Intercultural Pragmatic Failure in Humor - Literature review Example

Intercultural Pragmatic Failure in Humor Intercultural Pragmatic Failure in Humor Introduction The research herein focuses on the investigation and examination intercultural pragmatic failure of humor. Most people do not understand the humor due to lack of knowledge about it or lack of primary details on the target group’s culture by the speaker. Some hearers fail to find a joke funny since they lack the culture. The circumstance leads for ultimate failure of humor. Humor failure also primarily arises due to linguistic or pragmatics issues. Linguistics problems emerge when the hearer or hearers have limited knowledge about the language the speaker uses. However, the linguistic issue is beyond the scope of this study hence not a concern. Pragmatic failure on the other hand occurs when the hearers fail to comprehend or connect what actually the speaker’s words mean. The research herein therefore focuses on finding out the link that exists between humor success and the background of the target hearers. The research assesses humor reliance on intercultural pragmatics, especially on the second language. Literature Review Concerning humor, it is evident that the speakers must embrace social competencies such as grammatical and psycholinguistic abilities if they hope to relay humor successfully. Bell from his research concludes that the communicative competence is only achievable when the speakers embrace a form of merger (Bell 2006). The merger should be that allowing them to comprehend the linguistic forms and their use for achieving social competence in their second language. The person presenting the humor must verse him or herself with both the linguistic competence and social competence that allows humor to be successful. From this point of view, it is warrants to indicate that humor relies greatly on intercultural pragmatics. Giora argues that a joke is only successful if the hearer understands the speaker’s point of view (Giora 1991). In the event that the speaker offers an explanation to a joke it means that, the humor has completely failed. In such a circumstance, the listeners have to take the initiative of filling in the gap that was the role of the speaker. However, if the hearers solve all the ambiguities in the humor, the speaker may consider the humor successful (Giora 1991). The processing of the joke involves an amalgamation of factors that make the reception of the humor an uncomplicated process. Most importantly, the mystery of the humor must remain a task of the hearers to uncover. Giora uses Sofa so Good, a London shop constituting a literal pun. It uses a novel meaning recommending its goods. Yet it does not dispense with the salient meaning of the shop. In the humor, this is a pragmatic failure since the buyers, hearers will find it complex to connect the name and the product, or output. Such a form of humor failure arises because of pragmatic problems between the speaker and the hearers. It indicates the input that primary knowledge contributes towards the success of humor. Bell argues that the intercultural pragmatics of humor is responsible for the comprehension of humor in a second language. (Bell 2006) .The interpretation of this fact means that the humor could not be successful if the intercultural pragmatics of humor did not come into play. A specific instance is especially on the person presenting the humor. On a similar perspective, Pohl believes that a pragmatic failure takes place in the course of cross-cultural communication (Pohl 2004). Pohl acknowledges that the pragmatic failure relates to the inability to comprehend what is said in its context (Pohl 2004). In view of the fact that all societies are products of pragmatic values, Lin suggests that the pragmatic norms reflect in the way of life even in the context of communication (Lin, 2008). In line with this thought, it is evident that linguistic variations will ensue, and the patterns that define communications will differ to a huge extent. Yun indicates that the pragmatic failure of humor is a common phenomenon as different cultures have different beliefs and practices creating intercultural breakdown of communication (Yun 2011). The aspect reveals that intercultural pragmatics is an important feature of language and its use as well as a huge determiner of the speaker’s choices. It is in the same context that Yun recommend the adaptation theory allowing the speakers of the language to adopt successful cross-cultural communication. In the case of humor, Yun’s research is of great relevance, since through adaption the hearer can easily understand the joke that the speaker presents (Yun 2011). The feature validates the reality that the intercultural pragmatics plays an important role in the context of determining the speaker’s joke. Successful humor and the speaker’s comprehension of the joke Humor is a composite conception that needs to be evaluated and analyzed comprehensively (Bell 2007). Relating to humor being successful, it is evident that the hearer must put a lot of effort in understanding the humor prior to the presentation. The purpose of this is to enable them to assess if the humor is funny depending on the culture. The aspect relates to the intercultural pragmatics of humor and the different perceptions of humor in different contexts (Bell 2007). In line with this argument, it is anticipatable that the speakers perceive their humor being funny, though this may not be possible for its hearers. The research conducted by Pohl and Amaya argues that speakers may have the linguistic competence regarding phonology, syntax, semantics and even intonation and pragmatic competence (Amaya 2008).The competence aims at allowing the speakers to use language in the right context. Humor focuses on the intercultural pragmatics context where the effect of the language must be in line with the cultural aspect of the hearers. An interpretation of this show that different senses and references results from difference of the semantic rules and the pragmatic principles of different