using sarcasm as a tool for language acquisition - ganga

8/10/2019 Using Sarcasm as a Tool for Language Acquisition - Ganga

1/24

SINGAPORE POLYTECHNICSchool of Communication, Arts and Social Sciences

Specialist Diploma in English Language Teaching

SC6111: Exploring the English Language

Using Sarcasm as a Tool

for Language Acquisition

Prepared by

Gangasudhan (3)SELT/EO/1A/01

9th

February 2009


2/24

1|P a g e

SpecialistDiplomainEnglishLanguageTeaching

SC6111:ExploringtheEnglishLanguage

USINGSARCASMASATOOLFORLANGUAGEACQUISITION

This paper explores the feasibility of incorporating sarcasm into teaching

through a limited research into teacherperceptions. Firstly, by using the

findingsof

research

in

neuroscience

and

language

studies

in

relation

to

sarcasm,

inferences are drawn to support the use of sarcasmbased lessons.

Consequently,utilisingthequantitativeopinionof46educationpractitionersof

English Language out of 62 respondents who participated in an anonymous

online survey, this paper arrives at the conclusion that there is indeed strong

support and good potential for such an approach. This paper recommends

furtherresearchintothisissueandadvocatestheuseofsarcasmbasedlessons

(anexampleofwhichisannexed)inteaching.


3/24

2|P a g e

ThewordsarcasmistraceabletotheGreekwordsarazein,meaningto

speakbitterly,totearfleshlikedogs;thewordironyistraceabletothe

Greektermeironeia,atermusedtodescribeunscrupuloustrickery.

AlbertNKatz(2000)

IntroductiontotheSpecialIssue:

TheUses

and

Processing

of

Irony

and

Sarcasm

Sarcasm and Irony have intrigued philosophers, scholars and psychologists alike for millennia. More

recently, the interest in theproductionandprocessingofthesehas transcended from theabstractto

thephysiological.StudiesdonebymedicalresearcherssuchasMcDonald(2000),Giora(2000),Channon

(2004), and more recently, ShamayTsoory (2005) are just some examples of how much the

neuropsychologicalinvestigationhasdelvedintothisphenomenon.Today,notonlycanwearriveatthe

irrefutableconclusionthatinterpretingsarcasmandironyisaphysicalprocessofbrainfunction,wecan

evenisolateandidentifythelefthemisphereasthepartofthebrainthatinterpretstheliteralmeaning,

thefrontallobesandrighthemisphereasthepartsthatprocesstheintentionandcontext,andtheright

ventromedial prefrontal cortex as the part that integrates these elements to determine the true

meaning(Shamay

Tsoory

et

al,

2005).

Manyinroadshavealsobeenmadeintermsofunderstandinghowtheintangiblecomplexityofsarcasm

is interwoven in communication, regardless of language. For example, research into other languages

such as those done by Pengpanich (1998) and Day (1998) demonstrate that the characteristics of

sarcasmareconsistentacrossvarious languages,and,bystudyingthe technicalaspectsof theEnglish

Language,Kruez

and

Caucci

(2007)

suggest

that

cues

can

be

drawn

from

the

syntactic

structure

of

the

sarcastictext.


4/24

3|P a g e

This finding is corroborated by Livnat (2003 & 2004), whose preceding studies investigated the role

syntactic structure in relative detail, and recognises that it does play at least a nominal role in

understandingsarcasticutterancesaswellasinidentifyingtheintendedvictim.Correspondingly,Bryant

andJean (2006)systematically investigatedwhethertherewasan ironictoneofvoiceandarrivedat

theconclusionthattherewasnospecificidentifierinthisregardandthattoneandintonationwereonly

peripheralcluesthataidinunderstandingthesarcasticutterance.

Whilst adults use sarcasm for different purposes, namely;joking, criticising, teasing and challenging

(Harger & Hallet, 2006), Lee and Katz (1998) suggested that ridicule played an important role in

determining the presence of sarcasm in communication, and, Pexman and Olineck (2002) found that

ironicinsults(sarcasm)werelargelyperceivedtobecriticisminapolitemanner,althoughmoremocking

innaturewiththeinversebeingtrueofironiccompliments.

