Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Applied Linguistics Review

Editor-in-Chief: Wei, Li

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.286

Online
ISSN
1868-6311
See all formats and pricing
More options …

The relationship between English proficiency and humour appreciation among English L1 users and Chinese L2 users of English

Xuemei Chen
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Applied Linguistics and Communication, Birkbeck College, University of London, 26 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DT, UK
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jean-Marc Dewaele
  • Department of Applied Linguistics and Communication, Birkbeck College, University of London, 26 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DT, UK
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-04-13 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2018-0002

Abstract

Humour appreciation involves split second detection and resolution of cultural and pragmatic incongruities. Second language (L2) users may need more time and effort to understand and appreciate L2 humour. Previous studies have mostly used decontextualized verbal jokes and reported a linear relationship between L2 proficiency and humour appreciation. The present study strives for more ecological validity by using audiovisual-based, multimodal humorous stimuli. A total of 272 Chinese L2 users of English and 94 English L1 users rated the funniness and the ease of understanding of two short video extracts and then completed an English vocabulary size test, LexTALE. The findings suggest that L2 users need to reach a certain threshold in L2 linguistic, pragmatic and sociocultural knowledge before a positive linear relationship emerges between proficiency and appreciation of multimodal humorous stimuli. Also, advanced L2 users demonstrated similarities with English L1 users in humour processing.

Keywords: L2 humour appreciation; L2 vocabulary size; ease of understanding; Chinese L2 users of English; English L1 users

References

  • Allen, Steve. 1990. Steve Allen on the Bible, religion and morality. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Press.Google Scholar

  • Attardo, Salvatore & Victor Raskin. 1991. Script theory revis (it) ed: Joke similarity and joke representation model. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research 4(3-4). 293–348.Google Scholar

  • Ayçiçeği-Dinn, Ayşe, Simage Şişman-Bal & Catherine Caldwell-Harris. 2017. Are jokes funnier in one’s native language? Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 31(1). 5–37.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy & Salvatore Attardo. 2010. Failed humor: Issues in non-native speakers’ appreciation and understanding of humor. Intercultural Pragmatics 7(3). 423–447.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy & Anne Pomerantz. 2014. Reconsidering language teaching through a focus on humor. EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages 1(1). 31–47.Google Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy, Stephen Skalicky & Tom Salsbury. 2014. Multicompetence in L2 language play: A longitudinal case study. Language Learning 64(1). 72–102.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy D. 2005. Exploring L2 language play as an aid to SLL: A case study of humour in NS–NNS interaction. Applied Linguistics 26(2). 192–218.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy D. 2007. Humor comprehension: Lessons learned from cross-cultural communication. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research 20(4). 367–387.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy D. 2009. Responses to failed humor. Journal of Pragmatics 41(9). 1825–1836.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Bell, Nancy D. 2011. Humor scholarship and TESOL: Applying findings and establishing a research agenda. TESOL Quarterly 45(1). 134–159.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Caldwell-Harris, Catherine L & Ayşe Ayçiçeği-Dinn. 2009. Emotion and lying in a non-native language. International Journal of Psychophysiology 71(3). 193–204.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Carrell, Amy. 1997. Joke competence and humor competence. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research 10(2). 173–186.Google Scholar

  • Chen, Xuemei. (in progress). Has your sense of humour changed? The appreciation of humour across languages and cultures among Chinese L2 users of English. Birkbeck, University of London. Unpublished PhD dissertationGoogle Scholar

  • Chiaro, Delia. 2009. Cultural divide or unifying factor? Humorous talk in the interaction of bilingual, cross-cultural couples. In Neal R Norrick & Delia Chiaro (eds.), Humor in interaction, 211–231. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Cook, Vivian J. 2016. Premises of multi-competence. In Vivian J Cook & Li Wei (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multi-competence, 1–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Coulson, Seana. 2015. Frame-shifting and frame semantics: Joke comprehension on the space structuring model. In Geert Brone, Kurt Feyserts & Tony Veale (eds.), Cognitive linguistics and humor research. Applications of cognitive linguistics, 167–190. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.Google Scholar

  • Crisell, Andrew. 2002. An introductory history of British broadcasting, 2nd edn. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Cunningham, William A & Peter Derks. 2005. Humor appreciation and latency of comprehension. Humor, International Journal of Humor Research 18(4). 389–403.Google Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2013. Emotions in multiple languages, 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2016. Thirty shades of offensiveness: L1 and LX English users’ understanding, perception and self-reported use of negative emotion-laden words. Journal of Pragmatics 94. 112–127.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2018. Why the dichotomy ‘L1 versus LX user’ is better than ‘versus non-native speaker’. Applied Linguistics 39(2). 236–240.Google Scholar

