Article published In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Intertextual satire in media discourse

Conceptual blends

ORCID logo | Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University
ORCID logo | Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University
ORCID logo | Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University
The paper investigates intertextual satire in media discourse from the cognitive linguistic perspective. Within the frameworks of conceptual blending theory and the theory of precedent-related phenomena, we examine the cognitive processes of producing and understanding intertextual satire. By modelling conceptual integration networks, we aim to specify the cognitive mechanisms and operations involved in decoding intertextual satirical articles, drawing on examples from Private Eye magazine. The study demonstrates that the basic cognitive mechanism involved in creating intertextual satire is blending, and, in contrast to ironic utterances, which involve two contexts, in intertextual satire one and the same scenario unfolds in three contexts: real, fictional, and satirical. Thus, the blend that occurs as a result of combining real and fictional scenarios is verbalised and obvious to the recipient. The emergent structure, based on the blend, represents the intended (non-verbalised) meaning of intertextual satire, namely indirect criticism of the real situation under focus.
Keywords: intertextual satire, precedent-related phenomenon, incongruity, mental spaces, blending, emergent structure, conceptual integration, cognitive operation, frame
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Satire in the media: Main approaches, key notions, dominant trends
    • 2.2Intertextuality and the theory of precedence
    • 2.3Conceptual integration theory
  • 3.Method and material
    • 3.1Data collection
    • 3.2Procedure of analysis
      • Irony
      • Intertextual satire
  • 4.Analysis and discussion
    • 4.1Tweedledom and Tweedlelee Both Sacked
    • 4.2Abel and Cain in Huge Split
    • 4.3Cruella De Vil Furious at “Ghislaine Maxwell” Comparison
  • 5.Conclusions
  • References
Published online: 7 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00183.doi
References (84)
References
Adams, B. B. (1999). Jonson’s “Epicoene” and the complex plot. Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England, 11 1, 172–225.Google Scholar
Attardo, S. (2000). Irony as relevant inappropriateness. Journal of Pragmatics, 32 (6), 793–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bilyk, O., Bylytsia, U., Doichyk, O., Ivanotchak, N., & Pyliachyk, N. (2022). COVID-19 metaphoric blends in media discourse. Studies about Languages, 40 1, 17–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boukes, M., Boomgaarden, H., Moorman, M., & de Vreese, C. (2015). At odds: Laughing and thinking? The appreciation, processing, and persuasiveness of political satire. Journal of Communication, 65 1, 721–744. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brewer, P. R., Young, D. G., & Morreale, M. (2013). The impact of real news about “Fake News”: Intertextual processes and political satire. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25 (3), 323–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, H. (2000). That was satire that was: The satire boom of the 1960s. London: Victor.Google Scholar
Carroll, L. (1899). Through the looking-glass and what Alice found there. London: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
Carter, S. (2021). Intertextuality and satire: Ben Jonson’s Poetaster. In Early Modern Intertextuality (pp. 85–105). Early Modern Literature in History. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Childs, P., & Fowler, R. (2006). The Routledge dictionary of literary terms. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cochrane, L. (2019, Wednesday, 23). Heads up: Why powerbands are not just for Sloanes. The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Colletta, L. (2009). Political satire and postmodern irony in the age of Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. The Journal of Popular Culture, 42 (5), 856–874. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colson, H. L. (2002). Contrast and assimilation in verbal irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 34 (1), 111–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Condren, C. (2012). Satire and definition. Humor, 25 (4), 375–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002). What’s so funny?: Conceptual integration in humorous examples. In V. Herman, (Ed.): The poetics of cognition: Studies of Cognitive Linguistics and the verbal arts. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2005). Extemporaneous blending: Conceptual integration in humorous discourse from talk radio. Style, 39 1, 107–122.Google Scholar
Coulson, S., & Oakley, T. (2005). Blending and coded meaning: Literal and figurative meaning in cognitive semantics. Journal of Pragmatics, 37 (10), 1510–1536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Day, A. (2011). Satire and dissent: Interventions in contemporary political debate. Indiana University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doichyk, O. (2011). Postmodernistska ironiia Dzhuliana Barnsa: linhvokohnityvnyi analiz [Julian Barnes’ Postmodernist Irony: Cognitive Linguistic Analysis]. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 972 1, 112–118.Google Scholar
(2012). Aliuzii yak zasib vyrazhennia ironii v idiostyli Dzhuliana Barnsa: linhvokohnityvnyi analiz [Allusions as the textual means of irony representation in Julian Barnes’ idiostyle: Cognitive linguistic analysis]. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 1023 1, 104–108.Google Scholar
(2015). Kohnityvnyi vymir ironii v idiostyli Dzh. Barnsa [Cognitive perspective on irony in J. Barnes’ idiostyle]. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 1155 (80), 34–39.Google Scholar