languages. Prior to presentation, the speakers must ensure that their humor they assign logic and reference to the intercultural concepts of language. That will determine if the successful humor attaches to their words especially to persons of the second language. Giora et al propose the optimal theory that explains liking as a product of innovation. In the context of humor, the speaker must be extremely innovative to invoke exceptional responses from the hearers (Giora et al. 2004). In a similar view, Zhang indicates the complication in understanding humor in alienation as various internal mechanisms shape humor (Zhang 2013). The author indicates further that an understanding humor involves analyzing it as a concept with major building blocks on intercultural pragmatics (Zhang, 2013). The same explains that the set of pragmatic concepts and strategies play a major role in ensuring that the speaker gives a humorous joke. Such humor terms as being relevant since it follows the expected procedure that allows the hearers to understand the intended meaning in humor (Liu 2005). Moalla reveals the existence of collisions between different languages in the course of communication (Moalla 2014). A deeper insight to this actuality means that the language and successful intercultural communication has more to do than the simple concepts that shape language. The simple concepts shaping language include syntax, semantics, phonetics and phonology. The speakers, in this instance must focus more on other factors such as the intercultural cues that shape a language to succeed in presenting humor. The speakers as a result cannot detach themselves from the intercultural pragmatics of humor as languages are different and different people perceive the languages differently. Zamborlin adds on to say that, pragmatic failures create dissonance in the course of communication (Zamborlin 2007). Intercultural communication is a good example when dissonance occur as majority of the speakers indicate having deficiencies in their linguistic, socio-linguistic or even pragmatic competencies (Zamborlin, 2007). In the course of humor presentation, the speaker may cause dissonance unintentionally, as they are ignorant of the factors forming pragmatics aspects of the language. When presenting the humor, the speaker may not be able to mitigate the factors hindering their jokes from being humorous leading to failure. Iwata demystifies the pragmatic failure by indicating that the speakers of foreign language fail because they transfer their communication styles to the second language communication (Iwata 2010)). The speakers also do not focus on making their topics clear as they assume that the hearers understand what they mean to say. Others do not even change the linguistic codes and if they do, they do not successful in the second language (Iwata 2010). In the course of presenting humor, it is therefore, expected that there will be minimal involvement and participation in the process of humor relaying. The aspect leads the speakers to end up using the wrong discourse patterns. Failure to follow the intercultural pragmatic rules acts as hindrance to the successful presentation of humor. The determinants of successful humor Humor needs to acceptance as a flow, but not a strain. If the hearers require too much effort to figure out the contents of the humor, it is unmistakable that the humor was not successful. Giora writes that the hearers find irony a tricky process especially in the course of interpretation process (Giora n.d). The context should provide a predictive context that allows the hearers’ literacy to interpret the humor’s literary. Pohl (2004) and Amaya (2008) further emphasize that having both linguistic competence and pragmatic competence may not mean that the hearers will successfully comprehend the humor. Bell & Attardo concludes that pragmatic failure is a major setback in relaying humor (Bell & Attardo 2010). The cultural part of pragmatics in a large way has disrupted proper understanding of humor (Bell & Attardo 2010). An interpretation of this is that humor needs embracing with ease as opposed to having difficulties in relating to the speakers thoughts. The manner of receiving humor can then primarily be as determinant of whether humor was successful or failed. In the case of intercultural pragmatics, the background knowledge on the culture would help the speaker understand the connotation behind the joke. Evidently, successful communication in a second language, especially in the context of humor, must be possible if pragmatic failure is avoided (Dash 2004). Due to the misunderstandings taking place in the course of communication, the speakers must evade cross-cultural pragmatic failures as much as possible to be successful. In the end, the hearers will positively appreciate the speaker’s effort in conveying the humor if the speaker factors in all of the intercultural pragmatics. Results and Findings From the research questions suggested, the results indicate that the intercultural pragmatics of humor determine the comprehension of humor in the second language. It is also evident that intercultural pragmatics determine if the hearers will understand the humor produced. Intercultural pragmatics of humor brings an interesting aspect of humor. It also shows how successful speakers can be in conveying humor. The most appealing aspect of this subject is the acceptance of the fact that intercultural communication is a major challenge in the process of communication. Since humor is part of communication, relaying of the joke faces intercultural issues, such as intercultural pragmatics. Speakers must overcome intercultural pragmatics issue to win acceptance by the intended hearers. Most importantly is the comprehension and appreciation of humor. It is only when the intercultural pragmatics has fulfillment that the hearers understands humor and even appreciates the efforts of the speaker in presentation. Humor gets appreciated in the second language only when the speakers immerse themselves in the background of the target language and culture. It is now