LanguageAcquisition

Looking

at

communication

and

language

learning,

Kruez,

Long

and

Church

(1991)

were,

in

fact,

able

to

demonstrate that ironybasedcommunicationachieves itsgoalsbetterand results inbetter retention

andrecallthancommunicationthatwasliteral.

Thisstudylendsconsiderableweighttotheideathatsarcasmcanbeusedforlanguageacquisitionwith

otherstudies,suchasthosedonebyCapelli,NakagawaandMadden (1991),Pexmanetal (2006)and

Ackerman

(1982),

clearly

narrowing

down

the

age

range

at

which

children

are

able

to

identify

and

recognisesarcasmcompetently.Typically,there isastarkcontrast inhowchildrenrespondtosarcasm

abovetheagesof11(ascomparedtobelowthisage)andverbalcuesseemtobemoreimportantatthe


5/24

4|P a g e

earlierstagesofdevelopmentbeforeacomprehensiveabilityincorporatingothercuessuchassyntactic

structure,contextandtheviolationofmaxims,isattained.

In the realm of education, the use of metaphors in teaching is not a new concept, having been in

practicefordecades.ThepopularityoftheclassicMetaphorsWeLiveBy(LakoffandJonhnsons1980)is

a testament to how important metaphors have become in Cognitive Linguistics. In the same vein, at

least one recent study has shed light on the distinguishing characteristics of metaphor and sarcasm

(Colston&Gibbs2002).Thisparticularstudyhasgoneontodemonstratethatsarcasmrequiresahigher

orderofthinkingascomparedtotheprocessingofmetaphors.

This facilitates the suggestion that sarcasmbased lessons could be used subsequent to lessons on

metaphor and warrants serious consideration into the possibility of using sarcasm as a language

acquisitiontool.Withresearchinthisareabeinglimited,thispaperaimstoinitiatesuchaconsideration

by undertakinga broadand relativelygenericsurvey thatassessed teacherperception with regard to

the

use

of

sarcasm

based

lessons.

ResearchSurvey

A ninequestion online survey (reproduced as Annexe A) was prepared with 8 multiple response

questions and 1 optional openended question being offered. Thecritical data collected was the age,

yearsofexperience,thelevelofsarcasmintheirownbehaviour,thelevelofsarcasmnotedfromtheir

studentsand

how

effective

they

would

expect

asarcasm

lesson

to

be.

Responseswerecollectedoveraperiodofslightlymorethanonemonth(from30thDecember2008to

4thFebruary2009)throughemail invitationstotheresearchersfriends,acquaintancesandcolleagues.


6/24

5|P a g e

Inaddition,unsolicitedemail invitationsweresentouttoallthejuniorcollegesandanotewasplaced

ontheresearchersblogwhichreceived2651uniquevisitorsduringtheperiod.

A total of 62 anonymous responses were received, however 12 were incomplete and thus rejected

outright.Oftheremaining50,afurtherfourwereexcludedfromthesurveyanalysisastherespondents

recorded0yearsofexperience(whichmayhavebeenentered inerror).Theeventual46respondents,

whoseresponseswereused,wereagedbetween21and64,hadvaryingextentsofexperienceranging

from1to37years,andwerehighly likelytobeeducationpractitionersbased inSingapore.Whilstthe

groupaveragewas36yearsofagewith8yearsofexperience,therewasa65.3%positivecorrelation

betweenageandexperienceamongthese46respondents.Thiswould indicatethattherewasa fairly

reasonablespreadofexperiencedteachers(asopposedtoteacherswhohaveswitchedtoteachingfrom

apreviouscareer).