(2016). Linhvokohnityvni parametry kompleksnoi ironii v idiostyli Dzh Barnsa [Linguo-cognitive properties of complex irony in J. Barnes’ idiostyle]. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 83 1, 66–72.Google Scholar
Dynel, M. (2011). The pragmatics of humour across discourse domains. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Garden paths, red lights and crossroads: On finding our way to understanding the cognitive mechanisms underlying jokes. Israeli Journal of Humor Research, 1 (1), 6–28.Google Scholar
Džanić, N. D., & Berberović, S. (2010). On politicians in big women’s sunglasses driving buses with their feet in mouths: Late-night political humour and conceptual integration theory. Jezikoslovlje, 11 (2), 197–214.Google Scholar
Elgot, J. & Walker, P. (2019, September, 5). Jo Johnson quits as MP and minister, citing ‘national interest’. The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, 22 (2), 133–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York City: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Forabosco, G. (1992). Cognitive aspects of the humor process: The concept of incongruity. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 5 (1–2), 45–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs Jr., R. W. (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15 (1–2), 5–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs Jr., R. W., & Colston, H. L. (Eds.). (2007). Irony in language and thought: A cognitive science reader. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, C. (2020, July 11). ‘I’m no Cruella de Vil’: Ghislaine Maxwell insists she is not an ‘evil villain’, had not seen Jeffrey Epstein in 15 years, did not introduce Prince Andrew to him and is being moved from cell to cell in prison for her safety. Mail Online. Available online: [URL]
Gray, J. (2006). Watching with The Simpsons: Television, parody, and intertextuality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Griffin, D. (1994). Satire: A critical reintroduction. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Hislop, I. (2011, April, 30). Provocateur in the public eye. Independent. Available online: [URL]
Holbert, R. L., Hmielowski, J., Jain, P., Lather, J., & Morey, A. (2011). Adding nuance to the study of political humor effects: Experimental research on juvenalian satire versus horatian satire. American Behavioral Scientist, 55 (3), 187–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, J. P. (2010). Entertaining politics: Satiric television and political engagement. USA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Kirby, D. (2020, July 12). Ghislaine Maxwell is no ‘Cruella de Vil’ say friends ahead of New York court hearing. inews. Available online: [URL]
Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., & Beam, M. A. (2009). The irony of satire: Political ideology and the motivation to see what you want to see in The Colbert Report. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14 (2), 212–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaMarre, H. L., & Walther, W. (2013). Ability matters: Testing the differential effects of political news and late-night political comedy on cognitive responses and the role of ability in micro-level opinion formation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25 (3), 303–322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., Young, D., & Gilkerson, N. (2014). Humor works in funny ways: Examining satirical tone as a key determinant in political humor message processing. Mass Communication and Society, 17 (3), 400–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landreville, K. D., & LaMarre, H. L. (2013). Examining the intertextuality of fictional political comedy and real-world political news. Media Psychology, 16 (3), 347–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LeBoeuf, M. (2007). The power of ridicule: An analysis of satire. Senior Honors Projects. Paper 63. University of Rhode Island. Available online: [URL]
Lee, H., Kwak, N., & Campbell, S. W. (2015). Hearing the other side revisited: The joint workings of cross-cutting discussion and strong tie homogeneity in facilitating deliberative and participatory democracy. Communication Research, 42 (4), 569–596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levko, O. (2020). Precedent units as a means of manipulation in Ukrainian religious media discourse: Psycholinguistic approach. Psycholinguistics, 28 (2), 99–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lundmark, C. (2003, July 20–25). Puns and blending: The case of print advertisements. [Paper presentation]. 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Theme session on cognitive-linguistic approaches to humour . Logroño, Spain. Available online: [URL]
Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Elsevier Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maslo, A. N. (2019). Parsing satirical humor: A model of cognitive-linguistic satire analysis. Književni jezik, 231–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michael, T. (2020, July, 12). Ghislaine Maxwell’s pals claim she’s not a Cruella de Vil-style ‘evil villain’ despite evidence she was Epstein’s pimp. The U.S. Sun. Available online: [URL]
Murphy, S. (2020, November, 15). Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain departure: what really happened? The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Nabi, R. L., Moyer-Gusé, E., & Byrne, S. (2007). All joking aside: A serious investigation into the persuasive effect of funny social issue messages. Communication Monographs, 74 (1), 29–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikonova, V., Boiko, Y., Savina, Y. (2019). Incongruity-specific British and American humour from the perspective of translation studies. Studies About Languages, 35 1, 89–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nilsen, A. & Nilsen, D. (2008). Literature and humor. In V. Raskin (Ed.), The primer of humor research (pp. 243–280). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oakley, T. (2016). Conceptual integration and fictive interaction. Literary Universals Project. University of Connecticut, USA.Google Scholar
