Previous research has shown that in different languages ironic speech is acoustically modulated compared to literal speech, and these modulations are assumed to aid the listener in the comprehension process by acting as cues that mark utterances as ironic. The present study was conducted to identify paraverbal features of German ‘ironic criticism’ that may possibly act as irony cues by comparing acoustic measures of ironic and literal speech. For this purpose, samples of scripted ironic and literal target utterances produced by 14 female speakers were recorded and acoustically analyzed. Results showed that in contrast to literal remarks, ironic criticism was characterized by a decreased mean fundamental frequency (F0), raised energy levels and increased vowel duration, whereas F0-contours differed only marginally between both speech types. Furthermore, we found ironic speech to be characterized by vowel hyperarticulation, an acoustic feature which has so far not been considered as a possible irony cue. Contrary to our expectations, voice modulations in ironic speech were applied independently from the availability of additional, visual irony cues. The results are discussed in light of previous findings on acoustic features of irony yielded for other languages.
AdachiT. (1996). Sarcasm in Japanese. Studies in Language, 20(1), 1–36.
2.
AnolliL.CiceriR.InfantinoM. G. (2000). Irony as a game of implicitness: Acoustic profiles of ironic communication. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(3), 275–311.
3.
AnolliL.CiceriR.InfantinoM. G. (2002). From “blame by praise” to “praise by blame”: Analysis of vocal patterns in ironic communication. International Journal of Psychology, 37, 266–276.
4.
AttardoS.EisterholdJ.HayJ.PoggiI. (2003). Multimodal markers of irony and sarcasm. Humor, 16(2), 243–260.
5.
BanseR.SchererK. R. (1996). Acoustic profiles in vocal emotion expression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 614–636.
6.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [computer software]. Available from http://www.praat.org/
7.
BortzJ. (1999). Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler. Berlin: Springer.
8.
BryantG. A.Fox TreeJ. E. (2002). Recognizing verbal irony in spontaneous speech. Metaphor and Symbol, 17(2), 99–117.
9.
BryantG. A.Fox TreeJ. E. (2005). Is there an ironic tone of voice?Language and Speech, 48, 257–277.
10.
BurnhamD.KitamuraU.Vollmer-ConnaU. (2002). What’s new pussycat? On talking to babies and animals. Science, 296, 1435.
11.
CapelliC. A.NakagawaN.MaddenC. M. (1990). How children understand sarcasm: The role of context and intonation. Child Development, 61, 1824–1841.
12.
ChafeW. (1974). Language and consciousness. Language, 50, 111–133.
13.
CheangH. S.PellM. D. (2008). The sound of sarcasm. Speech Communication, 50, 366–381.
14.
CheangH. S.PellM. D. (2009). Acoustic markers of sarcasm in Cantonese and English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126(3), 1394–1405.
15.
ColstonH. L. (1997). Salting a wound or sugaring a pill: The pragmatic functions of ironic criticism. Discourse Processes, 23, 25–45.
16.
CutlerA. (1974). On saying what you mean without meaning what you say. In La GalyM. W.FoxR. A.BruckA. (Eds.), Papers from the tenth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society (pp. 117–127). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society.
17.
DewsS.KaplanJ.WinnerE. (1995). Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony. Discourse Processes, 19, 347–367.
18.
DewsS.WinnerE. (1995). Muting the meaning: A social function of irony. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10, 3–18.
19.
DewsS.WinnerE. (1999). Obligatory processing of literal and non-literal meaning of verbal irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1579–1599.
20.
FernaldA.SimonT. (1984). Expanded intonation contours in mothers’ speech to newborns. Developmental Psychology, 20(1), 104–113.
21.
FowlerC. A.HousumJ. (1987). Talkers’ signalling of “new” and “old” words in speech and listeners’ perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 489–504.
22.
FowlerH. W. (1965). A dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
GibbsR. W. (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15, 5–27.
24.
GibbsR. W.ColstonH. L. (2001). The risks and rewards of ironic communication. In AnolliL.CiceriR.RivaG. (Eds.), Say not to say: New perspectives on miscommunication (pp. 181–194). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
25.
GriceH. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In ColeP.MorganJ. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
26.
GroebenN.ScheeleB. (1986). Produktion und Rezeption von Ironie. Vol. 1: Pragmalinguistische Beschreibung und psycholinguistische Erklärungshypothesen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
27.
GroebenN.SeemannH.DrinkmannA. (1985). Produktion und Rezeption von Ironie, Band. II: Empirische Untersuchungen zu Bedingungen und Wirkungen ironischer Sprechakte. Tübingen: Narr.
28.
HaimanJ. (1998). Talk is cheap: Sarcasm, alienation, and the evolution of language. New York: Oxford University Press.
29.
JohnsonK. (2003). Acoustic and auditory phonetics. Oxford: Blackwell.
30.
JohnstoneT.SchererK. R. (2000). Vocal communication of emotion. In LewisM.Haviland-JonesJ. M. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 220–235). New York: Guilford.
31.
JorgensenJ.MillerG. A.SperberD. A. (1984). Test of the mention theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 112–120.
32.
KnollM.ScharrerL.CostallA. (2009). Are actresses better simulators than female students? The effects of simulation on prosodic modifications of infant- and foreigner-directed speech. Speech Communication, 51(3), 296–305.
33.
KnollM.UtherM.MacLeodN.O’NeillM.WalshS. (2006). Emotional, linguistic or just cute? The function of pitch contours in infant- and foreigner-directed speech. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Speech Prosody, Dresden, Germany.
34.
KreuzR. J.KasslerM. A.CoppenrathL.McLain AllenB. (1999). Tag questions and common ground effects in the perception of verbal irony. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1685–1700.
35.
KrugerJ.EpleyN.ParkerJ.NgZ. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 925–936.
36.
KünzelH. J. (2001). Beware of the ‘telephone effect’: The influence of telephone transmission on the measurement of formant frequencies. Forensic Linguistics, 8(1), 80–99.
37.
LandisJ. R.KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorial data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
38.
LavalV.Bert-ErboulA. (2005). French-speaking children’s understanding of sarcasm: The role of intonation and context. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research, 48, 610–620.
39.
LeeC. J.KatzA. N. (1998). The differential role of ridicule in sarcasm and irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 13(1), 1–15.
40.
MacLeodN. (1999a). Generalizing and extending the eigenshape method of shape space visualization and analysis. Paleobiology, 25(1), 107–138.
SchererK. (2003). Vocal communication of emotion: A review of research paradigms. Speech Communication, 40, 227–256.
51.
SearleJ. (1979). Expression and meaning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
52.
SperberD.WilsonD. (1981). Irony and the use-mention distinction. In ColeP. (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 295–318). New York: Academic Press.
53.
UtherM.KnollM.BurnhamD. (2007). Do you speak E-N-G-L-I-S-H? A comparison of foreigner-and infant-directed speech. Speech Communication, 49, 2–7.
54.
WirtzM.CasparF. (2002). Beurteilerübereinstimmung und Beurteilerreliabilität. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