  • Dewaele, Jean-Marc & Lora Salomidou. 2017. Loving a partner in a Foreign Language. Journal of Pragmatics 108. 116–130.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Erdodi, Laszlo & Renee Lajiness-O’Neill. 2012. Humor perception in bilinguals: Is language more than a code? Humor 25(4). 459–468.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Fine, Gary Alan. 1977. Humour in situ: The role of humour in small group culture. In Antony J Chapman & Hugh C Foot (ed.), It’s a funny thing, humour, 315–318. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

  • Godkewitsch, Michael. 1972. The relationship between arousal potential and funniness of jokes. In Jeffrey H Goldstein & Paul E McGhee (ed.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues, 143–158. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In H. Paul Grice ed., Studies in the way of words, 22–40. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Keuleers, Emmanuel, Michaël Stevens, Pawel Mandera & Marc Brysbaert. 2015. Word knowledge in the crowd: Measuring vocabulary size and word prevalence in a massive online experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 68(8). 1665–1692.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Laineste, Liisi. 2014. National and ethnic differences. In Salvatore Attardo (ed.), Encyclopedia of humor studies, 541–542. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

  • Lemhöfer, Kristin & Mirjam Broersma. 2012. Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods 44(2). 325–343.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Lorette, Pernelle & Jean-Marc Dewaele. 2015. Emotion recognition ability in English among L1 and LX users of English. International Journal of Language and Culture 2(1). 62–86.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Martin, Rod A. 2010. The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Burlington: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • McCarthy, Philip M & Scott Jarvis. 2010. MTLD, vocd-D, and HD-D: A validation study of sophisticated approaches to lexical diversity assessment. Behavior Research Methods 42(2). 381–392.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • McGraw, A. Peter & Caleb Warren. 2010. Benign violations: Making immoral behavior funny. Psychological Science 21(8). 1141–1149.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Pavlenko, Aneta. 1999. New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2(3). 209–230.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pavlenko, Aneta. 2012. Affective processing in bilingual speakers: Disembodied cognition? International Journal of Psychology 47(6). 405–428.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pomerantz, Anne & Nancy D Bell. 2007. Learning to play, playing to learn: FL learners as multicompetent language users. Applied Linguistics 28(4). 556–578.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pomerantz, Anne & Nancy D Bell. 2011. Humor as safe house in the foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal 95(s1). 148–161.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Raskin, Victor. 2008. Theory of humor and practice of humor research: Editor’s notes and thoughts. In Victor Raskin (ed.), The primer of humor research, 1–16. New York: Mouton de.Google Scholar

  • Révész, Andrea & Tineke Brunfaut. 2013. Text characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35(1). 31–65.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rose, Kenneth R. 2001. Compliments and compliment responses in film: Implications for pragmatics research and language teaching. International Review of Applied Linguistics 39(4). 309–326.Google Scholar

  • Ruiz-Madrid, Ma Noelia & Inmaculada Fortanet-Gómez. 2015. A multimodal discourse analysis approach to humour in conference presentations: The case of autobiographic references. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 173(2015). 246–251.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schmuckler, Mark A. 2001. What is ecological validity? A dimensional analysis. Infancy 2(4). 419–436.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Shively, Rachel L. 2013. Learning to be funny in Spanish during study abroad: L2 humor development. The Modern Language Journal 97(4). 930–946.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vaid, Jyotsna. 2000. New approaches to conceptual representations in bilingual memory: The case for studying humor interpretation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(1). 28–30.Google Scholar

  • Vaid, Jyotsna. 2006. Joking across languages: Perspectives on humor, emotion, and bilingualism. In Aneta Pavlenko (ed.), Bilingual minds: Emotional experience, expression, and representation, 152–182. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Vaid, Jyotsna, Belem G López & Francisco E Martínez. 2015. Linking the figurative to the creative: Bilingual’s comprehension of metaphors, jokes, and remote associates. In Roberto R Heredia & Anna B Cieślicka (eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing, 53–86. New York: Cambridge Press.Google Scholar

  • Veale, Tony. 2004. Incongruity in humor: Root cause or epiphenomenon? Humor-International Journal of Humor Research 17(4). 419–428.Google Scholar

  • Veale, Tony. 2015. The humour of exceptional cases: Jokes as compressed thought experiments. In Geert Brone, Kurt Feyserts & Tony Veale (eds.), Cognitive linguistics and humor research. Applications of cognitive linguistics, 69–90. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-04-13


This article is funded by the China Scholarship Council (10.13039/481100004543), Grant Number: 201406290174.


Citation Information: Applied Linguistics Review, ISSN (Online) 1868-6311, ISSN (Print) 1868-6303, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2018-0002.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in