that it is legitimate to question the inability of conveying humor if the hearers do not perceive it as a joke. The idea offers an explanation that the linguistic competence is not enough, and much more is required for humor to be successful. Through intercultural pragmatics, the concept of the intensity and nature of humor is understandable. The aspect explains that it is not practical that the speaker considers the internal mechanisms that define humor in the second language. In line with this argument, intercultural pragmatics takes an important phase of the successful humor in the second language. If the hearers receive the humor immediately, the speaker can comfortably say that they have overcome the intercultural pragmatic barrier of humor. It is the role of the speakers to go beyond linguistic competence of the second language and appreciate the pragmatic aspect of the second language. In the end, humor will always serve the intended purpose with minimal strains on the side of the speaker. Method The scholarly articles used in this research were retrieved from online databases. The key words intercultural, pragmatics, humor and second language, used in an attempt to explore the intercultural pragmatic failure in humor. The research focused more on intercultural pragmatics as it formed the focus of the study. Scholarly articles that focused on the mechanics of intercultural pragmatics as well as the implication of humor were also the major focus of the research. The study focused on sixteen sources recently published to find current information on the fact that the intercultural pragmatics and humor not being separable. However, information on previous centuries also found on the topic, but only acted as a guide to search for detailed information. The search took a global perspective, as humor does not confine to one culture. The intercultural pragmatics also affected all cultures despite their linguistic nature. Implementation The literature review presents a detailed explanation on the failure of humor because of the failure to focus on the intercultural pragmatics of the second language. The results findings of the study are fundamental in the improvement of humor transmission in a second language. Humor includes more than learning the linguistic structure of a language, with questions on the culture of language and successful humor coming into play. The review provides further research for the speakers of humor to ensure always that they are conversant with the target cultures. Conclusion In line with the researchers and analysts in the study, intercultural pragmatics has a huge role in the successful transmission of humor. To make the hearers participate actively in humor conveyance, the speaker must ensure that they focus on successfully incorporating the intercultural pragmatics. The hearers of the humor determine if the humor is successful or not. The hearers must interpret the speaker’s joke with minimal difficulties. However, it is evident that the humor interpretation process is complex forcing the speaker to make sure they incorporate the intercultural pragmatics. Second language speakers have major issues in identifying with the second language increasing the chances of them not comprehending the pragmatics of the second language. The aspect explains why the speakers find it extremely tasking to relate to the humor in the second language. As a result, I recommend that for the speakers of humor should focus on the intercultural pragmatics of the language they aim at submitting humor. Intercultural pragmatics, as a result, entails proper reception of humor, conversations, actively engaging in speech and identifying with the speaker. References Amaya, L. F. (2008). Teaching culture: Is it possible to avoid pragmatic failure? Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 21, 11-24. Bell, N. D. & Attardo, S. (2010). Failed humor: Issues in non-native speakers’ appreciation and understanding of humor. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(3), 423–447. Bell, N. D. (2006). Interactional adjustments in humorous intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 3(1), 1-28. Bell, N. D. (2007). How native and non-native English speakers adapt to humor in intercultural interaction. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20 (1), 27– 48. Dash, P. (2004). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure: A definitional analysis with implications for classroom teaching. Asian EFL Journal 6(3), 1-17. Giora, R. (1991). On the cognitive aspects of the joke. Journal of Pragmatics,16, 465-485. Giora, R. (n.d.). Will anticipating irony facilitate it immediately? 19-37. Giora, R., Fein, O., Kronrod, A., Elnatan,I., Shuval, N. Zur, A. (2004). Weapons of mass distraction: Optimal innovation and pleasure ratings. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(2), 115–141. Iwata, Y. (2010). Pragmatic Failure in topic choice, topic development, and self-disclosure by Japanese EFL speakers. Intercultural Communication Studies, 19(2), 145. Lin, M. (2008). Pragmatic failure in intercultural communication and English teaching in China. China Media Research, 4(3).  Liu, N. (2005). Incongruity and resolution in humor from the perspective of relative theory. Journal of PLA Institute of Foreign Languages, 1, 16-19.  Moalla, A. (2014). Intercultural strategies to co-construct and interpret humor. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. Pohl, G. (2004). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure and implications for language teaching. Second Language Learning & Teaching, 4(2), 91-112. Yun, Z. (2011). Analysis of pragmatic failures in communicative context adaptation. Journal of Chongqing Technology and Business University (Social Science Edition), 3, 019. Zamborlin, C. (2007). Going beyond pragmatic failures: Dissonance in intercultural communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 4(1), 21–50.  Zhang, W. (2013). An ideal model to measure humorousness: 1+1 two factor formulae. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(6), 1216-1224. Read More