Clift1999
| Clift1999 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Clift1999 |
| Author(s) | Rebecca Clift |
| Title | Irony in conversation |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Goffman, Footing, Framing, Irony, Pragmatics |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1999 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Language in Society |
| Volume | 28 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 523-553 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0047404599004029 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article proposes the adoption of Goffman's concept of “framing” to characterize irony across its forms; the suggestion that this framing is achieved by a shift of footing reveals links between verbal irony and other forms of talk. Examination of irony in conversation shows how the shift of footing allows for detachment, enabling the ironist to make evaluations in response to perceived transgressions with reference to common assumptions. It is both the construction of an ironic turn and its placement in a sequence that make for the discernible shift of footing, and thus the visibility of the frame; with irony, conversational expectations of what constitutes a next turn are fulfilled on the level of form, but undermined on the level of content. This analysis shows the extent to which irony is affiliative, and reveals its hitherto unacknowledged subtlety of effect and range of attitude
Notes
