Creative multimodal and multilingual puns as and through joint actions in Korean media interviews
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.23261Keywords:
pun, multimodal, multilingual, joint action, KoreanAbstract
This study examines how participants in Korean media talk, specifically talk show interviews, interactively construct puns as and through joint actions. Going beyond puns as humorous wordplay, the study illustrates their interactional and pragmatic functions. A close examination of the sequential positions and interactional contexts of puns in 16 different interviews shows that they recurrently emerge when participants are placed, socially or interactionally, in delicate or difficult situations. Through puns, the participants not only recontextualise the local meaning of a particular target word, but also globally transform the focus and frame of the troublesome ongoing interaction, as well as managing their identities and roles in the interaction. The analysis shows that the participants creatively design puns based on Korean words as well as utilising English words, formulating multilingual puns. The study also demonstrates that puns are often accompanied, triggered or entirely performed by nonlinguistic devices (e.g. body movements, gestures, facial expressions). These multimodal resources play a key role in formulating creative puns, in understanding and responding to puns, and in diverting the trajectory of ongoing interaction.
References
Ahn, H. (2017). English as a discursive and social communication resource for contemporary South Koreans. In C. Jenks & J. Lee (Eds.), Korean Englishes in transnational contexts (pp. 157–179). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Attardo, S. (2017). Humor in language. Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.342
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional linguistics: Studying language in social interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Delabastita, D. (1996). Wordplay and translation: Introduction. The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication, 2(2), 127–139.
Du Bois, J. W. (2014). Towards a dialogic syntax. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(3), 359–410. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2014-0024
Duranti, A., & Goodwin, C. (1992). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 1–42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giorgadze, M. (2014). Linguistic features of pun, its typology and classification. European Scientific Journal, 10(10), 271–275.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(10), 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(99)00096-x
Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as social organization among black children. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jenks, C., & Lee, J. (2017). Korean Englishes in transnational contexts. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kim, K.-H. (2016). The host’s receipt work in Korean talk-show interactions managing norms through categorization work. Discourse and Cognition, 23(4), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.15718/discog.2016.23.4.1
Krauss, R. K., Chen, Y., & Gottesman, R. F. (2000). Lexical gestures and lexical access: A process model. In D. McNeil (Ed.), Language and gesture (pp. 261–283). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, H. (2019). Konglish? or multilingual practice? An investigation of subtitles in Korean TV shows. The Korean Language in America, 23(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.5325/korelangamer.23.1.0027
Lems, K. (2011). Pun work helps English learners get the joke. The Reading Teacher, 65(3), 197–202. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.01027
Mondada, L. (2011). Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequentialachievement in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 542–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.019
Otake, T., & Cutler, O. (2013). Lexical selection in action: Evidence from spontaneous punning. Language and Speech, 56(4), 555–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830913478933
Park, J. S-Y. (2009). Regimenting languages on Korean television: Subtitles and institutional authority. Text & Talk, 29(5), 547–570. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2009.029
Park, J. S-Y. (2017). Class, competence, and language ideology: Beyond Korean Englishes. In C. Jenks & J. Lee (Eds.), Korean Englishes in transnational contexts (pp. 53–72). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Partington, A. S. (2009). A linguistic account of wordplay: The lexical grammar of punning. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1794–1809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.025
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Redfern, W. (1985). Puns. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stivers, T. (2004) “No no no” and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction. Human Communication Research, 30(2), 260–293.
