Online and offline joking Liisi Laineste Estonian Literary Museum / / Center of Excellence of Estonian Studies (CEES) University of Tartu *Supported by IUT 22-5

*This study was supported by the Estonian Ministry of EducaKon and Research (IUT22-5), and by the European Union through the European

Drunkard’s search? A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his keys and they both look under the streetlight together. ATer a few minutes the policeman asks if he is sure he lost them here, and the drunk replies, no, and that he lost them in the park. The policeman asks why he is searching here, and the drunk replies, "this is where the light is."

Outline of the lecture •  CollecKng conversaKonal joking •  Humour and jokes in face-to-face communicaKon (FtF, ~offline) and in computer mediated communicaKon (CMC, ~online) •  Jokes offline •  Formats •  Status and other aspects of usage •  Context maYers

•  Jokes online

•  Formats •  Anonymous vs authored •  Context?

•  Comparison: offline and online •  Some examples •  •  •  • 

material methods results discussion

•  Conclusions

CollecKng jokes •  FolklorisKc interest and folk collecKons (for whom, why) •  Alan Dundes’ joke collecKon in Berkeley •  Humour collecKons at the Estonian Literary Museum •  Eisen (e.g. hYp://www.folklore.ee/rl/pubte/ee/vanad/eisen/eesKnalja/ sisu.html) •  Some subcategories (clerical humour, L. Raudsepp 1969) •  School lore collecKons (e.g. 1992 and 2007; hYp://www.folklore.ee/ rl/pubte/ee/araamat/2007/koolip.pdf) •  Humour-focused campaigns / compeKKons (e.g. “A funny thing happened to me”; hYp://www.folklore.ee/era/kysitlus/naljakas.htm) •  DigiKsing old documents (newspapers, calendars etc)

•  CollecKng online humour

–  StaKc: Joke collecKons –  Dynamic: Social media content

-> How about collecKng conversaKonal humour?

FtF versus CMC •  Zajdman (1991): how are jokes integrated into conversaKon (joke text + life context =“inclusive text”, p 26) •  •  •  • 

Supplier Sub-contractor Joint venture Merger

•  FuncKons (e.g. Norrick 1993) •  CogniKve •  EmoKonal •  Social

•  Humour as gloss (Oring 2003: 88) •  Other case studies, e.g. Nardini (2000), Hay (2000), Holt (2010), Bell (2007, 2009, 2015) etc •  The applicability of previous research to CMC

Offline: Zajdman (1991) •  Four levels, on which jokes can be integrated into conversaKon •  1) supplier – joke text (JT) is simply added to the context (LC)

•  2) sub-contractor – JT mixes with LC, as a parable •  3) joint venture – abbreviated JT is integrated into the LC, but remains recognisable

•  4) merger – JT forms a dynamic compound with its context; is fully merged

Offline: Oring (2003) •  Prefigured vs emergent performance •  FuncKons (p. 92): •  •  •  •  •  •  • 

Support a friend Ridicule a behaviour CriKcise Disengage from ansewring a delicate quesKon QuesKon authority Advocate a point of view etc

•  Joking is a roundabout way of delivering a point •  Jokes in conversaKon are concerned with more abstract categories, not just surface features (eg the first and most obvious meaning of the joke)

Online: typical to the medium •  Smith (1991): PC as the “joking machine” •  Baym (1995) – internet fosters playful interacKon, including sharing humour •  So does ambiguity and anonymity (Vandergriff 2010; Vandergriff & Fuchs 2009) •  “thin context”; less context -> more misinterpretaKon (Kock 2008, Hancock 2004) •  DisinhibiKon: Internet and latrinalia (Bronner 2009) •  Jokes as disruptors in analog and digital; synchronous and asynchronous communicaKon (see also Norrick 1993) •  Grice’s maximes in the context of online humour •  Use, funcKons of and reacKons to humour and jokes online •  Failed humour

Sources and funcKons of old known jokes in online conversaKon (Laineste 2015) •  Old known jokes (lame jokes) are short narraKves that end in a predictable punch-line or have been circulated in the same variant for decades and don't provide any novelty for the listeners. These are very oTen published in volumes of joke collecKons and in newspaper varia secKons. They are also used (as punch-lines, key words or citaKons) in conversaKon to illustrate the point and bring analogies. •  Searched for (in Estonian): “This reminds me of the old joke” and analogous phrases (12 different versions) > 250 first hits / instances (no duplicates) •  DifferenKated between introducKon (if there was any), text of the joke and reacKon

–  Source •  •  •  •  • 

online journalism blogs forums social media dynamic dedicated joke sites

–  FuncKon •  sKmulus / introducKon to the topic •  moral / analogy / illustraKon •  Comment

FuncKons 140 120 120 100 100 80 80 60 60 40 40

20 20

0 0

forum

illustraKon

news portal

comment

blog

social media

independent sKmulus

joke site

introducKon

FuncKons: examples In unexpected contexts (with no documented reacKon): Member of Parliament, Olavi Anton: “There was once and old joke, where Baba Yaga complained to Kashchei that she was raped. The joke ended with the known punch-line – is it forbidden even to dream?” As illustraKon or analogy: An arKcle in KesKus, an Estonian (online) journal, Ktled “Albania, the most independent state” starts with the following sentence: This is an old joke: the most independent state in the world is Albania, because nothing depends on it.

