Cover not available
Article published In:
Constructions and Frames
Vol. 13:2 (2021) ► pp.309–339

As if irony was in stock

The case of constructional ironies

 | University of Bremen
 | University of Osnabrück
The linguistic treatment of verbal irony
has more often than not focused on novel, ad hoc ironies. Research in the last decade, however, suggests that there is a considerable number of utterances that are either schematic or lexically filled and interpreted as ironic by convention. By analyzing three of these, i.e. Tell me about it, XP pro BE not (A Michelangelo he is not) and stand-alone insubordinate as if (As if anyone could pronounce that), the present paper will show that these expressions are best analyzed as constructions (Goldberg 1995, 2006). The paper will further show that the Viewpoint account of irony (Dancygier 2017; Tobin & Israel 2012) describes the data at hand most adequately.
Keywords: verbal irony, constructional ironies, construction grammar, conceptual integration, viewpoint
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Explaining irony and its functions
    • 2.1Pragmatic accounts of irony
    • 2.2Cognitive accounts of irony
    • 2.3The function(s) of irony
  • 3.What makes a construction? A usage-based perspective
  • 4.Constructional ironies
    • 4.1Tell me about it
    • 4.2XP pro BE not
    • 4.3Stand-alone insubordinate as if
  • 5.Implications for accounts of irony
  • 6.Summary: Constructional ironies as space builders and perspective shifters
  • 7.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 December 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.00053.leh
References (50)
References
Athanasiadou, A. (2017). Irony has a metonymic basis. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 201–215). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Irony in constructions. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), The diversity of irony. De Gruyter/Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasiadou, A., & Colston, H. L. (2020). Intorduction. On the Diversity of Irony. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), The Diversity of Irony (pp. 1–11). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Attardo, S. (2000). Irony as relevant inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 793–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J. K., & Goldberg, A. E. (2011). Learning what not to say: The role of statistical preemption and categorization in a-adjective production. Language, 55–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryant, G. A. (2010). Prosodic Contrasts in Ironic Speech. Discourse Processes, 47(7), 545–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Usage-based Theory and Exemplar Representations of Constructions. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Camp, E. (2012). Sarcasm, pretense, and the semantics/pragmatics distinction. Noûs, 46(4), 587–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B., Depraetere, I., & Lesuisse, M. (2019). The necessity modals have to, must, need to, and should: Using n-grams to help identify common and distinct semantic and pragmatic aspects. Constructions and Frames, 11(2), 220–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, R. (1996). Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 309–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheang, H. S., & Pell, M. D. (2008). The sound of sarcasm. Speech communication, 50(5), 366–381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, B. (2017). Viewpoint phenomena in constructions and discourse. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 2(1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. (2010–). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): One billion words, 1990–2019. Retrieved from Available online at [URL]
Diewald, G. (2002). A model for relevant types of contexts in grammaticalization. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 103–120). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, M. (2013). Irony from a neo-Gricean perspective: On untruthfulness and evaluative implicature. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10(3), 403–431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Filippova, E. (2014). Irony production and comprehension. In D. Matthews (Ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition (pp. 261–278). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 501–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garmendia, J. (2010). Irony is critical. Pragmatics & Cognition, 18(2), 397–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). She’s (not) a fine friend: “Saying” and criticism in irony. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8(1), 41–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Irony. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1–2), 5–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R. (1995). On irony and negation. Discourse Processes, 19(2), 239–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). On Our Mind: Salience, Context, and Figurative Language. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., Drucker, A., Fein, O., & Mendelson, I. (2015). Default sarcastic interpretations: On the priority of nonsalient interpretations. Discourse Processes, 52(3), 173–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., & Fein, O. (1999). Irony comprehension: The graded salience hypothesis. Humor, 12(4), 425–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giora, R., Fein, O., & Schwartz, T. (1998). Irony: graded salience and indirect negation. Metaphor and Symbol, 13(2), 83–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalizations in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts (pp. 41–58). Brill.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. D., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language (1. publ. ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2019). Delimiting the class: A typology of English insubordination. In K. Beijering, G. Kaltenböck, & M. S. Sansiñena (Eds.), Insubordination. Theoretical and empirical issues (pp. 167–198). De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction. Language, 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kreuz, R. J., & Link, K. E. (2002). Asymmetries in the Use of Verbal Irony. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21(2), 127–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things : what categories reveal about the mind. Univ. of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, C. (2020). Using Multimodal Corpora to Study the Ironic Tone of Voice. Opportunities and Challenges. Paper presented at ICAME41. [URL]
Mauchand, M., Vergis, N., & Pell, M. (2018). Ironic tones of voices. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Speech Prosody 2018. DOI logo
Michaelis, L. A., & Feng, H. (2015). What is this, sarcastic syntax? Constructions and Frames, 7(2), 148–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Östman, J.-O., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Dialects, Discourse, and Construction Grammar. In T. Hoffmann & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 476–489). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rockwell, P. (2000). Lower, Slower, Louder: Vocal Cues of Sarcasm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(5), 483–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. (2017). Cognitive modeling and irony. In A. Athanasiadou & H. L. Colston (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 179–200). Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Lozano-Palacio, I. (2019a). A Cognitive-Linguistic Approach to Complexity in Irony: Dissecting the Ironic Echo. Metaphor and Symbol, 34(2), 127–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019b). Unraveling irony: from linguistics to literary criticism and back. Cognitive Semantics, 5(1), 147–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, F., & Turner, M. B. (2013). Multimodal construction grammar. In M. Borkent, B. Dancygier, & J. Hinnell (Eds.), Language and the creative mind (pp. 255–274). CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Tobin, V., & Israel, M. (2012). Irony as a viewpoint phenomenon. In B. Dancygier & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective (pp. 25–46). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, M. (2012). Conceptual Integration. In D. Geeraerts (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Veale, T., & Hao, Y. (2010). Detecting ironic intent in creative comparisons. Paper presented at the 19th European conference on artificial intelligence – ECAI 2010, Lisboa, Portugal.
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2012). Explaining irony. In Meaning and relevance (pp. 123–145). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

LEHMANN, CLAUDIA
2023. As if that wasn't enough: Englishas ifclauses as multimodal utterance constructions. English Language and Linguistics 27:1 ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo
Lehmann, Claudia
2023. Multimodal markers of irony in televised discourse. In Multimodal Im/politeness [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 333], ► pp. 251 ff. DOI logo
Lehmann, Claudia
2024. Multimodal constructions revisited. Testing the strength of association between spoken and non-spoken features of Tell me about it . Cognitive Linguistics 35:3 ► pp. 407 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.