SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.35 suppl.21Diagram of interpersonal and textual rhetorics: Full versionStructural analysis chart for John 9 author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Acta Theologica

On-line version ISSN 2309-9089
Print version ISSN 1015-8758

Acta theol. vol.35  suppl.21 Bloemfontein  2015

 

Appendix 3

 

 

The analytical outline for ironic speech acts: Short version

 

Ito Hisa

 

A. PRELIMINARY STEPS FOR IDENTIFYING IRONIC UTTERANCES

When you notice that something is not right or true in the literal interpretation (meaning) in an utterance, is there any clue to interpret it differently?

i. Use some form of the word 'irony'.

ii. Is there any indication of some contradictions?

1. In the relationship between text and context.

2. In the relationship between text and co-text.

3. In the relationship between text and text.

iii. Can you suspect any violation of the sincerity conditions, especially of the Quality Maxim?

iv. Can you suspect any violation of other Maxims?

v. Are there more than two illocutionary forces in the utterance?

vi. Does the utterance observe the Irony Principle?

vii. Is there any interpreter of the text who suggests or suspects that the utterance is ironic?

If the answer to any of the above questions is 'yes', the utterance may be further analysed using the following steps to determine whether or not it is an ironic speech act.

 

B. VERIFYING STEPS FOR IDENTIFYING IRONIC UTTERANCES

Go through all the steps below, unless otherwise stated.

i. Identify three participants, considering the two levels of communication (the story and the text levels): Ironist, Observers, and Target (or Victim).

ii. Classify the utterance according to the types of irony:

1. Verbal irony

2. Situational irony:

a. Dramatic irony

b. Irony of self-betrayal

c. Irony of events

d. Irony of dilemma

iii. Find the nature of oppositions (choose one according to the irony concerned):

1. Counterfactual, propositional or lexical oppositions.

2. Pragmatic opposition (any violation of Maxims/conditions).

iv. If the utterance falls into the category of situational irony, skip step iv) and directly go to step v). If the utterance falls into the category of verbal irony, test it by applying the following ironic speech-act conditions:

1. Prove it using Propositional Content Conditions.

2. Prove it using Preparatory Conditions.

3. Prove it using Sincerity Conditions.

4. Prove it using Essential Conditions.

v. Classify the utterance according to the speech-act taxonomy.

vi. What is the speaker's intended meaning or message?

If the utterance is successfully analysed according to the above steps, it can be concluded that the utterance is ironical.

 

C. FINAL STEP IN IDENTIFYING IRONICAL UTTERANCES

Determine what perlocutionary act this ironic utterance performs. Or, how does this ironic utterance function in the particular text?

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License