Jocular Mockery as Interactional Practice in Everyday Anglo-Australian ConversationFootnote

* I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their very constructive comments on an earlier version of this work.

References

• Adetunji A 2013 ‘A discursive construction of teasing in football fandom: the context of the South-Western Nigerian viewing centre’ Discourse and Society 24: 147–162. doi:10.1177/0957926512469392
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antaki C 1998 ‘Identity ascriptions in their time and place: “Fagin” and “The terminally dim”’ in C Antaki & S Widdicombe (eds) Identities in Talk London: Sage. pp. 71–86.
   Google Scholar
• Arundale R 2010 ‘Constituting face in conversation: face, facework and interactional achievement’ Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2078–2105. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attardo S, J Eisterhold, J Hay & I Poggi 2003 ‘Multimodal markers of irony and sarcasm’ Humor 16: 243–260. doi:10.1515/humr.2003.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beach W & P Glenn 2011 ‘Bids and responses to intimacy as “gendered” enactments’ in SA Speer & E Stokoe (eds) Conversation and Gender Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 210–228.
   Google Scholar
• Béal C & K Mullan 2013 ‘Issues in conversational humour from a cross-cultural perspective: comparing French and Australian corpora’ in B Peeters, K Mullan, & C Béal (eds) Cross-culturally Speaking, Speaking Cross-culturally Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press. pp. 107–140.
   Google Scholar
• Bertrand R & B Priego-Valverde 2011 ‘Does prosody play a specific role in conversational humour?’ Pragmatics and Cognition 19: 333–356. doi:10.1075/pc.19.2.08ber
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergmann J 1993 Discreet indiscrections. The social organisation of gossip Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Blythe J 2012 ‘From passing-gesture to “true” romance: kin-based teasing in Murriny Patha conversation’ Journal of Pragmatics 44: 508–528. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boxer D & F Cortés-Conde 1997 ‘From bonding to biting: conversational joking and identity display’ Journal of Pragmatics 27: 275–294. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00031-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brône G 2008 ‘Hyper- and misunderstanding in interactional humour’ Journal of Pragmatics 40: 2027–2061. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler C 2007 ‘From bite to nip: the dialogic construction of teases’ Texas Linguistic Forum 50: 22–34.
   Google Scholar
• Culpeper J 1996 ‘Towards an anatomy of impoliteness’ Journal of Pragmatics 25: 349–367. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Depperman A 2010 ‘Future prospects of research on prosody: the need for publicly available corpora’ in D Barth-Weingarten, E Reber & M Selting (eds) Prosody in Interaction Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 41–47.
   Google Scholar
• Drew P 1987 ‘Po-faced receipts of teases’ Linguistics 25: 219–253. doi:10.1515/ling.1987.25.1.219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew P 1997 ‘“Open” class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation’ Journal of Pragmatics 28: 69–101. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew P & E Holt 1998 ‘Figures of speech: figurative expressions and the management of topic transition in conversation’ Language in Society 27: 495–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dynel M 2007 ‘Joking aside: sociopragmatic functions of conversational humour in interpersonal communication’ in P Cap & J Nijakowska (eds) Current Trends in Pragmatics Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 246–268.
   Google Scholar
• Dynel M 2008 ‘No aggression, only teasing: the pragmatics of teasing and banter’ Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 4: 241–261.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards D 2000 ‘Extreme case formulations: softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral’ Research on Language and Social Interaction 33: 347–373. doi:10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Everts E 2003 ‘Identifying a particular family humour style: a sociolinguistic discourse analysis’ Humor 16: 369–412. doi:10.1515/humr.2003.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford C & BA Fox 2010 ‘Multiple practices for constructing laughables’ in D Barth-Weingarten, E Reber & M Selting (eds) Prosody in Interaction Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 339–368.
   Google Scholar
• Fox K 2004. Watching the English. The hidden rules of English behaviour London: Hodder.