O’Connell, J. (2021). Bowie’s books. The hundred literary heroes who changed his life. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Quinn, B. (2019, September, 5). A family divided: How Brexit fractured the Johnsons. The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Rebrii, O. V., & Nashenko, G. V. (2015). Pretsedentni imena yak problema khudozhnoho perekladu [Precedent Names as a Problem of Literary Translation]. Visnyk KhNU im. VN Karazina. Seriya Inozemna Filologiya, 81 1, 273–280.Google Scholar
Rebrii, O., & Tashchenko, G. V. (2019). Cultural specifics of precedent names as a factor of cognitive equivalence in translation. Cognition, Communication, Discourse, 18 1, 119–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ribeiro, A. S. (2016). Satirical discourse and intertextuality: The dialogic construction of satirical authority in Die Fackel. Oxford German Studies, 45 (4), 444–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, G. D. (1999). Developing the Incongruity-Resolution Theory. In Proceedings of AISB symposium on creative language: Stories and humour (pp. 78–85). EdinburghGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, G. (2004). The linguistic analysis of jokes. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz, J. H. (2009). Understanding Tropes: At the crossroads between pragmatics and cognition. Frankfurt am Mein: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Ruiz Gurillo, L., & Alvarado Ortega, M. B. (Eds.). (2013). Irony and humor: From pragmatics to discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selivanova, O. (2006). Suchasna lingvistyka: terminologichna entsyklopediya [Modern linguistics: terminological encyclopaedia]. Poltava: Dovkillia.Google Scholar
Shultz, T. R. (1976). A cognitive-developmental analysis of humour. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), Humor and laughter: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 11–36). NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Simpson, P. (2003). On the discourse of satire: Toward a stylistic model of satirical humor. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). “That’s not ironic, that’s just stupid”: Towards an eclectic account of the discourse of irony. In M. Dynel (Ed.), The pragmatics of humour across discourse domains (pp. 33–50). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skalicky, S. (2018). Lexical priming in humorous satirical newspaper headlines. Humour, 31 (4), 583–602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Suls, J. M. (1983). Cognitive processes in humor appreciation. In P. E. McGee & J. H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of humor research: Vol. 1: Basic issues (pp. 39–57). New York: Springer-Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Syal, R., Sabbagh, D., & Walker, P. (2020, November, 13). End of macho era: what to expect now Dominic Cummings has gone. The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Tashchenko, G. V. (2017). Cognitive equivalence as a criterion of the precedent name Translation. Science and Education a New Dimension. Philology, 39 (143), 54–56.Google Scholar
Torchynska, N., Shymanska, V., Gontsa, I., & Dudenko, O. (2021). Intertextuality as an Integral Component of the Modern Ukrainian Discourse (on the Example of Literary and Journalistic Styles). Postmodern Openings, 12 (4), 255–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
The Book of Genesis. Available at: [URL]
The Emperor Has No Clothes. In: BookBrowse. Available at: [URL]
Velykoroda, Y. (2012). Pretsedentni fenomeny v amerykanskomu mediynomu dyskursi (na materiali chasopysiv “Time” ta “Newsweek [Precedent-related phenomena in American media discourse (on the basis of “Time” and “Newsweek” magazines)]. [Doctoral dissertation, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv].
(2016). Ludic function of precedent-related phenomena in media discourse. Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University, 3 (4), 70–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Conceptual metaphorisation through precedent related phenomena in media discourse. Studies about Languages, 34 1, 32–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Velykoroda, Y., & Moroz, O. (2021). Intertextuality in media discourse: A reader’s perspective. ExELL, 9 (1), 56–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, P., Sabbagh, D. &, Syal, R. (2020, November 13). Boris Johnson boots out top adviser Dominic Cummings. The Guardian. Available online: [URL]
Yurchyshyn, V. (2021a). Linguopragmatic Features of Persuasive Power of Satire Based on Private Eye Magazine. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 17 (24), 10–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021b). Zasoby realizatsii strukturnykh elementiv satyry za metodolohiieiu P. Simpsona (na materiali brytanskoho mediadyskursu) [Means of Realisation of structural Elements of Satire in British Media Discourse (Based on P.Simpson’s Methodology)]. Scientific notes of V. I. Vernadsky Taurida National University, Series: Philology. Journalism, 2 (1), 233–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021c). Linhvoprahmatychni kharakterystyky satyry v brytanskomu mediinomu dyskursi [Linguopragmatic features of satire in British media discourse]. PhD thesis, Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University.
(2022). Inkongruentnist yak sposib realizatsii dialectychnoho elementa satyry u brytanskomu media dyskursi [Incongruity as a means of creation of the dialectic element of satire in British media discourse]. Current Issues of Foreign Philology, 17 1, 88–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar