properties modusov a discourse bona fide and non bona fide

The basic criterion on which basis native speakers interpret the statement as bona fide or non bona fide, it is possible to formulate as follows: the Statement in moduse bona fide correlates with some situation in the real world and, from the point of view of speaking, is true.
The statement in moduse non bona fide such korreljata has no: it sends the addressee to a nonexistent situation or
Represents a real situation strange, unusually.
As it is a question of conformity of the statement to some
Situations, the concept of a situation demands the explanatory. The situation is «the extralinguistic reviewer of the offer, a piece real
The validity, private event, the fact on which it is informed in the concrete statement »[Arutyunov 2009: 7].
As an example illustrating intended absence of correlation of the statement non bona fide with the validity, we will result following metalinguistic inherently supervision: If I'm asked ”Did you get a hair cut?” and I answer ”No, they grew backwards over night”, then I am being ironic. [GloWbE] [21]
The metalinguistic comment I am being ironic shows, that ironical (i.e. non bona fide) statement interpretation can serve as a rational explanation of its obvious absurdity.
The criterion of correlation of the statement with a real situation shows, knowledge of a normal course of events for understanding of a discourse non bona fide are how much important: absence of the necessary information can become a hindrance for correct interpretation told. Besides, this criterion explains, why children to certain age are at a loss with understanding of humour, irony and sarcasm: they have not enough
Communicative experience and knowledge of the world for detection of divergences between a situation and the statement and for rational interpretation of these divergences.
So, possibility of correlation of the statement with a real situation is basic distinction between modusami bona fide and non bona fide which defines their other properties and most essentially influences interpretation of the told. This criterion, however, is not universal, compare a situation with mentioned in chapter 1 plausible (verisimilar) irony [Partington 2006, 2007], when speaking eksplitsiruet own expectations or some social norm in a situation which contradicts these expectations or norms. So, in an example [4.27] comments of readers reflect a real state of affairs, i.e. are true, however in a context of discussed news they are interpreted ironically: ” Argo ”actor Victor Garber has confirmed that he is gay, and has been living with his longtime partner, artist Rainer Andreesen, in New York. I am confirming that I am heterosexual. Since we are all” coming out ”these days, let me just add that I am a heterosexual male [Internet communications].
As a rule, deviations from norm, but not norm (for this reason the initial news message draws attention and causes response of readers) appear an irony target. In comments the norm and "anti-norm" are interchanged the position. The irony is a result of a parody explication of the norm, some social «values by default».
One more example of plausible irony - the statement «citizens wish to go on safe roads» by which the description of the conflict caused by departure of the high-ranking official on a strip of counter movement is accompanied: Besides, a number of decisions of the European court under human rights and the Council of Europe (they operate and in Russia) allows to break inviolability of a private life of public figures if that is demanded besides by interests of a society. With the public figure of Shevchenko they consist in a situation at least that citizens wish to go on safe roads [A.Kukolevsky «Vstrechka with the people». The kommersant-power. 12.04.2010].
The statement about that «citizens wish to go on safe roads» reflects representation existing in a society about that, «as should be». The ironical treatment becomes possible in a context of a described situation as expectations contradict a real situation.
Obviously, in the cases similar [4.27] and [4.28], criterion of communication of the statement with a reality is not the core. Hence, it is possible to say that with the validity is enough criterion of a parity of the statement only for opposition of comic and serious communications in the general view. For the description of various modes of communications bona fide and non bona fide it is necessary to consider consistently at least three more parametres. Unlike modusa bona fide, a necessary element of dialogue non bona fide is the game behaviour and / or pretence speaking. Game as behaviour type - one of the major ways of development of world around: on the one hand, through game the person learns properties and functions of objects, on the other hand, in game he searches for new ways of use of already known things and signs. Compare N.D.Arutjunovoj's opinion: « The impression is made, that almost all forms of a life, except work (but for the actor as well work), or enter in the field of game, or with it adjoin »[Arutyunov 2006: 9].
Game with linguistic signs appears in the convenient way to check up, what else actions besides an information transfer can be made with language. From the point of view pragmatists of communications the game speech behaviour can cause discrepancy of value of the statement and value speaking. In moduse non bona fide the told corresponds with a reality in a mode "as though"; the speaking receives
Possibility not only to pretend to be ignorant, but also to create
The "virtual" speech character from which name absurd ideas express or the critical estimation of a situation is expressed: Similar still slightly gold petro-gas time and we will execute Khruschev's main order - to catch up and overtake America. Not on a standard of living it is final, but by quantity of billionaires. It for the West crisis a trouble, and for us mother native... Despite of these crises the number of happy owners of this figure has grown on 30 persons. Rates simply surprising! Probably back-breaking toil, from generation to generation, kopeechku to kopeechke, these conditions overworked. [Internet communications] [22] As have explained in interview to "News" a member of committee of the State Duma
