Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T19:39:15.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Irony, Exaggeration, and Hyperbole: No Embargo on the Cargo!

from Part V - Irony, Affect, and Related Figures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2023

By
John Barnden
Edited by
Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr  and
Herbert L. Colston
Herbert L. Colston
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
Get access

Summary

Hyperbole is a trope with close relations to irony. People use hyperbole to overly exaggerate the reality of some situation, which implicitly communicates their attitudes toward that topic or event. Barnden specifically argues that hyperbole is another example of “irony-as-affect-expression” in which a hyperbolic statement, such as “Peter has millions of pets,” is not an exaggeration about the number of pets Peter owns, but exaggerates the discrepancy between what some person believes about Peter’s pets and the number of pets Peter really owns. In this manner, hyperbole increases the intensity of “the affect cargo” (e.g., the speaker’s affective purpose in saying “Peter has millions of pets”) beyond that of the cargo (e.g., the actual number of Peter’s pets), which could have been expressed by a nonexaggerating utterance (e.g., “Peter has many pets”). Barnden considers several types of “affect types in ironic cargo,” including contempt, bitterness, criticism, teasing, as well as annoyance, disappointment, regret, relief, and gladness. More generally, irony, including hyperbole, offers far more potential for expressing complex affective states than does nonirony.

Keywords

affect-cargodiscrepancyexpectation violationexaggerationhyperboleirony-as-affect expressionverbal irony
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Irony and Thought , pp. 272 - 309
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Athanasiadou, A. (2017). Irony has a metonymic basis. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 201–216). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Attardo, S. (2000a). Irony markers and functions. Rask – Int. J. Language and Communication, 12(1), 3–20.Google Scholar
Attardo, S. (2000b). Irony as relevant inappropriateness. J. Pragmatics, 32(6), 793–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldick, C. (1990). Concise Oxford dictionary of literary terms. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (1995). Simulative reasoning, common-sense psychology and artificial intelligence. In Davies, M. & Stone, T. (Eds.), Mental simulation: Evaluations and applications (pp. 247–273). Blackwell.Google Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (2015). Open-ended elaborations in creative metaphor. In Besold, T. R., Schorlemmer, M., & Smaill, A. (Eds.), Computational creativity research: Towards creative machines (pp. 217–242). Springer.Google Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (2016). Mixed metaphor: Its depth, its breadth, and a pretence-based approach. In Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (Ed.), Mixing metaphor (pp. 75–111). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (2017). Irony, pretence and fictively-elaborating hyperbole. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 145–177). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (2020a). Uniting irony, metaphor and hyperbole in a pretence-based, affect-centred framework. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 15–65). De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnden, J. A. (2020b). The meta-dynamic nature of consciousness. Entropy, 22(12), 1433. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22121433CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barnden, J. A. (2022) Pre-reflective self-consciousness: A meta-causal approach. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 13(2), 397–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-021-00603-zGoogle Scholar
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M. (2010). “Mummy, I love you like a thousand ladybirds”: Reflections on the emergence of hyperbolic effects and the truth of hyperboles. In Burkhardt, A. & Nerlich, B. (Eds.), Tropical truth(s): The epistemology of metaphor and other tropes (pp. 383–427). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Burgers, C., & Steen, G. J. (2017). Introducing a three-dimensional model of verbal irony: Irony in language, in thought, and in communication. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 87–108). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camp, E. (2012). Sarcasm, pretence and the semantics/pragmatics distinction. Noûs, 46(4), 587–634.Google Scholar
Carston, R., & Wearing, C. (2015). Hyperbolic language and its relation to metaphor and irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 79, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Gerrig, R. J. (2007). On the pretense theory of irony. In Gibbs, R. W., Jr. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language and thought: A cognitive science reader (pp. 25–33). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reprinted from J. Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 121–126 (1984).Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. (2015). Interpreting figurative meaning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. (2017). Irony performance and perception: What underlies verbal, situational and other ironies? In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 19–41). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. (2019). How language makes meaning: Embodiment and conjoined antonymy. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. (2020). Eye-rolling, irony and embodiment. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 211–235). De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colston, H. L., & Carreno, A. (2020). Sources of pragmatic effects in irony and hyperbole. In Baicchi, A. (Ed.), Figurative meaning construction in thought and language (pp. 187–208). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Colston, H. L., & Keller, S. B. (1998). You’ll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. J. Psycholinguistic Research, 27(4), 499–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, G. (2006). Why irony is pretence. In Nichols, S. (Ed.), The architecture of the imagination (pp. 111–133). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Currie, G. (2010). Echo et feintise: quelle est la difference et qui a raison? Philosophiques, 35(1), 12–23.Google Scholar
Davies, M., & Stone, T. (Eds.). (1995). Mental simulation: Evaluations and applications. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dynel, M. (2018). Deconstructing the myth of positively evaluative irony. In Jobert, M. & Sorlin, S. (Eds.), The pragmatics of irony and banter (pp. 41–57). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fogelin, R. J. (2011). Figuratively speaking (rev. ed.). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2007). Irony in talks among friends. In Gibbs, R. W., Jr. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language and thought: A cognitive science reader (pp. 339–360). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reprinted from Metaphor and Symbol, 15, 5–27 (2000).Google Scholar
Jing-Schmidt, Z. (2008). Negativity bias in language: A cognitive-affective model of emotive intensifiers. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(3), 417–443.Google Scholar
Kao, J. T., Wu, J. Y., Bergen, L., & Goodman, N. D. (2014). Nonliteral understanding of number words. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(33), 12002–12007. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1407479111Google Scholar
Kreuz, R. J., & Johnson, A. A. (2020). In Barnden, J. A. & Gargett, A. (Eds.), Producing figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspectives (pp. 263–295). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kreuz, R. J., & Roberts, R. M. (1995). Two cues for verbal irony: Hyperbole and the ironic tone of voice. Metaphor & Symbol, 10(1), 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumon-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S., & Brown, M. (2007). How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of irony. In Gibbs, R. W., Jr. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language and thought: A cognitive science reader (pp. 57–95). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Reprinted from J. Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 3–21 (1995).Google Scholar
Matlin, M. W., Stang, D. J., Gawron, V. J., Freedman, A., & Derby, P. L. (1979). Evaluative meaning as a determinant of spew position. J. General Psychology, 100, 3–11.Google Scholar
McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2004). “There’s millions of them”: Hyperbole in everyday conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(2), 149–184.Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2017). Irony and sarcasm in follow-ups of metaphorical slogans. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 127–141). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A., & Wong, S. T. D. (2020). England is an appendix; corrupt officials are like hairs on a nation’s arm: Sarcasm, irony and self-irony in figurative political discourse. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 162–182). De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peña, M. S., & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J. (2017). Construing and constructing hyperbole. In Athanasiadou, A. (Ed.), Studies in figurative thought and language (pp. 42–73). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Popa-Wyatt, M. (2014). Pretence and echo: Towards an integrated account of verbal irony International Review of Pragmatics, 6(1), 127–168.Google Scholar
Popa-Wyatt, M. (2020a). Hyperbolic figures. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 91–106). De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popa-Wyatt, M. (2020b). Mind the gap: Expressing affect with hyperbole and hyperbolic figures. In Barnden, J. A. & Gargett, A. (Eds.), Producing figurative expression: Theoretical, experimental and practical perspectives (pp. 449–467). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Récanati, F. (2007). Indexicality, context and pretence: A speech-act theoretic account. In Burton-Roberts, N. (Ed.), Advances in pragmatics (pp. 213–229). Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2014). Mapping concepts. Understanding figurative thought from a cognitive-linguistic perspective. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 27(1), 187–207.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2017). Cognitive modeling and irony. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 179–200). John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. J., & Lozano-Palacio, I. (2021). On verbal and situational irony. In Soares da Silva, A. (Ed.), Figurative language: Intersubjectivity and usage (pp. 213–240). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. (1984). Verbal irony: Pretense or echoic mention? J. Experimental Psychology: General, 113(1), 130–136.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1981). Irony and the use-mention distinction. In Cole, P. (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 295–318). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tabacaru, S. (2020). Faces of sarcasm: Exploring raised eyebrows with sarcasm in French political debates. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 236–277). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Walton, K. L. (1990). Mimesis as make-believe: On the foundations of the representational arts. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Watling, G. (2020). Denying the salient contrast: Speaker’s attitude in hyperbole. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. (Eds.), The diversity of irony (pp. 107–130). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Willison, R. (2017). In defense of an ecumenical approach to irony. In Athanasiadou, A. & Colston, H. L. (Eds.), Irony in language use and communication (pp. 61–83). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. (2006). The pragmatics of verbal irony: Echo or pretence? Lingua, 116, 1722–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. (2013). Irony comprehension: A developmental perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 40–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.016Google Scholar
Wilson, D. (2017). Irony, hyperbole, jokes and banter. In Blochowlak, J., Grisot, C., Durrleman, S., & Laenzlinger, C. (Eds.), Formal models in the study of language (pp. 201–219). Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2012). Explaining irony. In Wilson, D. & Sperber, D. (Eds.), Meaning and relevance (pp. 123–145). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×