Each culture has a distinct set of features that contribute to a unique communication style. For example, bilinguals often balance multiple social contexts and may undergo cognitive changes that consequently support different communication styles. The present work examines how individual differences in bilingual experience affect one form of communication style: sarcastic and indirect language. A diverse sample of largely bilingual adults (first language English) rated their likelihood of using sarcastic and indirect language across different daily settings. They also rated their second language experience. There were two key findings: Bilinguals use sarcasm for similar social functions as do monolinguals (general sarcasm, frustration diffusion, and embarrassment diffusion) and greater global second language proficiency linked to greater usage of general sarcasm in daily life. These results suggest that bilinguals may use sarcasm to achieve various communicative goals and bilingual experience may affect general cognitive capacities that support sarcasm use across real-world contexts.
BaumS.TitoneD. (2014). Moving toward a neuroplasticity view of bilingualism, executive control, and aging. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35, 857-894. doi:10.1017/S0142716414000174
2.
BialystokE. (Ed.). (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511605963
3.
BrownP.LevinsonS. C. (Eds.). (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813085
4.
Brown-SchmidtS. (2009). The role of executive function in perspective taking during online language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 893-900. doi:10.3758/pbr.16.5.893
5.
BurgersC.BeukeboomC. J.KelderM.PeetersM. M. E. (2015). How sports fans forge intergroup competition through language: The case of verbal irony. Human Communication Research, 41, 435-457. doi:10.1111/hcre.12052
6.
CarlsonS. M.MosesL. J. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children’s theory of mind. Child Development, 72, 1032-1053. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00333
7.
CaucciG. M.KreuzR. J. (2012). Social and paralinguistic cues to sarcasm. International Journal of Humor Research, 25, 1-22. doi:10.1515/humor-2012-0001
8.
ChannonS.WattsM. (2003). Pragmatic language interpretation after closed head injury: Relationship to executive functioning. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 8, 243-260. doi:10.1080/135468000344000002
9.
ChenX.DewaeleJ. M. (2018). The relationship between English proficiency and humor appreciation among English L1 users and Chinese L2 users of English. Applied Linguistics Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1515/applirev-2018-0002
10.
DanemanM.CarpenterP. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(80)90312-6
11.
DanemanM.CarpenterP. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561-584. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.9.4.561
12.
DeliensG.AntoniouK.ClinE.KissineM. (2017). Perspective-taking and frugal strategies: Evidence from sarcasm detection. Journal of Pragmatics, 119, 33-45. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2017.08.002
13.
DewsS.KaplanJ.WinnerE. (1995). Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony. Discourse Processes, 19, 347-367. doi:10.1080/01638539509544922
14.
DewsS.WinnerE. (1995). Muting the meaning a social function of irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 10, 3-19. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms1001_2
15.
DressM. L.KreuzR. J.LinkK. E.CaucciG. M. (2008). Regional variation in the use of sarcasm. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27, 71-85. doi:10.1177/0261927x07309512
16.
DruckerA.FeinO.BergerbestD.GioraR. (2014). On sarcasm, social awareness, and gender. Humor, 27, 551-573. doi:10.1515/humor-2014-0092
17.
FanS. P.LibermanZ.KeysarB.KinzlerK. D. (2015). The exposure advantage: Early exposure to a multilingual environment promotes effective communication. Psychological Science, 26, 1090-1097. doi:10.1177/0956797615574699
18.
FilippovaE.AstingtonJ. W. (2008). Further development in social reasoning revealed in discourse irony understanding. Child Development, 79, 126-138. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01115.x
19.
GeneseeF.BoivinI.NicoladisE. (1996). Talking with strangers: A study of bilingual children’s communicative competence. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 427-442. doi:10.1017/S0142716400008183
20.
GlenwrightM.PexmanP. M. (2010). Development of children’s ability to distinguish sarcasm and verbal irony. Journal of Child Language, 37, 429-451. doi:10.1017/S0305000909009520
21.
GreenD. W.AbutalebiJ. (2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 515-530. doi:10.1080/20445911.2013.796377
22.
GulliferJ. W.ChaiX. J.WhitfordV.PivnevaI.BaumS.KleinD.TitoneD. (2018). Bilingual experience and resting-state brain connectivity: Impacts of L2 age of acquisition and social diversity of language use on control networks. Neuropsychologia, 117, 123-134. doi:10.31234/osf.io/24xcv
23.
GulliferJ. W.TitoneD. (2019). Characterizing the social diversity of bilingualism using language entropy. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Advance online publication. doi:10.1017/S1366728919000026
HoltgravesT. (1997). Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 624-637. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.624
26.
IdeS. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua: Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 8, 223-248. doi:10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223
27.
IvankoS. L.PexmanP. M.OlineckK. M. (2004). How sarcastic are you? Individual differences and verbal irony. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 244-271. doi:10.1177/0261927x04266809
28.
IzadiA. (2015). Persian honorifics and impoliteness as social practice. Journal of Pragmatics, 85, 81-91. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.002
29.
KaakinenJ. K.OlkoniemiH.KinnariT.HyönäJ. (2014). Processing of written irony: An eye movement study. Discourse Processes, 51, 287-311. doi:10.1080/0163853x.2013.870024
30.
KatzA. N.PexmanP. M. (1997). Interpreting figurative statements: Speaker occupation can change metaphor to irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 12, 19-41. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms1201_3
31.
