ارسل ملاحظاتك

ارسل ملاحظاتك لنا







الرئيسية > Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of...>الوصف
يجب تسجيل الدخول أولا

Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Humour in Interviews: Morgan and Youssef’s as a Case Study

المصدر: مجلة الدراسات المستدامة
الناشر: الجمعية العلمية للدراسات التربوية المستدامة
المؤلف الرئيسي: Mohammed, Maha Bakir (Author)
المجلد/العدد: مج6, ملحق
محكمة: نعم
الدولة: العراق
التاريخ الميلادي: 2024
التاريخ الهجري: 1446
الشهر: آب
الصفحات: 555 - 584
ISSN: 2663-2284
رقم MD: 1482651
نوع المحتوى: بحوث ومقالات
اللغة: الإنجليزية
قواعد المعلومات: EduSearch
مواضيع:
الخطاب الحجاجي | المناقشات الجدلية | الاستراتيجية الفكاهية | ظاهرة السخرية
كلمات المؤلف المفتاحية:
Humour | Pragma-Dialectics | Argumentation | Speech Acts | Satire | Parody | Introduction
رابط المحتوى:
PDF (صورة)      PDF (نص)      HTML
صورة الغلاف QR قانون
حفظ في:
المستخلص: Humour is a common strategy used in argumentative discussion. The ideal model of analysing a critical discussion (argumentation) is the pragma dialectical approach. The notion of dialectic, also dialectics, points out a discourse in which two participants are taking turns; the proponent who makes a move and the respondent who makes another move responding to a prior one (Walton: 2006: 41). Argumentation is a term that refers to a verbal, social, and rational move needed to convince others of a standpoint by putting forward utterances for the sake of justifying or rejecting the opposing utterances. (Eemeren and Houtlosser, 2000:1). The current study aims at (1) sketching a pragmatic structure of humour in terms of argumentation by the means of applying a pragma dialectical mothed. Of analysis, (2) identifying the highly used illocutionary acts in setting a contradictory argumentation; (3) Pinpointing the type of presupposition that is highly used in a humourous argumentation, and (4) exploring the humorous strategy that is the most commonly used in this term. To achieve the aforementioned objectives, the study hypothesises the following, (1) the pragmatic structure of humour as far as argumentation is concerned, is drawn by the means of employing illocutionary acts, as well as presupposition, (2) Expositives are the most frequent illocutionary act used in argumentative discourse, (3) factive presupposition is the highly used type in the sense of argumentation and (4) satire is the most common strategy of humour in a critical/argumentative discourse. Finally, the study has concluded the following remarks: (1) It is proved that humour can be successfully employed for the purpose of rejecting or showing disagreement and avoiding going deep in a pointless discussion; (2) The study explicates that the expositive acts of informing, reporting, and disclaiming are frequently used in argumentative discourse in opposition to exercitive acts; (3) Explains that the antagonist tends to make a factive presupposition in order to prove the truth of his utterance, and (4) the study seeks its validation in terms of the frequencies and percentages that proves satire to be the most common type of humour used in argumentative discourse.
ISSN: 2663-2284

عناصر مشابهة


© 2024 المنظومة. جميع الحقوق محفوظة.