On Verbal Humor in the American Soap Opera Friends 英语专业毕业论文.doc

on verbal humor in the american soap opera friends一、 课题(论文)提纲0.引言1.关于幽默 1.1幽默语言的学习 1.2合作原则和会话含义的介绍2.分析幽默语在情景喜剧老友记里的运用2.1量的准则2.2质的准则2.3关系准则2.4方法准则3.关于幽默语的讨论4.结论二、内容摘要 美国情景喜剧老友记中的言语幽默在一定程度上阻碍了英语学习者对该喜剧的欣赏。本文以语用学的合作原则和会话含义理论为基础，从幽默会话对合作原则及其次准则的蔑视现象以及幽默会话中的隐含意义两个方面对美国情景喜剧老友记中的言语幽默进行了探讨,并分析了老友记中的言语幽默效果。本研究有助于提高英语学习者欣赏该喜剧，同时提高学习者理解美式幽默的能力。三、 参考文献1 何兆熊主编. 新编语用学概要m. 上海.上海外语教育出版社.1999.2 何自然. 语用学与英语学习m. 上海.上海外语教育出版社.1997.3 胡范铸. 幽默语言学m. 上海.上海社会科学院出版社.1987.4 刘乃实. 试析幽默的语用合作原则j. 清华大学研究教育.2002(2): 143-147.5 毛荣贵. 英语幽默语言赏析m. 上海.上海社会科学院出版社. 1993.6 吴清. 合作原则和情景喜剧中的幽默j. 江南大学学报. 2005(2).107-110. on verbal humor in the american soap opera friendsabstract: the verbal humor in the famous american soap opera friends, to a certain degree, prevents the english learners from appreciating the soap opera effectively. this thesis, based on cooperative principle (cp) and conversational implication theory, analyses how verbal humor flouts each of the four cooperative principles and how to understand the implied meaning behind the humorous conversations. meanwhile, the effects of verbal humor are illustrated in details. the study is sure to help english learners to appreciate the soap opera and improve their ability in understanding the american humor.keywords: verbal humor；friends；cooperative principle ； conversational implication 0 introduction the american soap opera friends is one of the most famous and welcome in america and in the world for its unique conversational humor. the verbal humor in friends is the typical humor with american characteristics, which sometimes is hard for non-native english speakers to understand. hence, detailed pragmatic analysis of the verbal humor in friends is helpful to improve english learners understanding and appreciation of the nature of american humor. at the same time, it is illuminating to apply humor skills to mediate interpersonal relationships.1about humor 11 studies on humor in recent years, an increasing amount of studies on humor has caught the attention of scholars at home and abroad. however, these studies discuss humor always from psychological or linguistic angles. walter nash considers that “the humor of psychological and social satire is expressed to a very great extent through the flaws and connections of speech acts, the contractual failures of parties to conversation”. he points out humorous conversations occur because “those exchanges violate the maxims of ordinary conversation, as formulated in a well-known paper by h. p. grice”. chinese professor mao ronggui studies humor from linguistic view. he divides humorous language into two types: rhetorical humor and non-rhetorical humor. according to the study of professor mao, the rhetorical humor is produced through using various tropes, including oxymoron, transferred epithet, zeugma, anticlimax, pun, irony, parody, paradox, and the non-rhetorical humor is created by lexical deviation and deviation of register. besides, many scholars in china have done researches on humor based on pragmatic theories. however, the studies in this field have not reached the stage of maturity, and they are rather insufficient or lack of authority in china, let alone the pragmatic studies on the humorous conversations in american sitcoms friends since it just came into being in the 1990s. 1.2 the cooperative principle and conversational implication the studies on the humor in friends are rather insufficient as it became popular in china just in the 1990 so that the studies in this field still have a long way to reach the stage of maturity. in this case, this thesis is made to research and focuses on explaining the relationship between the verbal humor and the cooperative principle to show the ways in which the verbal humor in the american soap opera friends flouts the four principles, the humorous effect is triggered and the implied message behind the humor is conveyed. here comes to grices cooperative principle and his conversational implication theory. grice suggests that “there is a set of over-arching assumptions guiding the conduct of conversation. these arise, it seems, from basic rational considerations and may be formulated as guidelines for the efficient and effective use of language in conversation to further co-operative ends”. his idea is that in order to carry on the talk the participants must be willing to cooperative in making conversation. participants in conversation have the obligation to give adequate and accurate information, and to make relevant responses. grice identifies as guidelines four basic maxims of conversation, called the cooperative principle, or cp for short. they are introduced as follows:the co-operative principlemake your contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engagedthe principle of qualitytry to make your contribution on that is true, specifically: a. do not say what you believe to be false b. do not say that for which you lack adequate evidencethe principle of quantity a. make your contribution as informative as is required for the current purposes of the exchange b. do not make your contribution more informative than is required the principle of relevance make your contributions relevant the principle of manner be perspicuous, and specifically: a. avoid obscurity b. avoid ambiguity c. be brief d. be orderly2 analysis of humor in friends there are a large number of humorous dialogues in friends. therefore, the humorous dialogues had to be classified according to the factor or the reason of creating humor. those that flout four principles were chosen to be explained in details. humor is usually caused by the deliberate violation of the cp by participants of the conversation. different from daily conversation, humor is the embodiment of wisdom. it is jocular and witty and usually makes people laughing. one characteristic of humor is that the language used in it is implicit. it is not in a straightforward way to express ideas or put forward some criticizing or complaining comments. besides, it discloses things or ideas which are absurd or unreasonable in a tactful and implicit way. people keep thinking and inferring, and try to grasp the intended meaning and underlying message through the language of humor. 2.1 the principle of quality by the principle of quality, it is meant that in a dialogue we all try to make our contribution to one thing that is true or say things that are true. to keep to this principle, we simultaneously observe two sub-principles: we do not say what we believe to be false, and we do not say anything we lack adequate evidence. 2.1.1 “ joey: what are you talking about? keep it!phoebe: its not mine, i didnt earn it, if i kept it, it would be like stealing. rachel: yeah, but if you spent it, it would be like shopping! phoebe: okay. okay, lets say i bought a really great pair of shoes. do you know what id hear, with every step i took? not-mine. not-mine. not-mine. and even if i was happy, okay, and, and skipping- not-not-mine, not-not-mine, not-not-mine, not-not-mine.” (friends, 1994) this dialogue appears in the scene that one day phoebe discovers there is five hundred extra dollars in her account; every one asks her to keep the money, while she is unwilling to keep and use it. she thinks the shoes would blame her if she used that money to buy shoes. she, of course, knows shoes could not say anything. she is saying something untrue and is thus flouting the maxim of quality. at the same time, humor is produced by personifying the shoes as a person having a voice. her implied message is “i should not keep the extra money. and i would feel guilty if i kept and used it.” 2.1.2“ross: if i hadnt let you talk me to go into the airport in the first place, i wouldnt have put my fist through the wall.chandler: you put your fist through the wall?ross: no. i miss it and hit the door. but it opened really hard.” (friends, 1997) this conversation happens in the situation that ross fails to persuade his girlfriend to stay with him. ross says he put his fist through the wall to emphasize how upset and angry he is. however, chandler doubts rosss words because he knows ross is too timid to put his fist through the wall. later, ross admits he just hit the door. here, ross says something untrue on purpose and thus flouts the maxim of quality. humor of this kind is founded largely on hyperbole. 2.1.3“ross: yeah, uh and then i figured after you win, we could all go out to the balcony and see a night rainbow with gremlins dancing on top of it!” 2.1.4 “ross: you know what, im sure your wish is gonna come true, but, you guysjust in case, maybe a genie will come out if we rub this lamp!” (friends, 1999) ross says these two sentences, comparing that his friends would win to that someone would see a night rainbow with gremlins dancing on top of it and that coming out a genie from a lamp, to express he does not believe his friend would win. humor here is achieved by using metaphor. ross knows the phenomenon what he said could hardly happen, so he is flouting the maxim of quality deliberately. the implication that results is “it is impossible for you to win.” 2.2 the principle of quantity by the principle of quantity, it is meant that in a dialogue we all try to make our contribution as much as desired. there are two sub-principles under the quantity principle: we try to make our contribution as informative as is required for the current purpose of the exchange and we do not make our contribution more informative than is required. 2.2.1 “rachel: isnt this amazing? i mean, ive never made coffee before in my entire life. chandler: thats amazing. joey: congratulations.