Alain Arshinova by training, deficiency of recruits in army became the reason of occurrence of this bill. Actually, who would doubt, but here its sight at the Nature of Things: «Now many young men not to serve in army, go to postgraduate study, - has told Arshinova. - Presence of such law has allowed would stimulate them to go to serve in army, further to receive the second higher free education». That is in postgraduate study, it appears, go not to go to army and instead of postgraduate study much more pleasantly free of charge to receive one more higher. [O.Epihodov. «5 times suddenly, on Monday».
Game and pretence serve as an explanation of how the statement which has been not connected with the real world, nevertheless can be rational
It is interpreted and integrated into a discourse and, more widely, in available for participants of dialogue system of knowledge.
In moduse non bona fide game and pretence can be shown on - a miscellaneous: from intended combination of not coherent conceptual areas in the statement (an example 4.31) before use of rhetorical questions (an example 4.32) or obviously absurd statements (an example 4.33) as irony signals: Let's imagine now, at least for a minute,
Furtively, at night under a blanket with a small lamp, that RPTS and the truth becomes ”a core, a pillar” to modernisation at the state level. These children as we know, at all very much treat kindly criticism in the address. Any charitable OS put under the state order have not liked schoolboys? And how to you the clever refrigerators observing a post? Here at you one exit - to open a window of an orthodox browser and to complain unless in cosy dnevnichok. And if to you to it for bogohulstvennye materials and heresy do not close access.
[http://lenta.ru/columns/2010/07/31/kvas/] in the Summer of 2011 you have forbidden import of vegetables from Egypt, but have resolved import of vegetables from Italy and Hungary. That is, vegetables from Egypt should be carried at first to Hungary so it turns out? [Questions to the main health officer of Russia G.Onishchenko. http://www.redburda.ru] So it also did not go, on a place stood, it is the Earth quickly turned on a meeting to it, is more true than it gelendvagenu. And to it, only to remain on one place, it was necessary to press strenuously on gas. Simply all rather... [http://www.gazeta.ru/auto/news/2013/04/04/n_2834285. shtml]
Both the rhetorical question, and absurd representation of a situation are signals of a role of "the ignorant gawk», a mask which puts on itself speaking (so Socrat in Platon's dialogues arrived). In both cases govrjashchy does attempt to "cancel" available for participants of communications knowledge of the world and rules of interaction existing in it between objects and to replace them with new, game conventions. From the pragmatical point of view two modusa communications differ with degree kooperativnosti the speaking: if dialogue bona fide initially assumes rational and co-operative behaviour of all participants of a discourse the discourse non bona fide is an example interactions in which kooperativnost and rationality speaking "are disguised" under outwardly irrational, and sometimes and absurd statements.
It is necessary to notice, that kooperativnost - concept however useful to modelling of verbal interaction, so and indistinct. While in G.P.Grajsa's classical treatment kooperativnost describes rational and purposeful speech behaviour, in the ordinary use kooperativnost it is traditionally opposed to confrontation. Mixture of ordinary and pragmatical treatments leads to idealisation of co-operative dialogue: frequently in linguistic researches the Cooperation Principle describes exclusively harmonious and effective communications. For the other cases mismatching an ideal, various models are offered. So, if it is a question of the conflict of the purposes of participants of a discourse, speech actions are offered to be described in terms of principle nekooperatsii [Issers 2002]. If it is a question of humour as a rational explanation the separate version of the Principle of cooperation for modusa a discourse non bona fide [Raskin 1985] is formulated.
One more restriction reducing explanatory force of concept interesting us, the binary treatment kooperativnosti is: it is considered to be, that the behaviour speaking can be either co-operative, or not co-operative. Actually kooperativnost - concept gradualnoe; rationality and purposefulness can be shown in speech actions speaking in various degree. Taking into account the second criterion - game and pretence is a property it appears essentially important for the description of various modes of communications bona fide and non bona fide: behind outwardly irrational statement there can be absolutely rational communicative intention speaking (compare concept applied humour, offered in work [Mulkay 1988]). Here, in our opinion, it is necessary to speak about degree kooperativnosti: in spite of the fact that speaking intentionally breaks one of Maxim, its actions still remain rational and purposeful. Therefore the humour, irony and sarcasm is a co-operative speech behaviour, however degree kooperativnosti in this case much more low in comparison with a discourse bona fide in which actions speaking in the maximum degree correspond to expectations of the addressee and there are no additional obstacles for interpretation told or written. Modusy communications bona fide and non bona fide allow various degree of freedom in use of metalinguistic comments. Moreover, comments can differ degree "detalizovannosti": in different modes of a discourse bona fide and non bona fide they can or specify on modus communications, or eksplitsirovat the concrete speech certificate, or to name a certain mode of dialogue non bona fide, each time setting various volume corrected interpretations. In any case, metalinguistic markers modusa communications allow speaking / writing to expand a context and will facilitate a problem of interpretation told / the written.
Let's look, as the given criteria can be used for differentiation of various modes of communications bona fide and non bona fide.
In a general view modus bona fide includes two modes of dialogue: explicit (straight line) and implitsitnyj (indirect). Implitsitnaja communications are based on use of the indirect speech certificates allowing speaking to express senses which presence does not follow directly from the language form of the statement. The basic properties explicit and implitsitnoj in moduse bona fide are presented communications in Table 4. [23]