   Google Scholar
• Franzén AG & K Aronsson 2013 ‘Teasing, laughing and disciplinary humour: staff-youth interaction in detention home treatment’ Discourse Studies 15: 167–183. doi:10.1177/1461445612471469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner R 2002 When Listeners Talk: response tokens and listener stance Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Glenn P 1991/1992 ‘Current speaker initiation of two-party shared laughter’ Research on Language and Social Interaction 25: 139–162. doi:10.1080/08351819109389360
   Google Scholar
• Glenn P 2003 Laughter in interaction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goddard C 2006 ‘“Lift your game, Martina!” - Deadpan jocular irony and the ethnopragmatics of Australian English’ in C Goddard (ed.) Ethnopragmatics: Understanding Discourse in Cultural Context Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 65–97.
   Google Scholar
• Goddard C 2009 ‘Not taking yourself too seriously in Australian English: semantic explications, cultural scripts, corpus evidence’ Intercultural Pragmatics 6: 29–53. doi:10.1515/IPRG.2009.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grainger K 2004 ‘Verbal play on the hospital ward: solidarity or power?’ Multilingua 23: 39–59.
   Google Scholar
• Greer T, Y Usui, T Kato & H Taniguchi 2005 ‘Suppressing laughter in the display of (dis)affiliation’ Kobe Daigakui Kokusai Komyunikeeshon Sentaa Ronshuu (Kobe University International Communication Centre Bulletin) 2: 27–42.
   Google Scholar
• Haakana M 2002 ‘Laughter in medical interaction: from quantification to analysis, and back’ Journal of Sociolinguistics 6: 207–235. doi:10.1111/1467-9481.00185
   Google Scholar
• Harwood D 2010 ‘The phenomenon of sibling teasing: three mothers’ perceptions of their children's teasing behaviours’ Journal of Research in Childhood Education 24: 366–385. doi:10.1080/02568543.2010.510080
   Google Scholar
• Haugh M 2009 ‘Designing a multimodal spoken component of the Australian National Corpus’ in M Haugh, K Burridge, J Mulder & P Peters (eds) Selected Proceedings of the 2008 HSCNet Workshop on Designing the Australian National Corpus: Mustering Languages Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. pp. 74–86.
   Google Scholar
• Haugh M 2010a ‘Jocular mockery, (dis)affiliation and face’ Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2106–2119. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haugh M 2010b ‘Co-constructing what is said in interaction’ in TE Németh & K Bibok (eds) The Role of Data at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 349–380.
   Google Scholar
• Haugh M 2011 ‘Humour, face and im/politeness in getting acquainted’ in B Davies, M Haugh & A Merrison (eds) Situated Politeness London: Continuum. pp. 165–184.
   Google Scholar
• Haugh M 2012 ‘Conversational interaction’. in K Allan & KM Jaszczolt (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 251–274.
   Google Scholar
• Haugh M & D Bousfield 2012 ‘Mock impoliteness, jocular mockery and jocular abuse in Australian and British English’ Journal of Pragmatics 44: 1099–1114. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haugh M & W Chang 2013 ‘Collaborative creation of spoken language corpora’ in T Greer, Y Kite & D Tatsuki (eds) Pragmatics and Language Learning Volume 13 Honolulu: National Foreign Language Resource Centre, University of Hawai'i. pp. 119–146.
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn A & GB Bolden 2012 ‘The conversation analytic approach to transcription’ in T Stivers & J Sidnell (eds) The Handbook of Conversation Analysis Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 57–76.
   Google Scholar
• Holt E 2007 ‘“I'm eyeing your chop up mind”: reporting and enacting’ in E Holt & R Clift (eds) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 47–80.
   Google Scholar
• Holt E 2010 ‘The last laugh: shared laughter and topic termination’ Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1513–1525. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.01.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt E 2011 ‘On the nature of “laughables”: laughter as a response to overdone figurative phrases’ Pragmatics 21: 393–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jefferson G 1979 ‘A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance-declination’ in G Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language:Studies in Ethnomethodology New York: Irvington. pp. 79–95.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson G 2004a ‘Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction’ in G Lerner (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 13–23.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson G 2004b ‘A note on laughter in “male-female” interaction’ Discourse Studies 6: 117–133. doi:10.1177/1461445604039445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jefferson G, H Sacks & E Schegloff 1987 ‘Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy’ in G Button & J Lee (eds) Talk and Social Organisation Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. pp. 152–205.