(taste a bite of coffee) joey: although actually im really not that hungry.” (friends, 1995) after tasting a bite of coffee, joey does not mention the taste of coffee in his comment. apparently, his answer is less informative than is required, thus, he flouts the maxim of quantity. the implication that results is “the coffee is not tasty.” in the first place, the three persons consider it is amazing that rachel could make coffee. but it turns out that rachels coffee is terrible. this sudden turning point would bring about the sense of humor. 2.3 the principle of relevance by the principle of relevance, it is meant that in a dialogue we all try to make our contribution relevant to the exchange. 2.3.1 “ross: i dont want to be single, ok? i just want to be married again.(rachel ran into the coffee shop wearing the wedding veil.)chandler: and i just want a million dollars!” (friends, 1994) this conversation happens when ross and chandler are talking about rosss love affair. ross says he wants to be married again, but chandler says he wants a million dollars. it seems that the two subjects they mention are irrelevant. but it occurs in a certain situation that a bride wearing wedding veil appears when ross speaks out his expectation to be married again. in the case, chandlers sense of humor is embodied by saying something irrelevant, i.e. flouting the principle of relevance. 2.3.2 “phoebe: oh, hey, mon, do you still have your like old blouses and dresses from high school? monica: yeah, i think i have some around here somewhere. why?phoebe: well, its just that maternity clothes are so expensive.” (friends, 2003) in this conversation, when phoebe is asked why she talks about monicas dresses from high school, she answers maternity clothes are expensivethis reply seems irrelevant to the question, but actually she implicates that monicas blouses and dresses from high school are big enough for a pregnant woman, while maternity clothes are so expensive, so she wants to borrow them. here, phoebe flouts the principle of relevance deliberately, and thus her sense of humor is expressed. 2.4 the principle of manner by the principle of manner, it is meant that in a dialogue we all try to be perspicuous (clear and lucid). in line with this principle, there are four sub-principles: a. we try to avoid obscurity; b. we try to avoid ambiguity; c. we try to be brief; d. we try to be orderly. 2.4.1 “phoebe: ooh! oh! (she starts to pluck at the air just in front of ross.) ross: no, no dont! stop cleansing my aura! no, just leave my aura alone, okay? phoebe: fine! be murky!” (friends, 1996) in this conversation, phoebe wants to catch rosss attention by plucking at the air in front of him. but he feels annoying and he wants to leave himself alone. instead of saying “do not bother me” directly, he refers to “my aura” and says “stop cleansing my aura” and “leave my aura alone”. moreover, phoebe utters “murky” to describe the air around ross instead of using “unhappy” or “sorrowful” to describe him directly. here, both ross and phoebe use obscure expression and thus flout the principle of manner. but the humorous effect they create and the implication of their utterance are obvious and accepted by audience. 2.4.2 “emily: what did you decide? does your uncle nathan get an invitation or not? ross: oh, god! nobody likes him. and hes so cheap. i mean hed never fly to london in a million years yeah, invite him.” (friends, 1997) ross and emily are deciding who would be invited to their wedding. when emily asks ross whether invite his uncle or not, ross does not answer “yes” or “no” briefly and directly. instead, he says a lot of his uncles weak points in the first place, but finally he decides to invite him so quickly. thus, obviously, rosss deliberately prolix expression creates a sense of humor by flouting the principle of manner.3discussion in the previous part, the humorous dialogues in friends were selected to be analyzed and explained from the view of flouting four principles of cp including the principle of quality, quantity, relevance and manner. after detailed analyzing, a conclusion that there is implied meaning behind some of the humorous conversation is drawn.the verbal humor in friends, sometimes conveying some implied message, called “conversational implication” an extra meaning compared with the literal, is still a successful communication skill though it, to a certain extents, exteriorly flouts the principles of the cp. some chinese scholars have researched on verbal humor in american soap opera friends. they conduct an analysis on the selected dialogues on the basis of the principle of quality and the maxim of manner. in their researches, they have the same result as this thesis does, that is, the participants in humorous conversations deliberately flout the principle of quality and of manner. however, most of them do not discuss the humorous conversations focusing on all of the four principles of the cp and do not discuss the