Level Respondents

Primary&

Below

10

Secondary 18

ITE 1

JuniorCollege 12

Polytechnic 2

Tertiary&Above 3

Total 46

Table1:BreakdownofRespondentsbyTeachingLevel


7/24

6|P a g e

ResponseAnalysis

63%oftherespondentsratedthemselves 3oraboveonascaleof5whenaskedhowsarcasticthey

consideredthemselvestobeandwhenqueriedonthefrequencywithwhichtheyencounteredsarcasm

intheclassroom,only39.1%gavearatingof3andabove.However,ahigherpercentage(55.6%)ofthe

18SecondarySchoolteachersgavethisrating,whichsuggeststhatthismaybethelevelwherestudent

sarcasm is the most outward in a classroom setting. Similarly, more from this group (72.2%) rated

themselvesas relativelysarcastic innaturewith the JuniorCollegecohort registering the strongest at

83.3%.

Level Respondents SarcasmStudent

Sarcasm

Sarcasm

Lesson

Lesson

Potential

Primary&

Below10

12 60% 12 70% Yes 70% 12 30%

3 20% 3 30% No 30% 3 50%

45 20% 45 0% 45 20%

Secondary 18

12 28% 12 39% Yes 83% 12 6%

3 22% 3 50% No 17% 3 67%

45

50%

45

11%

45

27%

Junior

College12

12 17% 12 58% Yes 67% 12 25%

3 42% 3 33% No 33% 3 58%

45 41% 45 9% 45 17%

Total 46

12 37% 12 61% Yes 70% 12 22%

3 26% 3 35% No 30% 3 56%

45 37% 45 4% 45 22%

Table2:BreakdownofQuantitativeResponsesReceived


8/24

7|P a g e

Amongalltherespondents,5offeredqualitativeresponsesfortheopenendedquestionandthesewere

largely related to the classroom management rather than language acquisition which was to be

expected. However, one respondent did explain that he or she had previously used advertisements

employingsarcasminaclassroomlesson.

Figure3:ListofQualitativeResponsesReceived

Unsurprisingly, 91.3% of the respondents reported that they had never conducted a lesson

incorporating sarcasm with only 4 individuals indicating that they had. Overall, 69.6% were open to

usingasarcasmbased lessonplan themselveswhilst78.3% feltthat itcouldbeeffective (ratingof 3

andabove).TheresponsefromtheSecondarySchoolteacherswasthemostencouraging,with94.4%

ratingthepotentialsuccessofasarcasmbased lessonas3andaboveand83.3%ofthemregistering

theirsupporttoincorporatesuchalessonplanintotheirownteaching.


9/24

8|P a g e

3

4/51/2

Primary

Level

Secondary

Level

JuniorCollege

Level

Total

Figure4:RadarChartofRespondentsEstimationofPotentialforSarcasmbasedLesson

Interestingly, there was a 16.6% inverse correlation between age and selfassessment of sarcasm, a

24.2% inverse correlation between age and perception of student sarcasm, and a 14% inverse

correlation between age and estimation of success of a sarcasm lesson. This translates into the

indicationthattheoldertheteacheris,thelowertheyratetheirownlevelofsarcasm,thelesssarcasm

they experience (or choose to experience) from their students, and, naturally, a higher level of

scepticismtowardstheuseofasarcasmbasedlesson.


10/24

9|P a g e

Discussion

Thesurveyresponsewasencouragingandthemajorityoftherespondentsfeltthattheywouldconsider

usingasarcasmbased lessonplan.Althoughthemajorityhadnotemployedusingsucha lessonplan,

theywerenonethelessconfidentthatsuchalessoncouldachieveitsobjective.Fromthebreakdownof

the responses, it can further be noted that, at the very least, the Secondary level may be the most

receptivetosuchanapproach.

The data suggests that Junior College teachers, although rating themselves more sarcastic than their

peersatother levels, feelthatasarcasmbasedapproachmaynotbesuitable (ornecessary) fortheir

studentsandweregenerallylesssupportive.ThisunexpectedfindingcouldbeduetothefactthatJunior

CollegestudentsaretypicallylessbrashandmoretimidthantheircounterpartsinSecondarySchool.

Thispaperhowever,concedesthatduetothelownumberofrespondentsfromtheITE,Polytechnicand

tertiary institutions involved in the survey, no concrete inferences can be drawn for these teaching

levels.