   Google Scholar
• Keltner D, L Capps, A Kring, R Young & E Heerey 2001 ‘Just teasing: a conceptual analysis and empirical review’ Psychological Bulletin 127: 229–248. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.229
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotthoff H 1996 ‘Impoliteness and conversational joking: on relational politics’ Folia Linguistica 30: 299–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lampert MD & S Ervin-Tripp 2006 ‘Risky laughter: teasing and self-directed joking among male and female friends’ Journal of Pragmatics 38: 51–72. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leech G 1983 Principles of pragmatics London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson S 2012 ‘Action formation and ascription’ in T Stivers & J Sidnell (eds) Handbook of Conversation Analysis Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 103–130.
   Google Scholar
• Lytra V 2007 ‘Teasing in contact encounters: frames, participant positions and responses’ Multilingua 26: 381–408.
   Google Scholar
• Mills S 2003 Gender and politeness Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McHoul A, M Rapley & C Antaki 2008 ‘You gotta light? On the luxury of context for understanding talk in interaction’ Journal of Pragmatics 40: 42–54. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrick N 1993 Conversational joking. Humour in everyday talk Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norrick N 1994 ‘Involvement and joking in conversation’ Journal of Pragmatics 22: 409–430. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90117-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrick N 2004 ‘Hyperbole, extreme case formulation’ Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1727–1739. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.06.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrick N & A Spitz 2008 ‘Humour as a resource for mitigating conflict in interaction’ Journal of Pragmatics 40: 1661–1686. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partington A 2008 ‘Teasing at the White House: a corpus-assisted study of face work in performing and responding to teases’ Text and Talk 28: 771–772. doi:10.1515/TEXT.2008.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawluk C 1989 ‘Social construction of teasing’ Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 19: 145–167. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1989.tb00142.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomerantz A 1986 ‘Extreme case formulations: a way of legitimizing claims’ Human Studies 9: 219–229. doi:10.1007/BF00148128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter J & A Hepburn 2010 ‘Putting aspiration into words: “laugh particles”, managing descriptive trouble and modulating action’ Journal of Pragmatics 42: 1543–1555. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriquez N & A Ryave 1992 ‘The structural organization and micropolitics of everyday secret telling interactions’ Qualitative Sociology 15: 297–318. doi:10.1007/BF00990330
   Google Scholar
• Queen R 2005 ‘“How many lesbians does it take…”: jokes, teasing, and the negotiation of stereotypes about lesbians’ Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 15: 239–257. doi:10.1525/jlin.2005.15.2.239
   Google Scholar
• Santamaría-García C 2011 ‘Bricolage assembling. CL, CA and DA to explore agreement’ International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16: 345–370. doi:10.1075/ijcl.16.3.04san
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schalley AC, S Musgrave & M Haugh 2014 ‘Accessing phonetic variation in spoken language corpora thorugh non-standard orthography’ Australian Journal of Linguistics 34: 139–170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff E 2001 ‘Getting serious: joke >> serious “no”’ Journal of Pragmatics 33: 1947–1955. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00073-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff E 2007 Sequence organization in interaction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schenkein JN 1972 ‘Towards an analysis of natural conversation and the sense of heheh’ Semiotica 6: 344–377. doi:10.1515/semi.1972.6.4.344
   Google Scholar
• Schnurr S 2009 ‘Constructing leader identities through teasing at work’ Journal of Pragmatics 41: 1125–1138. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sidnell J 2011 ‘“D'you understand that honey?”: gender and participation in conversation’ in SA Speer & E Stokoe (eds) Conversation and Gender Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 183–209.
   Google Scholar
• Stivers T & JD Robinson 2006 ‘A preference for progressivity in interaction’ Language in Society 35: 367–392. doi:10.1017/S0047404506060179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Straehle C 1993 ‘“Samuel?” “Yes dear?” Teasing and conversational rapport’ in D Tannen (ed.) Framing in Discourse Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 210–230.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh S 2013 ‘Corpus linguistics and conversation analysis at the interface: theoretical perspectives, practical outcomes’ in J Romero-Trillo (ed.) Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics Vol 1 Berlin: Springer. pp. 37–51.
   Google Scholar
• Yu C 2013 ‘Two interactional functions of self-mockery in everyday English conversations: a multimodal analysis’ Journal of Pragmatics 50: 1–22. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar