Muting the Meaning A Social Function of Irony

Abstract

According to the tinge hypothesis, the evaluative tone of the literal meaning of ironic utterances automatically colors the hearer's perception of the intended meaning. In Experiment 1, participants read short stories that end with either a literal or an ironic insult. Ironic insults are rated as less critical than literal insults, and the ironic speaker is rated as less annoyed than the literal speaker. In addition, the speaker-target relationship is affected less negatively when the insult is delivered ironically rather than literally. These results are obtained regardless of whether the addressee or a third person is the target of the remark and regardless of whether the story characters know one another or have just met. In Experiment 2, participants read similar short stories that end with either a literal or ironic compliment. Results mirror those of Experiment 1. Ironic compliments are rated as less praising than literal compliments, and the ironic speaker is rated as less pleased than the literal speaker. The speaker-target relationship is affected less positively when the compliment is ironic than when it is literal. As in Experiment 1, these results are obtained regardless of addressee or familiarity of the story characters. The results from these two experiments support the tinge hypothesis by demonstrating that irony mutes the criticism or praise conveyed by literal language.