Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Appreciation of Ambiguous Humorous Messages: The Influence of Processing Mode and Presentation Cover

Appreciation of Ambiguous Humorous Messages: The Influence of Processing Mode and Presentation

Open Access
|May 2015

References

  1. Algeo, J. (1977). Blends, a structural and systemic view. American Speech, 52 (1/2), 47.10.2307/454719
  2. Algeo, J. (1980). Where do all the new words come from? American Speech, 55 (4), 264-277.10.2307/454567
  3. Algeo, J. (1993). Fift y years among the new words: A dictionary of neologisms 1941-1991. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Altmann, G.T.M. (1997). The ascent of Babel: An exploration of language, mind and understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Behind the Grammar (2010). Top 10 made up words. Retrieved from: http://behindthegrammar.com/2010/07/top-10-made-up-words/ Bryant, M.M. (1974). Blends are increasing. American Speech, 49 (3/4), 163-184.
  5. Calude, A. & Pagel, M. (2011). How do we use language? Shared patterns in the frequency of word use across 17 world languages. Philosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society Of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 366 (1567), 1101-1107.10.1098/rstb.2010.0315
  6. Church, K.W., Gale, W., Hanks, P., Hindle, R., & Moon, R. (1994). Lexical substitutability. In B.T.S. Atkins & A. Zampolli (Eds.), Computational Approaches to the Lexicon (pp. 153-177). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Cook, P. & Stevenson, S. (2010). Automatically Identifying the Source Words of Lexical Blends in English. Computational Linguistics, 36 (1), 129-149.10.1162/coli.2010.36.1.36104
  8. Crystal, D. (2012). The story of English in 100 words. London, UK: CPI Group.
  9. Divjak, D. (2006). Ways of intending: Delineating and structuring near synonyms. In S.T. Gries & A. Stefanowitsch (Eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis (pp. 19-56). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  10. Divjak, D. & Gries, S.T. (2006). Ways of trying in Russian: Clustering behavioral profiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2 (1), 23-60.10.1515/CLLT.2006.002
  11. Edmonds, P. & Hirst, G. (2002). Near synonyms and lexical choice. Computational Linguistics, 28 (2), 105-144.10.1162/089120102760173625
  12. Fandrych, I. (2008). Pagad, chillax and jozi: A multi-level approach to acronyms, blends, and clippings. Nawa: Journal of Language & Communication, 2 (2), 71-88.
  13. Field, A. (2009). Discovering Statistics using SPSS. London, UK: Sage.
  14. Finch, H. (2005). Comparison of the performance of nonparametric and parametric MANOVA test statistics when assumptions are violated. Methodology: European Journal Of Research Methods For The Behavioral And Social Sciences, 1 (1), 27-38.10.1027/1614-1881.1.1.27
  15. Fleck, D.W. (2006). On the origin and cultural significance of unusually large synonym sets in some Panoan languages of Western Amazonia. Anthropological Linguistics, 48 (4), 335-368.
  16. Gries, S.H. (2004). Shouldn’t it be breakfunch? A quantitative analysis of blend structure in English. Linguistics, 42 (3), 639-667.
  17. Gries, S. & Otani, N. (2010). Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy. ICAME Journal, 34, 121-150.
  18. Gutierrez, R., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Vasiljevic, M. (2012). Just an anger synonym? Moral context infl uences predictors of disgust word use. Cognition & Emotion, 26 (1), 53-64.10.1080/02699931.2011.567773
  19. Hicklin, M. (1930). Scribes seek snappy synonyms. American Speech, 6 (2), 110-122.10.2307/452474
  20. Hormes, J. & Rozin, P. (2010). Does “craving” carve nature at the joints? Absence of a synonym for craving in many languages. Addictive Behaviors, 35 (5), 459-463.10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.12.031
  21. Johnson, T.J., Meinke, D.L., Van Mondfrans, A.P., & Finn, J. (1965). Word frequency of synonym responses as a function of word frequency of the stimulus and list position of the response. Psychonomic Science, 2 (8), 235-236.10.3758/BF03343423
  22. Kelly, M.H. (1998). To ‘brunch’ or to ‘brench’: some aspects of blend structure. Linguistics, 36 (3), 579-590.10.1515/ling.1998.36.3.579
  23. Kitzinger, C. & Mandelbaum, J. (2013). Word selection and social identities in talk-in-interaction. Communication Monographs, 80 (2), 176-198.10.1080/03637751.2013.776171
  24. Lehrer, A. (2003). Understanding trendy neologisms. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 15 (2), 369-382.
  25. Liu, D. (2010). Is it a chief, main, major, primary, or principal concern?: A corpusbased behavioral profile study of the near-synonyms. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15 (1), 56-87.10.1075/ijcl.15.1.03liu
  26. Liu, D. & Espino, M. (2012). Actually, genuinely, really, and truly: A corpus-based Behavioral Profile study of near-synonymous adverbs. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 17 (2), 198-228.10.1075/ijcl.17.2.03liu
  27. Lounsbery, J. & Reitherman, W. (1977). The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. United States: Walt Disney Mackin, R. (1978). On collocations: ‘Words shall be known by the company they keep’. In P. Strevens (Ed.), In Honour of A. S. Hornby (pp. 149-165). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  28. Miller, G.A. & Charles, W.G. (1991). Contextual correlates of semantic similarity. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6 (1), 1-28.10.1080/01690969108406936
  29. Nayak, A. (2011). Portmanteau words: The key to creativity. A review of Arun K. Behera’s book “The World of Portmanteau Words”. Language in India, 11 (10), 487-489.
  30. Pagel, M. (2008). Rise of the digital machine. Nature, 452, 699.10.1038/452699a
  31. Partridge, E., Ganville, W., & Roberts, F.G. (1948). A dictionary of Forces’ slang. London, UK: Secker and Warburg. Piñeros, C. (2004). The creation of portmanteaus in the extragrammatical morphology of Spanish. Probus: International Journal of Latin & Romance Linguistics, 16 (2), 203-240.
  32. Pound, L. (1933). Miscellany. American Speech, 8 (4), 76-80.
  33. Prenner, M. (1928). Slang synonyms for ‘drunk’. American Speech, 4 (2), 102-103.10.2307/452862
  34. Scott-Phillips, T.C. (2007). The social evolution of language, and the language of social evolution. Evolutionary Psychology, 5 (4), 740-753.10.1177/147470490700500405
  35. Smith, K. & Nordquist, D. (2012). A critical and historical investigation into semantic prosody. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 13 (2), 291-312.10.1075/jhp.13.2.05smi
  36. Steffens, N.K. & Haslam, S. (2013). Power through ‘us’: Leaders’ use of wereferencing language predicts election victory. Plos ONE, 8 (10), 1-6.
  37. Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. New York: Harper & Row.
  38. Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.6
  39. Wiktionary (2013). English citations of confuzzle, confuzzles, confuzzling and confuzzled. Retrieved from: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:confuzzle Withington, R. (1932). More ‘portmanteau’ coinages. American Speech, 7 (3), 200-203.10.2307/451651
  40. Xiao, R. & McEnery, T. (2006). Collocation, semantic prosody, and near synonymy: A cross-linguistic perspective. Applied Linguistics, 27 ( 1), 103-129. 10.1093/applin/ami045
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0003 | Journal eISSN: 2083-8506 | Journal ISSN: 1234-2238
Language: English
Page range: 29 - 43
Published on: May 29, 2015
Published by: Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2015 Adam Kucharski, Celina Timoszyk-Tomczak, published by Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.