How a Female Cartoonist Has Become Even More Famous Than Her Male Peers: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach

References

• Abdel-Raheem, A. (2020). Moral metaphor and gender in Arab visual culture: Debunking Western myths. Social Semiotics, 30(5), 715–742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdel-Raheem, A. (2023a). Cartooning and sexism in the time of Covid-19: Metaphors and metonymies in the Arab mind. Discourse & Society, 34(2), 147–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdel-Raheem, A. (2023b). Where Covid metaphors come from: Reconsidering context and modality in metaphor. Social Semiotics, 33(5), 971–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2021.1971493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aillaud, M., & Piolat, A. (2012). Influence of gender on judgment of dark and nondark humor. Individual Differences Research, 10(4), 211–222.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Arabiya. (2011, January 9). Women portrayed negatively in Egypt cartoons: Study. https://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/01/09/132796
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson, Trans.). University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds.; V. W. McGee, Trans.). University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, D. E. (1986). Grammar and gender. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bhatia, V. K. (1995). Genre-mixing in professional communication: The case of ‘private intentions’ v. ‘socially recognized purposes.’ In B. Du-Babcock, P. Bruthiaux, & T. Boswood (Eds.), Explorations in English for professional communication (pp. 1–19). University of Hong Kong.
   Google Scholar
• Brodinsky, D. M., & Rubien, J. (1976). Humor production as a function of sex of subject, creativity and cartoon content. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 597–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, A. J., & Gadfield, N. J. (1976). Is sexual humor sexist? Journal of Communication, 26, 321–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chilton, P. (1987). Metaphor, euphemism, and the militarization of language. War, Peace, and Culture, 10, 7–19.
   Google Scholar
• Coates, J., & Cameron, D. (Eds.). (1988). Women in their speech communities. Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Coser, R. (1960). Laughter among colleagues: A study of the functions of humor among the staff of a mental hospital. Psychiatry, 23, 81–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, J. A., Read, L. R., & Van Auken, P. M. (1990). Male-female differences in communicating job-related humor: An exploratory study. Humor, 3(3), 287–295.
   Google Scholar
• Domínguez, M., & Sapiña, L. (2022). She-Coronavirus: How cartoonists reflected women health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 29(2), 282–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505068211048402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donnelly, L. (2021). Very funny ladies: The New Yorker’s women cartoonists. Prometheus Books.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. (1997). Political cartoons in the 1988 presidential campaign: Image, metaphor, and narrative. Garland.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. (2014). Cartoons. In S. Attardo (Ed.), Encyclopedia of humor studies (pp. 112–116). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• El Refaie, E. (2009). What makes us laugh? Verbo-visual humour in newspaper cartoons. In E. Ventola, and J. Guijarro (Eds.), The world told and the world shown: Multisemiotic issues (pp. 75–89). Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• El Refaie, E. (2011). The pragmatics of humor reception: Young people’s responses to a newspaper cartoon. HUMOR, 24(1), 87–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falardeau, M. (2020). A history of women cartoonists. Mosaic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Fillmore, C. J. (1985). Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, 6, 222–254.
   Google Scholar
• Forceville, C. (2011). Pictorial runes in Tintin and the Picaros. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(3), 875–890.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1430–1451.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gameiro, S., de Guevara, B. B., El Refaie, E., & Payson, A. (2018). DrawingOut – An innovative drawing workshop method to support the generation and dissemination of research findings. PLoS ONE, 13(9): e0203197. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203197
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, R. W., & Siman, J. (2021). How we resist metaphors. Language and Cognition, 13(4), 670–692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, J. R. (2004). Performing marginality: Humor, gender, and cultural critique. Wayne State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giora, R. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giora, R., Shir, S., Heruti, V., & Fein, O. (2017). The role of defaultness in affecting pleasure: The optimal innovation hypothesis revisited. Metaphor and Symbol, 32(1), 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenall, A. K. (2001). Towards a socio-cognitive account of flouting and flout-based meaning. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Greengross, G., Silvia, P. J., & Nusbaum, E. C. (2020). Sex differences in humor production ability: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 84, 103,886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hariman, R. (2008). Political parody and public culture. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 94(3), 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630802210369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, J. (1995). Gender and humour: Beyond a joke. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
   Google Scholar
• Hay, J. (2000). Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 709–742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hazarika, A. (2017, February 1). Why aren’t female comedians funny? You asked Google – here’s the answer. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/01/why-arent-female-comedians-funny-google
   Google Scholar
• Helmy, M. M., & Frerichs, S. (2017). Sheherazade says no: Artful resistance in contemporary Egyptian political cartoon. In S. Awad & B. Wagoner (Eds.), Street art of resistance (pp. 349–376). Palgrave Studies in Creativity and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63330-5_15
   Google Scholar
• Hess, S., & Kaplan, M. (1968). The ungentlemanly art: A history of American political cartoons. Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hitchens, C. (2007). Why women aren’t funny? Vanity Fair, 557, 54–59.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, J., & Hay, J. (1997). Humour as an ethnic boundary marker in New Zealand interaction. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 18(2), 127–151.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, M. (1985). What’s so funny? Joking among women. In S. Bremner, N. Caskey, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Berkeley Women and Language Conference (pp. 135–151). Women and Language Group.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, M. H. (2018). Drawn to purpose: American women illustrators and cartoonists. University Press of Mississippi.
