An Analysis of Irony Triggers Humorous Effect in Obama"s speech in 2016 WHCD

Abstract：Irony plays a significant role in dramas， movies， TV serials and even in the modern interpersonal communications. By analyzing the speech Obama gave in 2016 WHCD under the frame work of echoic mention theory proposed by Sperber and Wilson （1981）， this study paper attempts to divide those humorous utterances into two categorizes： irony via self-mockery and irony via taunting on others. Next， the paper will be devoted to analyze cognitive process of irony interpretation in terms of conceptual blending theory. In this paper， both qualitative and quantitative method will be adopted.

Key words：irony； echoic mention； humorous effect； conceptual blending theory

1. Introduction

The WHCA's annual dinner， which is also the White House Correspondents Association Dinner begun in 1920， has become a Washington， D.C. tradition and is usually attended by the President and Vice President. This speech we are talking about in the paper is at Obamas eighth and final White House Correspondents Assocation dinner.

Kreuz and Roberts （1993） assert there are four types of irony： Socratic irony， dramatic irony， irony of fate and verbal irony. Muecke （1970） distinguishes two types of irony： verbal irony and situational irony. This paper will focus on the analysis of verbal irony.

2. Theoretical Framework of Echoic Mention Theory

Echoic mention theory is utilized for the recognition of verbal irony. As Sperber and Wilson （2001） conclude， based on the contextual knowledge and other background assumptions， the recognition of verbal irony is the process of“double recognition”. When there is an identifiable， specific originator， he will be the victim of verbal irony. Accordingly， when the speaker echoed nobody but himself， the irony will be self-directed.

3. Analysis And Discussion

3.1 Data collection

The 2016 WHCD speech Obama offered is full of laugh stocks， and from observing the reaction given by the audience we know the speech Obama held is successful of being humorous. The topic connected mostly with politics which tends to be nationally serious. However， the whole speech is about making fun of others and even himself. Here， I would like to present a diagram of the distribution of irony：

3.2 Recognition of Ironical Speech within Echoic Mention Theory

It should be pointed out that the concept of echo is quite broad， Sperber and Wilson （1981） propose several types of echo in their Use and the Use-Mention Distinction： a） Direct and immediate echoes； b） Echoes （real or imaginary） of attributed thoughts； c） Echoes of norms or standard expectations. In Obamas 2016 WHCD， most ironical utterance echoed the incidence happened before. For example， this one was taken by Obama at 00：01：17 of the video： “I do apologize and I was a little late tonight， I was running on CPT， with sense for jokes that white people should not make.” after this， the assembly hall burst into laughing immediately. The CPT is the key point for hearers to get the ironical sense， which refers to its full name of "Colored People 's Time”， with the racial prejudice of criticizing black people always being late. Why did Obama use this term？ Since at the beginning of April， the mayor of New York City， Bill de Blasio used the term CPT as an explanation for being late when he participated in an activity， but the strong racist joke caused dissatisfaction around the country. Then later， Clinton was on the stage to give him a dozen circle field， said that what he said is Cautious Politician Time. No surprising， Hillary and Bill Blasio was rubbished by the media at the end. In this sense， Obama was deliberately mentioned that again to make fun of those two politicians and at the same time reminded people of the fact that he is actually the black people who can use the racist term. Within it， Obama criticized Blasio for making use of inappropriate term in public speech， also took the advantage of poking fun of his black identity. Moreover， this utterance genuinely shows the opinion of the American president about the racist problem， that is， racial discrimination phenomenon is always there， still a big problem， can easily touch the sensitive nerve of people at any time in united states.

This speech was closely connected with the current political situation， and the speakers attitude toward it should be critical. Therefore， in the following part， Conceptual Blending Theory would be utilized to elaborate how the ironical speech producing humorous effect in hearers mind.

4. Theoretical Framework of Conceptual Blending Theory

Conceptual blending theory is a backstage cognition system including partitioning， mapping， structure projection and dynamic mental simulation. The core of conceptual blending theory is conceptual blending network. It consists of two or more input spaces with relevant elements， a generic space with the shared structure of the input spaces， and a blended space with the projected structure of the input spaces and its own emergent structure （Coulson1997：192）.

5. Analysis of Irony Triggers Humorous Effect Within Conceptual Blending Theory

At the 00：00：50 of the speech video， Obama uttered： “ it is my honor to be here at my last， and perhaps THE last WHCD. You all look great， the end of the republic has never looked better.” Then followed with the laugh from the audience.

In this diagram， two input spaces are set up separately. In Input 1 is the scenario thatObamas WHCD of today is the last one and in Input 2 is the scenario that the republics WHCD of today is the last one. The two input spaces have the same organizing frame： Agent-Patient. Governed by the common structure in the generic space， elements from the two input spaces are selectively chosen and projected into the blend：a and a are fused for they are actually the same thing， Obamas WHCD is equal to the countrys WHCD of that day， b and b are fused into a single element b'（the last） of the same meaning； though the clash between c and c， both of the two elements are projected into the blended space and will work separately as independent entities. Till now， the first step of composition is completed. Then in the next step of completion， background knowledge of Obama and republic are activated. The audience are all aware that this is the last time for Obama to host the WHCD as American president， but it wont be the last WHCD ever in American history. Although people usually joke about the end of the country if Trump was elected as American president， they are clear about the fact that the end of the United States will not come this soon. Of course there are still other candidates， so the end of the United States is just a joke. Last， it is elaboration. The emergent structure appears that the 2016 WHCD would be the last one for Obama as being the American president， but never will be the last one in history.

6. Conclusion

Through the analysis of the 2016 WHCD speech offered by Obama， the echoic mention theory was proved to be plausible in the aspect of irony recognition. And the conceptual blending theory offered the frame for us to be able to go further into the mind processing. The whole speech Obama giving was an ironical one which successfully produced huge humorous effect. By using this strategy he actually criticized the current situation of politics， at the same time revealed the difficulties as being a black American president in leading the country， and make people understand him more readily and easily.

【Reference】

[1] Clark， H. H. & Gerrig， R. J. （1984）. On the pretense of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology： General， 113， 121-126.

[2] Coulson. 1997. Semantic leaps： the role of frame - shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction[D]. Ph. D. Dissertation. San Diego： University of California.

[3] Fauconnier. （1985）. Mental Spaces： Aspects of meaning construction in natural language[M]. Massachusetts： The MIT Press.

[4] Fauconnier. （2003）. Conceptual integration[J]. Journal of Foreign Language（2）： 2-7.

[5] Grice， H. P. （1975）. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan （Eds.）， Speech acts （Vol. 9， pp. 113-127）. New York： Academic.

[6] Kaufer， D. （1981）. Understanding ironic communication. Journal of Pragmatics， 5， 495-510.

[7] Sperber & Wilson. （1981）. Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction[J]. Radical Pragmatics， 295-318.

[8] Sperber & Wilson. （1986）. Relevance：Communication and Cognition[M]. Oxford：Blackwell.

[9] Wilson&Sperber. （1992）. On verbal irony[J]. Lingua 87（l）：53-76.

【作者簡(jiǎn)介】

周思雅，女，漢族，湖北黃石人，碩士研究生學(xué)歷，單位：武漢理工大學(xué)，主要研究方向：語(yǔ)言學(xué)。