metalingvisti -

kommu -



Games / at -



With a reality

The speaking



ekspli -

And for

Maximum, since


Specify on


Speaking, and

Main objective


modus and

For the addressee

Dialogue -


The statement








Situation in

I (speak /

The real world

I ask)
I speak sincerely

impli -


The high:

prisutst -




The speaking

vuet in

Type of the speech

The statement


minimal -

The certificate, for example,

And a reality

The conventional


«I do not ask, and

vosstanavliva -



I demand! »

etsja by




The indirect


Speech certificates, that

It is expressed

Facilitates a problem



Standing up for

The statement


The basic distinction between explicit and implitsitnoj communications bona fide consists in necessity of attraction inferentsii, both is formal-logic, and the likelihood native speakers [24] based on intuition, for correlation told with a reality.

Let's notice also, that already in implitsitnoj communications in moduse bona fide we observe a game element / pretence: indirect expression intentsii is the first step to game action with a sign.
Explicit and implitsitnyj communications modes bona fide differ also in possibilities of metalinguistic commenting of own speech actions with the speaking: if explicit dialogue allows to specify only on modus in the general view (I speak seriously/I I do not joke) implitsitnyj the discourse demands nazyvanija the concrete speech certificate which adequate interpretation for any reason has appeared under the threat.
The following investigation phase - the description of modes of a discourse non bona fide and allocation of those parametres which distinguish irony from other modes of communications in moduse non bona fide. As modes of a "frivolous" discourse along with irony we will consider humour, sarcasm, lie and an absurd discourse.
Let's explain, why these modes modusa non bona fide have been included in model: often the irony is compared (and frequently and
It is identified) with humour, sarcasm, lie and absurdity (in affinity of absurdity to comic communications specify, for example, V.I.Karasik [Karasik 2007] and D.Weiss [Weiss 2004]; a parity of irony, a joke and lie - a consideration subject in article [Ermakova 2007а]). One more reason of inclusion of two "unhumorous" modes - lie and an absurd discourse - in modus non bona fide consists that in these modes of communications two basic properties of a discourse non bona fide are realised: both the lie, and absurdity assume absence of correlation between the statement and a situation and are not co-operative modes of communications.
On the difficulties arising at researchers at attempt to differentiate various modes of a discourse non bona fide, specifies K.Barb: trying to define border between irony, a joke and lie, she finds out, that neither function, nor the purpose, ease of recognition of intentions of the speaking cannot serve as a little objective criteria of differentiation. According to the researcher, kategorizatsija statements as joke or irony it is carried out subjectively [Barbe 1995]. As a result the irony is considered as a version of humour or unites with sarcasm and is opposed to comic communications.
The problem of differentiation of modes of a discourse non bona fide speaks first of all that we deal not with discrete sets, and with a continuum. Therefore instead of an establishment uniform (and the only thing) criterion on which basis it would be possible to separate unequivocally irony from humour and sarcasm, we will describe types of communications interesting us from the point of view of several signs (attributes), namely - already mentioned before degree kooperativnosti speaking, to game presence / pretence and possibility of metapragmatical comments of own speech actions. To these attributes we will add two more: compulsion and
eksplitsitnost expressions deonticheskoj estimations (i.e. estimations on a scale «due - given»), and also the appeal to reason or emotions of the addressee. The combination of signs will give us necessary "portraits"
Modes of communications interesting us: we will see both similarities, and distinctions between them.
The generalised description of prototypical variants of a discourse non bona fide is presented in Table 5. As additional attributes (the appeal to reason or to emotions and expression deonticheskoj estimations) are irrelevant for lie and an absurd discourse, they are considered only with reference to humour, irony and sarcasm more low, in Table 6.
Table 5. Modes modusa communications non bona fide


Parity with

Kooperativnost /


metapragma -




Games /


non bona

The interlocutor





The statement /

The high: humour

It is obligatory

I joke /

The text


Has joked /


To strengthening

Has joked,

The real

The intragroup

I’m just joking

Situations to so


/ kidding,

The named

ja zartuj § /

kulminatsion -

zartowaiam /

nogo the moment


(punch line)

ich hab doch nur gescherzt.


The ironical

It is not obvious,

It is obligatory

I sneer

The statement


I’m being






Ich ironisiere

Situations or

To vary

jetzt/Ich bin

To expectations

(Obvious irony -

ironisch / das

The speaking.


war ironisch


gemeint Jestem ironiczny /



The statement

Outwardly speech

It is obligatory

It was






I’m being

Situations, often

To principle


Representing it


Das war

As absurd





Speech actions

pritvor -

Not upotreblja -

Corresponds in

The speaking


jutsja, since

The maximum

Are rational, but

The speaking












Leading «illokutivnomu -

To murder »


Has no korreljata in world around

Speech behaviour
It is inapplicable to
The absurd



In moduse non bona fide possible modes of a discourse break up on two groups: the first includes humour, irony and sarcasm, into the second - lie and absurdity. The basic distinction between these groups is connected with nekooperativnostju lie and irrationality of an absurd discourse. Besides, the lie and an absurd discourse do not allow speaking to make comments on own speech actions. Phrases *Я I lie / I speak a lie or *Я I bear bosh are impossible as metalinguistic comments of own statements at the moment of speech.
The second criterion also demands explanatories. In process of easing of communication of the statement with the validity evidence kooperativnosti speech actions of the speaking decreases also. However the humour, irony and sarcasm, outwardly not co-operative ways of communications, in the basis have rational communicative intention. In favour of it speak, for example, such interpretations: And though in its words the irony sounded, their sense was far not ironic [NKRJA]. After a pulling down of the Nikitsky monastery, on a place where there were its temples and a belltower, in 1935 there was a building of electrosubstation under construction then in Moscow of the underground. A grey, inexpressive structure have tried though somehow to recover on a facade ”' revolutionary” bas-reliefs. It was so poorly, that writer-satirist Ilja Ilf in the notebook with terrible sarcasm named this creation ”inspired creation of architect Fridmana” [NKRJA].
The resulted contexts illustrate the important feature of "frivolous" dialogue. Despite external discrepancy of the statement to a real state of affairs, speech behaviour speaking on - former kooperativno and it is rational, with that only a difference, that these two properties appear are veiled. Depending on that, how much easily the irony is distinguished by the addressee, evidence of rationality of speech actions speaking also can vary. This variability is shown in a number of definitions which are used for the metalinguistic description of irony: on the one hand, there is an obvious irony; on the other hand, the irony can be thin, almost inaudible, implicit, hidden [Kashkin 2010б].
At a following stage it is necessary to define by means of introduction of additional signs distinctions between humour, irony and sarcasm. Such signs are expression deonticheskoj estimations and the appeal to emotions / to reason of the interlocutor.
Table 6. Humour, irony, sarcasm: expression of an estimation and the appeal to emotions or reason

Discourse mode non bona fide

Expression deonticheskoj estimations

The appeal to emotions / to reason


Not necessarily

The emotional component dominates, the purpose speaking - to cause laughter of the addressee / audiences


Negative deonticheskaja the estimation is expressed in implitsitnom a kind

In an equal measure it is turned to emotions and reason (interpretation of irony demands inferentsii)


Negative deonticheskaja the estimation is expressed in an explicit form

The emotional component dominates, the purpose speaking - to express a negative estimation of a situation

The Deontichesky estimation is an estimation on a scale «given - due» [Gerasimov 2000, Karasik 2012]. For a society deonticheskaja the estimation is important not less an estimation aksiologicheskoj: on the basis of knowledge of the due collective systems of values are formed. For this reason most prominent aspects of activity of the person become objects constant «valuable monitoring» from a society [SHilihina 2013]. Deviations from socially fixed norms in a discourse can be exposed to the explicit criticism or if for any reasons direct expression of a critical estimation appears undesirable, speaking can mark this deviation from norm implitsitno, through discrepancy of the statement of a situation. Obligatory implitsitnoe expression deonticheskoj estimations is that criterion which distinguishes irony and sarcasm from humour.
The second offered criterion - the appeal to reason / to emotions - allows to allocate, first, one more obligatory component of communications non bona fide - its emotional component (about a role of emotions in evolution of our ability to create and understand humour see, for example, [Hurley 2011]). Secondly, this criterion allows to show a difference between humour, irony and sarcasm: if in
Comic discourse the desire to cause positive emotions in a case with irony and sarcasm negative deonticheskaja the estimation is connected with negative emotions dominates. Besides, it is possible to assert, that the irony is equally turned both to emotions, and to reason of the addressee as the understanding of the ironical statement demands attraction likelihood inferentsii. We will notice, that importance both rational, and emotional making ironical communications the irony proves to be true the analysis sochetaemostnyh properties of a lexeme: adjectives which describe irony as communications mode, it is possible to divide conditionally on two lexical sets. Adjectives concern the first group with strongly pronounced konnotativnym the value allowing speaking to express an emotional estimation of irony (bitter irony, malicious irony, good-natured irony). The adjectives specifying in ease / difficulty of recognition of irony in a discourse get to the second group (obvious irony, the thin irony, the latent irony). More detailed analysis sochetaemostnyh features of a lexeme irony is presented in chapter 5.
Using the multiparametrical description, we can simulate distinctions between various modes modusa communications non bona fide in the form of a matrix. On an irony and humour example we will show, as the given model helps to spend conditional borders between two modes non bona fide communications:






lt; Conformity



Statements real ситуацииgt;

lt; Necessity



Attraction инференцииgt;

lt; Game / pretence




It is marked]

It is marked]

Nationality and



kooperativnost actions говорящегоgt;

lt; Expression оценкиgt;







lt; the Appeal to emotions /


[Emotions and



lt; Metalinguistic




The irony description, no less than other modes of communications bona fide and non bona fide, on the basis of a set of parametres appears convenient for the several reasons. First, it shows an irony place in structure of a discourse and allows to spend conditional borders between various modes of communications bona fide and non bona fide. Secondly, such approach allows to see, what conditions influence statement interpretation as irony or humour: first of all this obligatory expression of an estimation on a scale «due - given». Besides, unlike humour, an obligatory component of an ironical discourse is not only emotional, but also rational interpretation told. At last, the offered model shows not only distinctions, but also similarities between two modes modusa non bona fide. Now it becomes clear, why irony often consider as a version of the comic: it is promoted by presence of variety of the general properties.
<< | >>

More on topic properties modusov a discourse bona fide and non bona fide:

  1. markers modusov communications bona fide and non bona fide
  2. Chapter 4. Modusy communications bona fide and non bona fide
  3. § 3. A conscientiousness role (bona fides) in a recognition konsensualnyh agreements obligation sources
  4. influence of an order of a discourse on the referential competence PR - a discourse: an objective field of a discourse
  5. conditions of formation of integrity of a PR-discourse: a discourse order, diskursivnaja a tonality, positioning
  6. 1.2. The Uchebno-pedagogical discourse as type institutsionalnogo a discourse
  7. influence of an order of a discourse on retseptivnuju the competence PR - a discourse: markers adresovannosti
  8. the Discourse of operative interaction as type of a business discourse
  9. influence of an order of a discourse on the creative competence PR - a discourse: the right to authorship
  10. irony in a political discourse
  11. 1.1.3. A therapeutic discourse as a version of a professional discourse of the practical psychologist
  12. a discourse order as the tool and a condition of formation of a PR-discourse
  13. an employment Discourse as type of a business discourse
  14. the Personnel discourse as type of a business discourse
  15. the Business discourse as a metaprofessional discourse
  16. influenceof an order of a discourse on realisation communicative kompetentsy a PR-discourse
  17. 1.3 Influence of ageing on operation properties of trumpet steels (prochnostnye properties, treshchinostojkost, resistance to fragile destruction, corrosion firmness, hydrogen ohrupchivanie)