Group boundaries in humor in the online public sphere

References

Attardo, Salvatore. 2020. The Linguistics of humor: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford Academic.10.1093/oso/9780198791270.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Attardo, Salvatore. 2023. Humour 2.0: How the internet changed humour. London: Anthem Press.Search in Google Scholar

Belsat. 2021. Russian ‘Wagnerovites’ in Belarus forests: What we know about one of Lukashenka’s most resonant fakes 13 September https://belsat.eu/en/news/13-09-2021-russian-wagnerovites-in-belarus-forests-what-we-know-about-one-of-lukashenka-s-most-resonant-fakes (accessed 31 October 2023).Search in Google Scholar

Blank, Trevor J. 2013a. Hybridizing folk culture: Toward a theory of new media and vernacular discourse. Western Folklore 72(2). 105–130.Search in Google Scholar

Blank, Trevor J. 2013b. The last laugh: Folk humor, celebrity culture, and mass-mediated disasters in the digital age. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar

Boukes, Mark & Michael Hameleers. 2023. Fighting lies with facts or humor: Comparing the effectiveness of satirical and regular fact-checks in response to misinformation and disinformation. Communication Monographs 90(1). 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2022.2097284.Search in Google Scholar

Butler, Brian S. & Xiaoqing Wang. 2012. The cross-purposes of cross-posting: Boundary reshaping behavior in online discussion communities. Information Systems Research 23(3.2). 993–1010. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0378.Search in Google Scholar

Caron, James E. 2021. Satire and the public sphere: Ethics and poetics, reverse discourses, satiractivism. In Katerina Standish, Heather Devere, Adan Suazo & Rachel Rafferty (eds.). The palgrave Handbook of positive peace, 271–291. Singapore: Springer Singapore.10.1007/978-981-16-0969-5_14Search in Google Scholar

Chłopicki, Władysław & Dorota Brzozowska. 2021. Sophisticated humor against covid: The polish case. Humor 34(2). 201–227. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2021-0015.Search in Google Scholar

Chłopicki, Władysław, Giselinde Kuipers, Liisi Laineste, Guillem Castañar, Anastasiya Fiadotava, Agata Hołobut & Jonas Nicolaï. 2024. Specific humor scandal database. KU Leuven RDR, V1 https://doi.org/10.48804/PTPQVB.Search in Google Scholar

Davies, Christie. 2011. Jokes and targets. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Elo, Satu & Helvi Kyngäs. 2008. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62(1). 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.Search in Google Scholar

Fiadotava, Anastasiya. 2021. “If we don’t quarrel, we joke”: Emic perspectives on Belarusian families’ humorous folklore. Humor 34(1). 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2019-0052.Search in Google Scholar

Fine, Gary Alan. 1977. Humour in situ: The role of humour in small group culture. In Antony J. Chapman & Hugh C. Foot (eds.). It’s a funny thing, humour, 315–318. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-08-021376-7.50060-7Search in Google Scholar

Famichova, Nina. 2015. Internet jokes as a means of communicating Belarusian identity. In Dorota Brzozowska & Władysław Chłopicki (eds.). Culture’s software: Communication styles. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Fominaya, Cristina Flesher. 2007. The role of humour in the process of collective identity formation in autonomous social movement groups in contemporary Madrid. International Review of Social History 52(S15). 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0020859007003227.Search in Google Scholar

Friedman, Sam & Giselinde Kuipers. 2013. The divisive power of humour: Comedy, taste and symbolic boundaries. Cultural Sociology 7(2). 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975513477405.Search in Google Scholar

Godfrey, Richard. 2016. Soldiering on: Exploring the role of humour as a disciplinary technology in the military. Organization 23(2). 164–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508414533164.Search in Google Scholar

Habermas, Jürgen. 1962[1989]. The structural Transformation of the public sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hameleers, Michael. 2019. The populism of online communities: Constructing the boundary between “blameless” people and “culpable” others. Communication Culture & Critique 12(1). 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcz009.Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer. 1994. Jocular abuse patterns in mixed-group in-teraction. In Janet Holmes (ed.) Wellington working Papers in linguistics, Vol. 6, 26–55. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington.Search in Google Scholar

Hay, Jennifer. 2001. The pragmatics of humor support. Humor 14(1). 55–82. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.14.1.55.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet & Jennifer Hay. 1997. Humour as an ethnic boundary marker in New Zealand interaction. Journal of Intercultural Studies 18(2). 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.1997.9963447.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet & Meredith Marra. 2002a. Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of Pragmatics 34(12). 1683–1710. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00032-2.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet & Meredith Marra. 2002b. Humour as a discursive boundary marker in social interaction. In Anna Duszak (ed.). Us and others: Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures, 377–400. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.98.23holSearch in Google Scholar

Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L. & Karl R. Lang. 2011. Boundary management in online communities: Case studies of the Nine Inch Nails and ccMixter music remix sites. Long Range Planning 44(5-6). 440–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2011.09.002.Search in Google Scholar

Koller, Werner. 2007. Probleme der Übersetzung von Phrasemen. In Harald Burger, Dmitrij Dobrovol’skij, Peter Kühn & Neal Norrick (eds.). Phraseologie. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, 605–613. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110171013.605Search in Google Scholar

Kuipers, Giselinde. 2011. The politics of humour in the public sphere: Cartoons, power and modernity in the first transnational humour scandal. European Journal of Cultural Studies 14(1). 63–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549410370072.Search in Google Scholar

Laineste, Liisi. 2013. Funny or aggressive? Failed humour in internet comments. Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore 53. 29–46. https://doi.org/10.7592/fejf2013.53.laineste.Search in Google Scholar

Laineste, Liisi & Anastasiya Fiadotava. 2023. Heroes and villains in memes on the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Folklore: Electronic Journal of Folklore 90. 35–62. https://doi.org/10.7592/FEJF2023.90.laineste_fiadotava.Search in Google Scholar

Laineste, Liisi & Władysław Chłopicki. 2019. Co-construction of metaphors in Estonian conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 153. 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.04.006.Search in Google Scholar

Marone, Vittorio. 2015. Online humour as a community-building cushioning glue. The European Journal of Humour Research 3(1). 61–83. https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr2015.3.1.marone.Search in Google Scholar

Meyer, John C. 2000. Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory 10(3). 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00194.x.Search in Google Scholar

Oring, Elliott. 1984. Dyadic traditions. Journal of Folklore Research 21(1). 19–28.Search in Google Scholar

Poor, Nathaniel. 2005. Mechanisms of an online public sphere: The website Slashdot. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10(2). JCMC1028. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00241.x.Search in Google Scholar

Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-6472-3Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Mike S. 2015. Digital public sphere. In Gianpietro Mazzoleni (ed.). The international Encyclopedia of political communication, 322–328. London: Wiley Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Senior, Rose. 2001. The role of humour in the development and maintenance of class cohesion. Prospect 16(2). 45–54.Search in Google Scholar

Swinkels, Michiel & Anouk De Koning. 2016. Introduction: Humour and anthropology. Etnofoor 28(1). 7–10.Search in Google Scholar

Tsakona, Villy & Jan Chovanec. 2020. Revisiting intertextuality and humour: Fresh perspectives on a classic topic. The European Journal of Humour Research 8(3). 1–15. https://doi.org/10.7592/ejhr2020.8.3.tsakona.Search in Google Scholar

Yus, Francisco. 2022. Smartphone communication: Interactions in the app ecosystem. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781003200574Search in Google Scholar

Zenner, Eline & Dirk Geeraerts. 2018. One does not simply process memes: Image macros as multimodal constructions. In Esme Winter-Froemel & Verena Thaler (eds.). Cultures and Traditions of Wordplay and wordplay research, 167–194. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110586374-008Search in Google Scholar

Ziv, Avner. 1984. Personality and sense of humor. NY: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Ziv, Avner. 1988. Humor’s role in married life. Humor 1(3). 223–230. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.1988.1.3.223.Search in Google Scholar