   Google Scholar
• Kotthoff, H. (2006). Gender and humor: The state of the art. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(1), 4–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristeva, J. (1986). Word, dialogue, and the novel. In T. Moi (Ed.), The Kristeva reader (pp. 35–61). Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lampert, M. D., & Ervin-Tripp, S. M. (1998) Exploring paradigms: The study of gender and sense of humor near the end of the 20th century. In W. Ruch (Ed.), The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. 231–270). Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Limbrick, P. (1991). A study of male and female expletive use in single and mixed-sex situations. Te Reo, 34, 71–89.
   Google Scholar
• Littlemore, J. (2019). Metaphors in the mind. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor. An integrative approach. Elsevier Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. A. (2014). Humor and gender: An overview of psychological research. In Gender and humor (pp. 123–146). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McDowell, J. (Ed.). (2021). De-gendering gendered occupations. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mickes, L., Walker, D. E., Parris, J. L., Mankoff, R., & Christenfeld, N. J. (2012). Who’s funny: Gender stereotypes, humor production, and memory bias. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 108–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, R. R. (2019). Review of the book Drawn to Purpose: American Women Illustrators and Cartoonists, by M. H. Kennedy. Inks: The Journal of the Comics Studies Society, 3(2), 221–223.
   Google Scholar
• Mirza, H. S. (2013). “A second skin”: Embodied intersectionality, transnationalism and narratives of identity and belonging among Muslim women in Britain. Women’s Studies International Forum, 36, 5–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Musolff, A. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Nasri, C. (2017). The liberating force of art, humor, and social media: Women cartoonists of the Arab Spring. In L. Touaf, S. Boutkhil, & C. Nasri (Eds.), North African women after the Arab Spring: In the eye of the storm (pp. 53–76). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 87–121; 2nd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ruch, W., & Hehl, F.-J. (1998). A two-mode model of humor appreciation: Its relation to aesthetic appreciation and simplicity-complexity of personality. In W. Ruch (Ed.), The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. 109–142). Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Samson, A. C., & Huber, O. (2007). The interaction of cartoonist’s gender and formal features of cartoons. Humor, 20(1), 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, S. (2020). Barriers to women’s participation in politics. In Women, language and politics (pp. 138–177). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shlesinger, I. (2017). Girl logic: The genius and the absurdity. Hachette Books.
   Google Scholar
• Soutschek, A., Burke, C., Beharelle, A., Schreiber, R., Weber, S., Karipidis, I., ten Velden, J., Weber, B., Haker, H., Kalenscher, T., & Toble, P. (2017). The dopaminergic reward system underpins gender differences in social preferences. Nature Human Behavior, 1, 819–827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speer, A. A., & Stokoe, E. (2011). Conversation and gender. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sterns, O. (2009). Female cartoonist’s provocative work challenges Saudi society. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/10/27/hajjar.female.cartoonist/
   Google Scholar
• Thorne, B., Kramarae, C., & Henley, N. (Eds.). (1983). Language, gender and society. Newbury House.
   Google Scholar
• Tison, H. (2022). Female cartoonists in the United States: Bad girls and invisible women. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Uidhir, C. M. (2017). Comics and seriality. In F. Bramlett, R. T. Cook, and A. Meskin (Eds.), The Routledge companion to comics (pp. 248–256). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wall, K. (2015, October 16). Bearded villains: ‘A beard is not a fad. It’s not fashion. It’s a lifestyle.’ The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2015/oct/16/bearded-villains-instagram-lifestyle-tolerance
   Google Scholar
• Waugh, C. (1991). The comics. University Press of Mississippi.
   Google Scholar
• Willis, K. (2005). Merry hell: Humour competence and social incompetence. In S. Lockyer & M. Pickering (Eds.), Beyond a joke: The limits of humour (pp. 126–145). Palgrave.
   Google Scholar