Verified by 
Key points
- The things we find amusing will differ depending on who we’re with, where we are, and when they happen.
- A branch of linguistics called pragmatics helps us understand how we derive meaning from the broader context.
- An expert in both pragmatics and humor, Dr. Salvatore Attardo, shares his expertise in an interview.
I recently had the privilege of presenting a paper at the 2024 conference of the International Society of Humor Studies. It was during that meeting that I had the idea of interviewing leading experts in humor and laughter for this blog series. My first invitation was graciously accepted by Dr. Salvatore Attardo, Director of the Linguistics Graduate Program at the University of Texas-Commerce and, from 2001-2011, editor-in-chief of the society’s research journal, HUMOR. With Victor Raskin, he developed the General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH) and is considered by many to be a legend in his field.
Here’s a summary.
How did you first come to be interested in humor?
Attardo: I have had a long-standing interest in humor going back to my high school years in Italy. I created and wrote for a satirical magazine that was quite popular with my fellow students and some of the faculty. Later, I found myself contemplating what exactly it was that made our pieces so well received.
Being the nerd that I am, I ended up in the library and found the work of scholars such as Henri Bergson and Sigmund Freud, and it was then that I realized humor was an established scientific discipline in its own right. I’ve been fascinated ever since.
In the field of linguistics, pragmatics is the study of how we derive meaning from context. How can it help us understand how humor can be appreciated by some but not others or at one moment in time but not another?
Attardo: In linguistics, we use the concepts of competence and performance. Competence is the knowledge you have about something. You know, for example, how to ride a bicycle. Performance is the ability to act out or express that competency or knowledge—in this case, the actual riding of a bike. One might know how to ride, but if the ground is covered by a thick layer of snow, one would be unable to act on it.
So, if you were to drop a hammer on your foot, I might make a joke about it, but you most likely wouldn’t find it amusing, at least not while you are in significant pain. You’d understand the humor (competence) but not appreciate it (performance). Certain things will be funny in some circumstances but not in others, depending on the situation, the people involved, and so on.
Theories like the GTVH give us insight into the competence aspect, suggesting what it is that makes something amusing, but going on to predict exactly who will find this or that funny and why is much more difficult, if not altogether impossible. There are jokes that may be amusing to members of the “in-group” but not those in the targeted “out-group.” And there are jokes that could be made about a tragedy, for example, that wouldn’t be well received in the days, weeks, or even months following it but widely accepted years into the future. This is something, again, that relates to the performance of humor. Recent discourse theories in the field of linguistics are attempting to deal with these sorts of social variables, so maybe in 20 years, I’ll have a different answer, but for now, this will have to do.
What theory or theories of laughter or humor have you found most helpful to your work in this field?
Attardo: Well, naturally, I have a special affection for the GTVH. As its name implies, it does exceptionally well in explaining the inner workings of verbal humor, but I agree with the majority of scholars who maintain that no single explanation of humor can do everything. Theories are like gardening tools; each is designed to perform certain tasks exceptionally well but do others very poorly, if at all. You can dig a hole with a leaf rake, but you’re infinitely better off using a spade.
For example, Willibald Ruch’s work with the 3 WD Humor Test can provide some insight into how certain personality traits might influence humor appreciation, but they perform less well in other arenas.
What are some of the issues in the news today that pique your interest? For example, humor and artificial intelligence, political correctness, cultural differences or similarities, the use of humor in politics or advertising, etc.
Attardo: There are a number of things I find fascinating, but recently, I’ve been investigating how the internet has influenced both humor’s expression and its consumption. My findings were published in my latest book, Humor 2.0: How the Internet Changed Humor. The first section is concerned with new genres of humor. The second looks at the rise and fall of humor memes, such as cat videos. The third covers the multimodality of humor as it takes on various forms and roles. And the fourth, the most eye-opening and in many ways the most disturbing, relates to the dark side of internet humor. Naturally, I was familiar with the more commonplace forms of racist humor. It’s been researched by a number of respected scholars, but this was…well, wow!…at another level altogether: videos openly advocating for Hitler and his worldview.
It began with my review of a book by Sienkiewicz and Marx (2022), which provided insight into the workings of the alt-right movement in this area. Moderately right-wing mainstream media outlets and podcasts showcase “milder” forms of racist humor, which then direct sympathetic listeners and viewers to even more strident commentaries, and so on. These then act as gateways to sites advocating for open violence against their perceived enemies. And we’re not talking about the so-called “dark” web. These sites are available to virtually anyone with internet access.
Needless to say, it was a sobering experience and something we must be cognizant of in this highly charged political environment. Humor, as we’ve known for some time, is a double-edged sword. For all the joy humor inspires—and its magnificent ability to bring people together—it can also be used to hurt and divide us.
© John Charles Simon
References
Salvatore. 2023. Humor 2.0: How the Internet Changed Humor. Anthem Press: London.
Sienkiewicz, M. and N. Marx. 2022. That’s Not Funny: How the Right Makes Comedy Work for Them. University of California Press.