KozulinA. (1999). Reality monitoring, psychological tools, and cognitive flexibility in bilinguals: Theoretical synthesis and pilot experimental investigation. Lev Vygotsky: Critical Assessments: Future Directions, 4, 187-198. doi:10.1080/00207598808247754
32.
LandryR.BourhisR. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 23-49. doi:10.1177/0261927x970161002
33.
LeeC. J.KatzA. N. (1998). The differential role of ridicule in sarcasm and irony. Metaphor and Symbol, 13, 1-15. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms1301_1
34.
LehtonenM.SoveriA.LaineA.JärvenpääJ.de BruinA.AntfolkJ. (2018). Is bilingualism associated with enhanced executive functioning in adults? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 394-425. doi:10.1037/bul0000142
35.
LinS.KeysarB.EpleyN. (2010). Reflexively mindblind: Using theory of mind to interpret behavior requires effortful attention. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 551-556. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.019
36.
MacIntyreP. D.NoelsK. A.ClémentR. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language Learning, 47, 265-287. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.81997008
37.
MaoL. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: “Face” revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451-486. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90025-6
38.
MartinI.McDonaldS. (2005). Evaluating the causes of impaired irony comprehension following traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology, 19, 712-730. doi:10.1080/02687030500172203
39.
MephamK. D.MartinovicB. (2018). Multilingualism and out-group acceptance: The mediating roles of cognitive flexibility and deprovincialization. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37, 51-73. doi:10.1177/0261927x17706944
40.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 8-14. doi:10.1177/0963721411429458
41.
NicoladisE. (1998). First clues to the existence of two input languages: Pragmatic and lexical differentiation in a bilingual child. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 105-116. doi:10.1017/s1366728998000236
42.
NicoladisE.GeneseeF. (1998). Parental discourse and codemixing in bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 2, 85-99. doi:10.1177/136700699800200104
43.
NortonB. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 409-429. doi:10.2307/3587831
44.
OlkoniemiH.RantaH.KaakinenJ. K. (2016). Individual differences in the processing of written sarcasm and metaphor: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 433-450. doi:10.1037/xlm0000176
PernerJ.LangB. (2000). Theory of mind and executive function: Is there a developmental relationship? In Baron-CohenS.Tager-FlusbergH.CohenD. J. (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 150-181). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
47.
PexmanP. M. (2008). It’s fascinating research: The cognition of verbal irony. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 286-290. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00591.x
48.
PexmanP. M.GlenwrightM. (2007). How do typically developing children grasp the meaning of verbal irony?Journal of Neurolinguistics, 20, 178-196. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.06.001
49.
PexmanP. M.OlineckK. M. (2002). Does sarcasm always sting? Investigating the impact of ironic insults and ironic compliments. Discourse Processes, 33, 199-217. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3303_1
50.
PexmanP. M.ZvaigzneM. T. (2004). Does irony go better with friends?Metaphor and Symbol, 19, 143-163. doi:10.1207/s15327868ms1902_3
51.
RockwellP.TheriotE. M. (2001). Culture, gender, and gender mix in encoders of sarcasm: A self-assessment analysis. Communication Research Reports, 18, 44-52. doi:10.1080/08824090109384781
52.
RothbartM. K.PosnerM. I. (1985). Temperament and the development of self-regulation. In HartlageL. C.TelzrowC. F. (Eds.), The neuropsychology of individual differences: Perspectives on individual differences (pp. 93-123). Boston, MA: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3484-0_5
53.
Rubio-FernándezP.GlucksbergS. (2012). Reasoning about other people’s beliefs: Bilinguals have an advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 211-217. doi:10.1037/a0025162
54.
SchroederS. R. (2018). Do bilinguals have an advantage in theory of mind? A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Communication, 3, 36. doi:10.3389/fcomm.2018.00036
55.
SheikhN. A.TitoneD. A. (2013). Sensorimotor and linguistic information attenuate emotional word processing benefits: An eye-movement study. Emotion, 13, 1107-1121. doi:10.1037/a0032417
56.
Spencer-OateyH.WangJ. (2019). Culture, context, and concerns about face: Synergistic insights from pragmatics and social psychology. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 38, 423-440. doi:10.1177/0261927X19865293
57.
TareM.GelmanS. A. (2011). Bilingual parents’ modeling of pragmatic language use in multiparty interactions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 761-780. doi:10.1017/s0142716411000051
58.
UnsworthN.HeitzR. P.SchrockJ. C.EngleR. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498-505.
59.
VaidJ.LópezB. G.MartinezF. E. (2015). Linking the figurative to the creative: Bilinguals’ comprehension of metaphors, jokes, and remote associates. In HerediaR. R.CieślickaA. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 53-86). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9781139342100.006
60.
VingronN.GulliferJ. W.HamillJ.LeimgruberJ.TitoneD. (2017). Using eye tracking to investigate what bilinguals notice about linguistic landscape images. Linguistic Landscape, 3, 226-245. doi:10.1075/ll.17014.vin
61.
YimO.Clément (2019). “You’re a juksing”: Examining Cantonese-English code-switching as an index of identity. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 38, 479-495. doi:10.1177/0261927X19865572
62.
ZelazoP. D.CarterA.ReznickJ. S.FryeD. (1997). Early development of executive function: A problem-solving framework. Review of General Psychology, 1, 198-226. doi:10.1037//1089-2680.1.2.198
