Linguistic Personality of Homo Ridens

Keywords: anthropocentrism, communicative behavior, discourse, homo ridens, linguistic personality.

Abstract

The article is part of a more detailed study of a linguistic laughing personality (homo ridens) in British literature within the framework of the theory of anthropocentrism. The results of the scientific literature analysis aimed at the study of the concept of “linguistic personality” and “laughing linguistic personality”, in particular, are presented. From a wide range of examples starting from Chaucer up to the present we have selected the brightest characters in the English literature represented by W. Shakespeare and B. Shaw to highlight the main characteristics of the communicative style of homo ridens behavior. The analysis of the development of the personality is provided and the ways of achieving humorous effect in the process of communication in humorous discourse are given. The main factors of influence (psychological, social, cultural, etc.) on the formation of a laughing communicative personality are highlighted. The perception, understanding and interpretation of the world are covered within humorous discourse. Particular attention is paid to the intentions of comedians to use high-quality intellectual humor not only to create a humorous effect, but also for a philosophical explanation of the basic realities and laws of being. Shakespearean fools characterized as highly intellectual communicative people tend to influence their humor on the ruler and, thus, to the development of consciousness of the nation as a whole. Both linguistic and extra-linguistic means of expressing opinion by a laughing personality are analyzed. The analysis of the ‘quality’ of English humor has been carried out in order to show the influence of English fools as mimetic personalities on the British society in general. The ability of the communicative personality of homo ridens within the norms adopted by society to clearly reflect the realities of life of their era in a humorous form is characterized that further allows us to analyze the identity of the British comedian in diachrony.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Antonov, O.V. (2013). Poniattia komunikatyvnoho styliu v suchasnykh prahmalinhvistychnykh doslidzhenniakh [The concept of communicative style in modern prahmalinhvistic researches]. Movni i kontseptualni kartyny svitu – Language and conceptual world view, 43(1), 38–44 [in Ukrainian].
Arutyunova, N.D. (1981). Faktor adressata [Addressee Factor]. Izvestiya akademii nauk SSSR – Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 40(4), 367–386 [in Russian].
Attardo, S. (2017). Humor in Language. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.342
Bell, R. (1980). Sotsiolingvistika [Sociolinguistics]. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnie otnoshenia [in Russian].
Dmytruk, O. (2018). The Strategy of Structuring Information According to its Relevance in Mind Manipulation. Advanced Education, 9, 194–200. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.124468
Gaidenko, I.O. (2015) Language and Thought. Advanced Education, 3, 33–38. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.43887
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. California: University of California Press.
Jensen, T.W. (2018). Humour as Interactional Affordances: an Ecological Perspective on Humor in Social interaction. Psychology of Language and Communication, 22(1), 238–259. https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2018-0010
Karasik, V.I., & Dmitrieva, O.A. (2005). Lingvo-kulturnuy tipazh: k opredeleniyu poniatia [Linguistic-cultural type: to the definition of the concept]. Axiological linguistics: lingvo-cultural types – Aksiologichnaya lingvistyka: lingvokulturnye tipazhi, (pp. 5–23). Volgograd: Paradigma [in Russian].
Karasik, V.I., & Yarmahova, E.A. (2006). Lingvoculturniy tipazh “angliyskiy chudak” [Linguistic-cultural type of “English eccentric”]. Moscow: Gnozis [in Russian].
Lopez, B.G., & Vaid, J. (2017). Psycholinguistic approaches to humor. In S. Attardo (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, (pp. 267–281). Tailor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315731162-19
Naumov, V.V. (2006). Ligvisticheskaya identifikatsia lichnosty [Linguistic identification of personality] Moscow: KomKniga [in Russian].
Plotnikova, S.N. (2006). Chelovek i personazh: phenomenologicheskiy podhod k yestestvennoy i khudozhestvennoy kommunikatsii [Man and character: the phenomenological approach to natural and artistic communication]. Chelovek v kommunikatsii: kontsept, zhanr, diskurs – Man in communication: concept, genre, discourse, (pp. 89–104). Volgograd: Paradigma [in Russian].
Pocheptsov, O.G. (1989). Komunikatuvnuy status yak parametr movleniyevoi vzaemodiy [Communicative status as a parameter of speech interaction]. Lingvistyka – Linguistics, 4, 40–45 [in Ukrainian].
Poluzhyn, M.M. (1998). Suchasni paradygmy lingvistychnyh doslidzhen [Contemporary paradigms of linguistic research]. Problems of Romano-Germanic Philology, (pp. 3–15). Uzhgorod: Patent [in Ukrainian].
Selivanova, О.О. (2002). Osnovy lingvistychnoi teorii tekstu i komunikatsii [Fundamentals of linguistic theory of text and communication]. Kyiv: TSUL “Phitosociocenter” [in Ukrainian].
Serebrennikov, B.A., Kubryakova, E.S., Postovalova, V.I., Telia, V.N., & Ufimtseva, A.A. (1988). Rol chelovecheskogo factora v yazyke [The role of the human factor in the language]. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
Sorokin, Y.A., Tarasov, E.F., & Shahnarovich, A.M. (1979). Teoreticheskie i prikladnye problemy rechevogo obschenia [Theoretical and applied problems of speech communication]. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
Sternin, I.A. (1989). O ponjatii kommunikativnogo povedenija [The concept of communicative behavior]. Kommunikativ-funktionale Sprach betrachtung – Communicative-functional language viewing, (pp. 279–282) [in Russian].
Tarasova, E.V. (2000). Synergetychni tendentsii v suchasniy lingvistytsi [Synergetic tendencies in modern linguistics]. Bulletin of Kharkiv national university – Visnyk Kharkivskogo natsionalnogo universytetu, 500, 3–9 [in Ukrainian].
Tsos, Y.A. (2014). Komunikatyvni movlennievi vlastuvosti u stulioviy organizatcii osobystosti [Communicative speech properties in stylistic personality organization]. Psyholingvistyka – Psycholinguistics, 16, 164–174 [in Ukrainian].
Sheygal, E.I., & Mironenko, M.V. (2005). Shut i shutnik: professia ili hobbi? [Fool and joker: a profession or a hobby?]. Zhanry rechi – Genres of Speech, 4, 385–399 [in Russian].
Skryl, O.I., & Parfenova, O.V. (2018). To the Question of the Linguistic Personality and Its Components. In W. Klaczewski & H. Stefanek (Eds.), Development of philological sciences in countries of the European Union taking into account the challenges of XXI century, (pp. 362–381). Lublin: Izdevnieciba “Baltija Publishing”.
Shakespeare, W. (n.d.). As You Like It. Act 5, Scene 1. Retrieved from http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/asu_5_1.html
Shakespeare, W. (n.d.). Twelfth Night. Act 3, Scene 1. Retrieved from http://shakespeare.mit.edu/twelfth_night/twelfth_night.3.1.html
Shaw, B. (1972). Pygmalion. Moscow: Higher School Publishing House [in Russian].

Abstract views: 374
PDF Downloads: 187
Published
2019-04-18
How to Cite
Skryl, O., & Sharun, Y. (2019). Linguistic Personality of Homo Ridens. PSYCHOLINGUISTICS, 25(2), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2019-25-2-273-289