When it comes to humour, performing humorous structures means not only producing amusement, but also implies the ability of perceiving the comical, ludicrous or absurd in human life. In this paper, I consider humour as a way in which people in the rural community express themselves freely, without boundaries or constraints. Therefore, the interest of the present article is to identify and analyse sensitive humorous topics in Romanian rural communities. In conducting the study, the following steps were taken: I videotaped people from the Upper Valley of the river Mureș (selected with sociolinguistic criteria such as gender, age, occupation), I transcribed the audio-video records and I divided the data into thematic categories: jokes, traditional shouts and funeral songs or dirges with humorous structures. Starting from these methodological steps, I attempt to perform a multimodal analysis, which consists of analysing both the text and the audio-video record. In the first part of my research, the analysis of the text focuses on specific structures of conventional humour performed in jokes, traditional shouts and dirges by the main theories of humour: superiority, release and incongruity theories of humour. In analysing the audio-video stimuli, I dwell upon identifying the degree of influence of the psycho-sociolinguistic parameters (gender, occupation and context) on the performance of humour, concentrating on markers of humour such as intonation and visual cues. After analysing the humorous sensitive topics in Romanian rural communities through a multimodal perspective, my conclusion is that speakers combine linguistic and non-linguistic elements in order to make a text humorous.
Attardo, S. & Raskin, V. (1991). ‘Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model’. Humour: International Journal of Humour Research, 4 (3/4), pp. 293–347.
Bauman, R. (1986). Story, Performance, and Event. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dobreanu D. & Dobreanu V. (1999). Subcetate Mureș- File de monografie, Cluj- Napoca: Editura Motiv.
Freud, S. (1905 ). Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious (Der Witz und seine Beziehung zum Unbewußten). James Strachey (tr.), New York: Penguin.
Gruner, Ch. R. (2000 ). The Game of Humour: A Comprehensive Theory of Why We Laugh. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers.
Hobbes, Th. (1651 ). Leviathan. New York: Penguin.
Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, L. (coord.) (2002). Interacţiunea Verbală în Limba Română Actuală. Corpus (selectiv). Schiţă de Tipologie. București: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.
Kant, I. (1790 ). Critique of Judgment. James Creed Meredith (tr.), Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Koestler, A. (1964). The Act of Creation. New York: Penguin Books.
Ladd, D. R. (1978). ‘Stylized intonation’. Language, 54, 517-540.
Lakoff, R. T. (1975). Language and Women’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.
Ludovici, A. (1932). The Secret of Laughter. London: Constable.
Martin, R., Puhlik-Doris, P, Larsen, G., Gray, J. & Weir K. (2003). ‘Individual differences in uses of humour and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the Humour Styles Questionnaire’. Journal of Research in Personality 37 (1), pp. 48–75.
Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humour. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ruiz Gurillo, L. (2012). La Lingüística del Humor en Español. Madrid: Arco/Libros S.L.
Schopenhauer, A. (1818/1844 ). The World as Will and Idea (Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung), tr. R. B. Haldane and J. Kemp, 6th ed., London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Suls, J. (1972). ‘A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: An information-processing analysis’, in Goldstein, J. & McGhee P., The Psychology of Humour, New York: Academic Press, pp. 81–99.
Veatch, T. C (1998) ‘A theory of humour’. Humour: International Journal of Humour Research 11 (2), pp. 161-215.
Wells, J. C. (2006). English Intonation. An Introduction. London: Cambridge University Press.
Zafiu, R. (2007). ‘Evaluarea umorului verbal’, in G. Pană-Dindelegan (coord.): Limba română. Stadiul actual al cercetării, București: Editura Universității din București, pp. 497-505.