A Cognitive-pragmatic Approach to Puns

Jin Qiu

Abstract


The present paper is intended to provide a unified account for the interpretation of puns from a cognitive-pragmatic perspective. In recent years a few scholars have delved into the processing mechanism of puns, but none of them has demonstrably elucidated the cognitive psychological foundation of puns and the development of our cognitive strategy for pun interpretation. Through careful analyses, the present paper proves that the logic of taxonomy is the cognitive psychological foundation of puns and shows that a cognitive approach incorporating the notion of the impartment and inheritance of connotation and denotation (IICD for short) can be successfully applied to the analyses of puns. Based on this notion, we propose a four-step hypothesis for the interpretation of puns. It is demonstrated that this hypothesis can effectively elucidate the interpretation of puns, and meanwhile, unfold a picture of addressees’ mental progress.

 


Keywords


Puns; the impartment and inheritance of the connotation and denotation (IICD for short); hinges; context; cognitive mechanism

Full Text:

PDF

References


Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Berlin and New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.

Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Fan, J.C. (1992). English rhetoric appreciation. Shanghai, China: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press.

Guiraud, P. (1976). Les jeux de mots. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.

Heller, L. G. (1974). Toward a general typology of the pun. Language and Style, (7), 271-282.

Mulken, V. M. et al. (2005). Puns, relevance and appreciation in advertisements. Journal of Pragmatics, (37), 707-721.

Redfern, W. (1984). Puns. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

Sherzer, J. (1985). Puns and jokes. In Teun A. Van Dijk (Ed.). Handbook of discourse analysis. (Vol. 3, pp. 78-92). London, England: Academic Press Inc.

Tanaka, K. (1992). The pun in advertising: A pragmatic approach. Journal of Pragmatics, (87), 91-102.

Ungerer, F., & Schmid, H. J. (2001). An introduction to cognitive linguistics. Beijing, China: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Vickers, B. (1988). In defense of rhetoric. Oxford, England: The Clarendon Press.

Xu, S. H. (2008a). Why metonymy is possible – “metonymy and logic”: interpreting metonymy by means of “impartment and inheritance of connotation and denotation”. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 59(1), 69-77.

Xu, S. H. (2008b). Metonymy and the logic of taxonomy. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 40(2), 93-99.

Xu, S. H. (2008c). Cognitive approach to the study of rhetoric. Journal of Xi an International Studies University, 16(2), 1-5.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.4p.135

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.