Conclusion

Asthisstudywasspecificallyaimedatageneral investigationacrossall levels,thepreliminaryfindings

suggest that a closer look at the teacher responses of each level may be warranted. A larger study

comprising increased sample sizes of each teaching level would certainly shed more light on the

receptivenessofusingasarcasmbasedlessonandestablishiftheSecondarySchoollevelisindeedthe

mostsuitable

for

this

purpose

as

the

survey

results

seem

to

suggest.


11/24

10|P a g e

Nevertheless,thisreport issatisfiedthat itsobjectiveshavebeenmetnamely,anawarenessofsuch

an approach was made known to at least hundreds of practitioners, the applicability of sarcasm as a

languageacquisitiontoolwasdemonstratedusingexistingresearch literature,and finally,asampleof

thewillingnessofteacherstoadoptsuchanapproachwasobtained.

It is hoped that the research that was undertaken in this paper can be further developed to make

inroadsintothisareaoflimitedresearchandbethenceconsolidatedwithotherparallelresearchinthe

fields of neuroscience and psychology such that an instructive direction can be given to education

practitionersontheuseofsarcasmbasedteaching(anexampleisattachedasAnnexeC).


12/24


13/24

12|P a g e

Katz, A. N., 2000. Introduction to the Special Issue: The Uses and Processing of Irony and

Sarcasm.ASpecialIssueofMetaphorandSymbol,15(1&2),pp.13.

Keysar,B.,2000.Theillusorytransparencyofintention:DoesJuneunderstandwhatMarkmeans

becausehemeansit?.DiscourseProcesses,29,pp.161172.

Kreuz, R. J., Long, D. L. and Church, M. B., 1991. On being ironic: Pragmatic and mnemonic

implications.MetaphorandSymbolicActivity,6,pp.149162.

Kreuz, R. J. and Caucci, G. M., 2007. Lexical influences on the perception of sarcasm. In:

WorkshoponComputationalApproachestoFigurativeLanguage:Annualmeetingofthe

Human Language Technology Conference,April 2006. Rochester, NY: North American

ChapteroftheAssociationforComputationalLinguistics(HLTNAACL).

Lakoff,G.andJohnson,M.,1980.Metaphorsweliveby.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Lee,C.J.andKatz.A.N.,1998.Thedifferentialroleofridicule insarcasmand irony.Metaphor

andSymbol,13(1),pp.115.

Livnat,Z.,2003.Onverbalironyandtypesofechoing.In:WorkingPapersinLinguistics,Volume

15.DepartmentofPhoneticsandLinguistics,UniversityCollegeLondon.

Livnat, Z., 2004. On verbal irony, metalinguistic knowledge and echoic interpretation.

PragmaticsandCognition,12,pp.5770.

McDonald, S., 2000. Neuropsychological Studies of Sarcasm.A Special IssueofMetaphorand

Symbol,15(1&2),pp.8598.

Nakassis,C.andSnedeker,C.,2002.Beyondsarcasm:IntonationandContextasRelationalCues

inChildren'sRecognitionofIrony.In:GreenhillA.etal.,ed.ProceedingsoftheTwenty

sixth Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA:

CascadillaPress.

Pengpanich, A., 1998. A pragmatic look at sarcasm in Thai. In: U. Warotamasikkhadit and T.

Panakul,ed.PapersfromtheFourthAnnualMeetingoftheSoutheastAsianLinguistics

Society,pp.241250.ArizonaStateUniversity:ProgramforSoutheastAsianStudies.

Pexman,P.M.andOlineckK.M.,2002.DoesSarcasmAlwaysSting?InvestigatingtheImpactof

IronicInsultsandIronicCompliments.DiscourseProcesses,33(3),pp.199217.


14/24

13|P a g e

Pexman, P. M., et al., 2006. Childrens use of trait information in understanding verbal irony.

MetaphorandSymbol,21,pp.3960.

Pinker,S.,2006.Dilemmas:Sheusessarcasm,sheknowsallthetricks.TheGlobeandMail,13

Decp.C2.

Roberts, R. M. and Kreuz, R. J., 1994. Why do people use figurative language? Psychological

Science,5,pp.159163.

ShamayTsoory, S. G., Tomer R. and AharonPeretz J., 2005. The neuroanatomical basis of

understanding sarcasm and its relationship to social cognition.Neuropsychol, 19, pp.

288300.

S'hiri, S., 1992. A pragmatics of verbal irony in literary discourse: An example from drama.

EdinburghWorkingPapersinLinguistics,3,pp.124134.

Tepperman J., Traum D. and Narayanan S., 2006. Yeah right: Sarcasm recognition for spoken

dialoguesystems.Interspeech.Pittsburgh.

The George Orwell Award,2000. Quarterly Review of Doublespeak26

[online],no.2(January1):1.Availablefrom:ProQuest[Accessed27November2008].


15/24

14|P a g e

AnnexeA

SurveyQuestionnaireHostedAt

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=qFacnnFfir_2f9cAocMYSasQ_3d_3d

UsingSarcasmasaLanguageAcquisitionTool

IamapostgraduatestudentinanEnglishLanguageTeachingprogrammewhoisexploringhow

sarcasmcanbeemployedtoteachaspectsof languagetoadvancedstudents.Thepurposeof

thissurveyistogatherfeedbackfrompractitionersonwhethertheythinksarcasmcanbeused

forteachinglanguageandiftheywoulduseitthemselvesintheirownclassroom.

It is hoped that this survey will create awareness on using sarcasm as a language acquisition

toolandinitiateinterestindevelopinglessonsthatincorporatesarcasmaswell.

Pleasefeelfreetoemailmeatgangasudhan@email.comforfurtherenquiries,toprovidemore

details(ifyousowish),torequestforsamplesarcasmexercisesthatIwillbecreating,and/or

justtobesarcastictome.

Q1. Howoldareyou?

Age

Q2. Howmanyyearsofteachingexperiencedoyouhave?

Experience

Q3 Whichleveldoyouspecialisein?

Primary&

Below

Secondary ITE Junior

College

Polytechnic Tertiary&

Above


16/24

15|P a g e

Q4 Howmuchofasarcasticpersonwouldyouconsideryourself?

1=NotSarcastic

5

=

Very

Sarcastic

1 2 3 4 5

Q5 Towhatextentdoyouencountersarcasmfromyourstudents?

1=Never

5=EveryTimeQ5

1 2 3 4 5

Q6 Haveyouconductedalessonthatusessarcasmaspartofthelessondesign?

Yes No

Q7 Ifyouhaveusedsarcasmtoconductlessons,Iwouldbegratefulifyoucanbriefly

describethelesson.

(Ifyoudonotwishtoshareand/orhavenotusedsarcasmtoconductlessons,please

proceedtothenextquestion.)

Q8 Ifprovidedwithagoodlessonplanthatincorporatessarcasm,wouldyouuseit?

Yes No

Q9 Basedonyourexperience,howeffectivedoyouthinkagoodlessonplanthat

incorporatessarcasmwouldbe?

1=NotEffective

5=Very

Effective

1 2 3 4 5


17/24

16|P a g e

AnnexeB

OverallSurveyResults


18/24

17|P a g e


19/24

18|P a g e


20/24

19|P a g e

AnnexeC

SampleLessonPlan

LESSONPLAN

Aim: Appreciate the Role of Context in English Language

CommunicationThroughSarcasm

LevelofStudents: UpperIntermediate

LearnerProfile: Academicallyinclined students at Secondary School who

respondwelltotheAuditoryandKinestheticlearningstyles

Lesson

Time:

45

minutes

Specificobjectives: Attheendofthelesson;

1) Studentsshouldbeabletoprovideatleast2distinctmeaningsforeachgiven

sarcasticsentence.

2) Studentsshouldbeabletoofferlogicalscenariosthatcanreasonablyexplain

obviouslysarcasticstatements.

Materials:

EquipmenttofacilitatePowerPointPresentation

Visualiser

Activities:

Activity1

Asaclassactivity,studentsareshownaseriesofsarcasticsentencesand,foreach,

areaskedtoofferasmanydifferentmeaningsaspossible(seeActivityList1below).

