcastic reading. In most communities, the use of irony is determined by a person’s status in the society, audience privilege, and contextual constrains. Furthermore, the gender, occupation, and economic status play a role in the use of incongruent language especially in ironic and sarcastic communication. Additionally, members of given occupation such teachers mostly use metaphors who are always perceived stereotypically. As a result, the audience view statements to be sarcastic based on the context in which people of specific occupation (such as comedians) utter. Participants reading textoids always create sarcastic meaning to the audience, as the author says, “When participants are asked to read textoids one word at a time, we find evidence for the emergence of sarcasm at a very early stage of processing” (Katz, Blasko, & Kazmerski, 2004). In regard to this, the discourse context becomes congruent to the sarcastic interpretation of read by a person from a high comedy occupation. These were also investigated using the electric recordings based on the event-related potentials (ERPs).

In conclusion, it imperative to note that for any statement to be considered sarcastic, the nature of a person who conveys the message, the context, and the interpreter play key roles. Social and cultural factors, gender and occupation also aid in determining the level of sarcasm in language processing. Hence the success of this method lies on the neurological science.

References

Katz, A. N., Blasko, D. G., & Kazmerski, V. A. (2004). Saying what you don’t mean: Social influences on sarcastic language processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(5), 186-189.