Fictive Interaction Blended Networks in the Daily Show
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA FACULTAD DE FILOLOGÍA DEPARTAMENTO DE FILOLOGÍA INGLESA TESIS DOCTORAL FICTIVE INTERACTION BLENDED NETWORKS IN THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART CONCEPTUALIZING POLITICAL HUMOR DISCOURSE NOT ONLY FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES PAULA FREITAS REBELO DA FONSECA DIRECTORA: DRA. PILAR ALONSO RODRÍGUEZ 2016 Tesis doctoral presentada por Dña. Paula Freitas Rebelo Da Fonseca bajo la dirección de la Prof. Dra. Pilar Alonso Rodríguez VºBº Prof. Dra. Pilar Alonso Rodríguez Salamanca 2016 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to begin with a famous African proverb adapted to fit this context: it takes a village to write a thesis. When I started on this educational journey four years ago, I knew it would not be easy, and that sweat, tears, fear and frustrations would be a constant. I was very fortunate to have received help, support and sound advice from so many people along the way. I would like to express my humble gratitude to the village that helped me reach my destination and complete this doctoral thesis. I apologize if I forget to mention anyone’s name, but there are so many people and so little space. First and foremost, I would like to begin by expressing my gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Pilar Alonso. Your academic excellence and scientific rigor were the main reasons why I chose you. Thank you for being my mentor and for encouraging my research and for allowing me to grow as a researcher. Your attentiveness, sound advice, honesty, encouraging words and patience helped me throughout this journey. I could not have chosen a better person. ¡Muchísimas Gracias! A special thanks to Esther Pascual, the “mother” of fictive interaction, you not only provided me with sound feedback on my work, but also gave me the opportunity to meet amazing people who are also studying your conceptual phenomenon. I am truly grateful to you and your project for funding my trip to the USA so that I could present my work at the 2nd Fictive Interaction Workshop at Case Western University. This was the climax of my Phd journey, as I was able to get great feedback and advice from researchers I admire like yourself, Mark Turner, Todd Oakley, amongst others. v I would also like to thank all my colleagues, past and present, who have always supported me in one way or another: Filomena, Lurdes and Antonio, to only name a few, there are many more but my space here is limited. I especially want to thank Ana Margarida, an extraordinary researcher, colleague and friend that I have known for almost twenty years. Thank you for introducing Esther Pascual and her concept fictive interaction to me. I cannot express in words how indebted I am to you for all those times we met to exchange ideas. You are a big part of this work. And last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank all my family and friends for putting up with all my complaining and for encouraging me to continue with your uplifting words, especially, my cousins and best friends: Suzie and Isabel. To my parents, Lucílio and Maria Helena, I am truly blessed to have wonderful parents like you. Thank you for all your help with your granddaughters so that I could work on my thesis, and for all your love and support throughout the years. To Inês, Ana and Sofia, my beautiful daughters, you are the reason why mommy persisted and kept going. I want you to know that it pays to work hard and to never give up on your dreams. And finally, a special thanks to my husband and soulmate, Zé. You are the main reason this PhD thesis exists! Thank you for all those times you drove me to Salamanca, for helping me with my text, for lifting me up when I was down, for encouraging me to continue when I wanted to quit, in essence for being the best partner anyone could ask for. So as you can see, it did take: a village to complete this thesis! vi TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 OUTLINE OF THE THESIS ................................................................................................................... 6 2 HUMOR ....................................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 HUMOR THEORIES: A BRIEF REVIEW .......................................................................................... 11 2.2 VERBAL HUMOR: A LINGUISTIC PERSPECTIVE ........................................................................... 15 2.2.1 The Semantic Script Theory of Humor ............................................................................. 16 2.2.2 The General Theory of Verbal Humor .............................................................................. 20 2.2.3 Giora’s Cognitive Models of Jokes ....................................................................................... 26 2.2.3.1 The marked informativeness hypothesis ............................................................................................... 27 2.2.3.2 The optimal innovation hypothesis .................................................................................................... 31 2.2.4 Humor within the Cognitive Linguistic Theoretical Framework ......................... 33 3 FICTIVE INTERACTION .................................................................................................... 43 3.1 BRIEF OVERVIEW OF COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS .......................................................................... 44 3.1.1 Conceptualization of meaning ............................................................................................. 47 3.1.2 Framing Knowledge: Structuring encyclopedic knowledge ................................... 50 3.1.3 Conceptual Integration Theory ........................................................................................... 54 3.2 FICTIVITY .......................................................................................................................................... 60 3.3 FICTIVE INTERACTION .................................................................................................................... 62 vii 3.3.1 Linguistic and communicative forms of fictive interaction: discourse and grammar ......................................................................................................................................................... 66 3.3.2 The role of metonymy in fictive interaction ...................................................................... 71 3.3.3 Fictive Interaction in political argumentation ............................................................ 76 3.3.4 Fictive Interaction in humor ................................................................................................ 78 4 THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART ................................................................. 81 4.1 TELEVISED POLITICAL SATIRE: “HARD NEWS” VS “SOFT NEWS” ........................................... 81 4.2 THE AUDIENCE AS A PARTICIPANT IN TELEVISION MEDIA INTERACTION ............................. 86 4.3 THE DAILY SHOW WITH JON STEWART ...................................................................................... 89 5 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 99 5.1 MULTIMODALITY .......................................................................................................................... 100 5.2 THE DATA ...................................................................................................................................... 106 6 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 115 6.1 JON STEWART’S MONOLOGUE ABOUT THE 1ST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE: DEMOCALYPSE 2012 - OBAMA WHERE ART THOU? .......................................................................................................... 115 6.1.1 FI Network Example #1 - Episode 4: Dude he’s yelling at you ........................... 119 6.1.2 FI Network Example #2 - Episode 5: Roll you? ......................................................... 124 6.1.3 FI Network Example #3 - Episode 6: Liar Romney lie ............................................. 126 6.1.4 FI Network Examples #4 and #5 - Episode 8: Power shift ................................... 131 6.1.5 FI Network Example #6 - Episode 9: Osama Bin Laden ........................................ 135 6.1.6 FI Network Example #7 - Episode 10: Urgent emails .............................................. 139 viii 6.2 JON STEWART’S MONOLOGUE ABOUT THE 2ND PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE: DEMOCALYPSE 2012 - THE SECOND DEBATE: NOW INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT .................................................... 145 6.2.1 FI Network Example #1 - Episode 5: Romney was sharp but … ......................... 148 6.2.2 FI Network Examples #2 and #3 – Episode 6: Romney and the Blunt Amendment ................................................................................................................................................ 149 6.2.2.1 FI Network example #2 – JS and Romney ..................................................................................... 150 6.2.2.2 FI Network Example #3 – JS and university students .............................................................. 151 6.2.3 FI Network Example #4 –Episode 8: Romney’s ace in the hole ........................... 153 6.2.4 FI Network Example #5 – Episode 9: Semantic trap ..............................................