Activity2

Asa class activity,students are shown a series of commonsarcastic remarks (with

context)and,foreach,areaskedtovolunteerlogicalandreasonablescenariosthat

giveanacceptablemeaninginstead(seeActivityList2below).


21/24

20|P a g e

Method:

Stage1

1) Teacherprimestheclassbydefiningthewordcontext

and giving some common examples where context

subconsciously plays a part. Examples may include

simplemetaphorssuchas greedypig, couchpotato,

to pull your socks up and apple of my eye, which

couldthenextendtoexcerptssuchasAlltheworld'sa

stage; and all the men and women merely players

(Shakespeare).

2) Student participation is encouraged by allowing for

spontaneousadditionsofpersonalexamples.

3)

Teacher

directs

students

to

consider

the

scenario

where the context is removed and the metaphor no

longer has the intended meaning. For example, in a

land where there are no sofas (couches), how would

the term couch potato be understood; in a place

where there are no socks, how can someone infer to

pullyoursocksup?

4)

Teacher inserts sarcastic adlibs during the class

discussion.

5) PowerPointPresentationistheninitiated.

10mins

Stage2

6) Activity1 is introducedwithanexamplesarcastic (but

ambiguous)sentenceflashedonscreentotheclassasa

whole.

7)

Studentsareaskedtoofferasmanydifferentmeanings

as they can think of for each sentence that is flashed

and the meanings are written on the board for visual

anchoring.

8)

Theyare

intentionally

not

told

that

the

sentences

are

sarcasticinnature.

9) Totalof5sentencesareflashedoneatatime.

10mins


22/24

21|P a g e

Stage3

10)Activity 2 is continued with an example of an often

heardsarcasticsentence flashedonscreentotheclass

as a whole (students are made aware that these are

sarcasticremarks).

11)Teacher may choose to include a context explanation

(verbalorvisual)toaidthestudentsunderstandingof

thesarcasticremarkasnecessary.

12)Students are then asked to offer a plausible scenario

thatwouldmakeeachsentenceappropriateinaliteral

senseandnegatethesarcasm.

13)Total of 5 sentences are flashed one at a time with

enough time given for students to think about a

suitable scenario before a possible suggestion is

revealed.

14)

Purpose is to facilitate students to think about thescenarios (and thereby the role of context) that can

completelyaltertheintendedmeaningofthesarcastic

comment.

15mins

Stage6

15)Teacher completes the discussion by identifying the

criticalfactorofcontextthatcanverywell ruinthe

intention

of

a

sarcastic

remark.

Other

examples

of

sarcasm (other languages etc) can then be offered at

the teachers discretion or other written work on

contextcanbeappendedtotheendofthislesson.

10mins


23/24


24/24

23|P a g e

Activity2Listof5CommonSarcasticremarks

Youtakingsteroids?(eg.whensomeonedoessomethingextremelyfast...)

SarcasticMessage:Whyareyoubeingsohurried?

PossibleScenario:DrugTesteraskingplayerorjournalistsqueryingsuspiciously

successfulsportsman.

It'sokaytofeelwhatyouare.(eg.whensomeonesays,"Ifeelsostupid"...)

SarcasticMessage:Youareindeedstupid.

PossibleScenario:Someonewhoisfeelingguiltyaboutwinning.

It'sokay,you'reajokeallbyyourself.(eg.whensomeonesays,"Hey,youwanttoheara

joke?"...)

SarcasticMessage:NobodytakesyouseriouslyandIamnotinterestedinyourjokes.

PossibleScenario:Acomedicperformerwhohaslosthisprops.

Ah,I'm

not

surprised.

(eg.

When

someone

says,

"I

don't

know

how

to

do

this."...)

SarcasticMessage:Youarestupid,nosurprises.

PossibleScenario:Thepersondoesnothavetheexpertiseforanadvancedproblem.

Youlooklikemygrandma'sgrandmother!

SarcasticMessage:Youlookugly/veryold.

PossibleScenario:Itsareferencetosomegenuinedistinguishingfeatureoftheperson.

using sarcasm as a tool for language acquisition - ganga

Documents