Cover not available
Article published In:
New Developments in Relevance Theory
Edited by Manuel Padilla Cruz and Agnieszka Piskorska
[Pragmatics & Cognition 28:2] 2021
► pp. 277–298

Memes as multimodal metaphors

A relevance theory analysis

| Kingston University
In this article I analyse object labelling image macro internet memes as multimodal metaphors, taking the Distracted Boyfriend meme as a case study. Object labelling memes are multimodal texts in which users add labels to a stock photograph to convey messages that are often humorous or satirical in nature. Using the relevance-theoretic account of metaphor, I argue that object labelling memes are multimodal metaphors which are interpreted using the same processes as verbal metaphors. The labelling of the image guides the viewer in the construction of ad hoc concepts, and it is these ad hoc concepts that contribute to the overall meaning that is communicated. The analysis in this article is rooted in the relevance-theoretic claim that pragmatic interpretive processes are triggered by all and any ostensive acts of communication. I also draw heavily on Deirdre Wilson’s work on lexical pragmatics to show how this plays out in the case of a multimodal digital text. Memes, like verbal metaphors, do not require a special theory or framework. They can be understood as ostensive stimuli which trigger the search for an optimally relevant interpretation.
Keywords: internet memes, lexical pragmatics, metaphor, multimodality, ad hoc concepts, digitally mediated communication
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Internet memes
  • 3.Relevance, metaphors, and internet memes
    • 3.1Relevance, ostension, and memes
    • 3.2Metaphors, relevance and ad hoc concepts
  • 4.Analysis and discussion: The case of the distracted boyfriend
    • 4.1Object labelling memes and reference
    • 4.2Object labelling memes as multimodal metaphors
    • 4.3Memes, metaphor, and meaning
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 June 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.21010.sco
References
Barthes, Roland
1977 Image, music, text. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2002 Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Billy
2013 Relevance theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara & Vandelanotte, Lieven
2017 Internet memes as multimodal constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 28(3). 565–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, Charles
2020 Visual and multimodal communication: Applying the relevance principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forceville, Charles & Clark, Billy
2014 Can pictures have explicatures?. Linguagem em (Dis)curso, 14(3). 451–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W.
1994 The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glucksberg, Sam
2001 Understanding figurative language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray, Cohn, Neil & Griffith, Bill
2012 A user’s guide to thought and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jewitt, Carey
2013 Multimodal methods for researching digital technologies. In Sara Price, Carey Jewitt & Barry Brown (eds.), SAGE handbook of digital technology research, 250–265 London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knobel, Michele & Lankshear, Colin
2008 Remix: The art and craft of endless hybridization. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(1). 22–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miltner, Kate M.
2014 “There’s no place for lulz on LOLCats”: The role of genre, gender, and group identity in the interpretation and enjoyment of an Internet meme. First Monday, 19(8). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oswald, Steve & Maillat, Didier
2018 Deceptive puns: The pragmatics of humour in puns. In Cristián N. Padilla (ed.), Perspectivas sobre el significado: Desde lo biológico a lo social, 145–171. La Serena: Editorial Universidad de la Serena.Google Scholar
Reboul, Anne
1998 A relevance theoretic approach to reference. Relevance theory workshop, 45–50. University of Luton.Google Scholar
1999 Reference, agreement, evolving reference and the theory of mental representations. In Martine Coene (ed.), Traiani Augusti vestigia pressa sequamur :studia 1 lingvistica in honorem L. Tasmowki, 601–616. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Recanati, François
2012 Mental files. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Mental files and identity. In Anne Reboul (ed.) Mind, values, metaphysics: Philosophical papers Dedicated to Kevin Mulligan. University of Geneva. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, Kate
2020 Referring expressions, pragmatics, and style: Reference and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2021a The pragmatics of rebroadcasting content on Twitter: How is retweeting relevant? Journal of Pragmatics, 1841. 52–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021b Contrastive stress in English: Meaning, expectations and ostension. In Elly Ifantidou, Louis de Saussure & Tim Wharton (eds.), Beyond meaning, 29–41. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2022 Pragmatics online. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segev, Elad, Nissenbaum, Asaf, Stolero, Nathan & Shifman, Limor
2015 Families and networks of internet memes: The relationship between cohesiveness, uniqueness, and quiddity concreteness. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(4). 417–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shakespeare, William
1597/1980 Romeo and Juliet. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Shifman, Limor
2014 Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
1986/95 Relevance: Communciation and cognition. Second edition (with postface) ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
1998 The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In Peter Carruthers & Jill Boucher (eds.), Language and thought, 184–200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D.
2008 A deflationary account of metaphor. In Raymond W. Gibbs (ed.), Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, 84–105. Cambridge: Camrbidge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Wilson, Deirdre
2015 Beyond speaker’s meaning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 15(44). 117–149.Google Scholar
Wharton, Tim
2009 Pragmatics and non-verbal communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre
2003 Relevance and lexical pragmatics. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 15(2). 273–292.Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Carston, Robyn
2007 A unitary approach to lexical pragmatics: Relevance, inference and ad hoc concepts. In Noel Burton-Roberts (ed.), Pragmatics, 230–260. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Pragmatics and the challenge of “non-propositional” effects. Journal of Pragmatics, 145 1. 31–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Kolaiti, Patricia
2017 Lexical pragmatics and implicit communication. In Piotr Cap & Marta Dynel (eds.), Implicitness: From lexis to discourse, 147–175. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre & Sperber, Dan
2002 Truthfulness and relevance. Mind, 111(443). 583–632. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Meaning and relevance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yus, Francisco
2018 Identity-related issues in meme communication. Internet Pragmatics, 1(1). 113–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021a Incongruity-resolution humorous strategies in image macro memes. Internet Pragmatics, 4(1). 131–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021b Pragmatics of humour in memes in Spanish. Spanish in Context, 18(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele
2012 Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Yus, Francisco
2023. Meme-Mediated Humorous Communication. In Pragmatics of Internet Humour, ► pp. 245 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 2023. 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.