FuncKons: conKnued No reacKon to diversion of topic: A discussion about a recent piece of news about a man who followed the prime minister’s car that had flashing lights: This reminds me of a joke about the police car: One of the officers asks the other to check if the light work, and the other, sGcking the head out of the window, reports: “They are working / they are not working / they are working...” Punch-line, key words only: A discussion about what happens when an asteroid hits the Earth: Like the old joke recommends: Don’t panic, just wrap yourself in a white sheet and walk slowly to the nearest cemetary. Most popular (with the point spelled out): The old joke about how four blind men are asked to describe an elephant. You can only imagine the mess when one describes the tail, the other a foot, the third an ear and the fourth the trunk.

•  Old jokes are numerous in CMC (most oTen cited in forums > news portals > blogs > social media > joke sites) •  FuncKons of such jokes are manifold, but most oTen (judging by the context) they funcKon as illustraKon, bringing analogies to the topic under discussion •  In CMC, jokes are not seen so much as a disrupKon. It is easier to overlook a joke that diverges from the main topic •  Zajdman’s levels of integraKon of the canned joke into the text work in CMC as well. •  AddiKonally, in communicaKng with strangers (anonymous forum) full text of joke is cited and the semanKc connecKon to the context is weak or pointed out in detail; communicaKng in close groups jokes are framed as citaKons or fragments and more closely related to the topic of discussion. •  In anonymous forums, news portals and elsewhere, the illustraKve quality of a joke is oTen spelled out; there is an explanaKon to the joke. •  Old jokes can provide joy of recogniKon (instead of discovery), and funcKon as an enhancer of group cohesion.

Failed humour in conversaKonal joking •  Speaker’s intent: to elicit a feeling that is usually referred to as amusement (Ruch 2009), mirth (MarKn 2014) or nonseriousness (Chafe 2009)

•  Audience’s recepKon:

amused (laughter, supporKve comments)

•  Failed humour is thus humour that was intended to amuse but didn’t succeed in doing so (cf Marsh 2016: not all humour is intended to amuse) •  Or, alternaKvely (Bell 2015: 4): Failed humour is any uYernace that is intended to amuse, but that, due to interlocutor, environmental, or other factors, is not negoKated “perfectly” •  Failing (or succeeding) on different levels (Hay 2001): –  RecogniKon –  Understanding –  AppreciaKon

ReacKons to humour and jokes: offline •  Bell (2015) •  Humour has an intent to amuse •  Success or failure of humour depends on:

LocuKonary factors LinguisKc rules (phonology, semanKcs etc) Ambiguity (lexical, syntacKc) PragmaKc force of the uYerance Message form (register, code switching etc) Humorous frame (keying) Joke incongruity Joke appreciaKon Joke metamessages (social funcKons – influencing others; discourse funcKons – change of topic, etc) •  Humour support •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  • 

Bell (2009): reacKons to offline failed humour

Bell (2009): ReacKons conKnued

ReacKons to failed humour and jokes: online forums, anonymous versus sign-in (Laineste 2015) Perekool (PK) Planet (PL) sum

posiKve / supporKve

neutral / ignoring

negaKve / aggressive

•  Failed humour can be idenKfied by the reacKon of one or several forum parKcipants; the context allows for marking down the posiKve / neutral / negaKve outcome of the interacKon; •  Neutral reacKon / ignoring was not the most common outcome; instead, aggression was more frequent. But only among anonymous conversaKon parKcipants (cf Bell’s 2009 results concerning failed humour offline); •  The possible range of reacKons to failed humour in online contexts depends on the anonymity of the environment (cf Bell’s 2013 findings that aggression is more frequent with friends and family, whereas with strangers reacKons tend to be more neutral/posKve); •  In-depth qualitaKve study is needed which would include interviews with the forum parKcipants; •  Community rules are being negoKated in both the anonymous forum as well as the community-based one.

Conclusions •  Internet is a busy medium of human interacKon, including humorous interacKon •  Form: change in medium brings about a change in content and form of humour, specific to the medium •  Context: equally “thick” – e.g. moKcons are used to express emoKon, strengthen the content of a message or to convey humor (Derks, Bos, & von Grumbkow, 2008). •  FuncKons: largely the same as offline - they illustrate, are used as gloss, etc •  Failed humour is frequent online, but oTen goes unnoKced. Anonymous environments bring about more negaKve reacKons, which is the opposite to offline contexts where inKmate relaKonships are a contribuKng factor to more aggressive reacKons to failed humour. This can be due to the asynchronous nature of CMC •  More research on online humour is needed

Thank you!