Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HOLMES, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Politeness, Power and Provocation: How Humour Functions in the Workplace

JANET HOLMES

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON

This article examines verbal humour in routine interactions within professional workplaces, using material recorded in four New Zealand government departments. The problem of defining humour is discussed, followed by a brief outline of the theoretical models which underpin the analysis of the various functions which humour serves in professional organizations.

Humour can express positive affect in interaction. It can also facilitate or `licence' more negative interpersonal communicative intent. While politeness theory can account for the former, as a means of expressing collegiality at work, or de-emphasizing power imbalances, in its standard form politeness theory does not explain barbed, competitive or confrontational humour. For this it is necessary to look to `the dark side of politeness' (Austin, 1990). An alternative perspective thus examines the extent to which humour functions, especially in unequal encounters, as an acceptable strategy to help superiors maintain a position of power but also as a strategy used by subordinates to licence challenges to the power structures within which they operate, and as a legitimizing strategy in attempts at subverting the repressive or coercive discourse of superiors.

Key Words: contestation • critical discourse analysis • humour • politeness theory • power • resistance • workplace

Discourse Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, 159-185 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/1461445600002002002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Contemporary EthnographyHome page
P. B. Patterson, P. Hawe, P. Clarke, C. Krause, M. van Dijk, Y. Penman, and A. Shiell
The Worldview of Hospital Security Staff: Implications for Health Promotion Policy Implementation
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, June 1, 2009; 38(3): 336 - 357.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
O. H. Lynch and Z. A. Schaefer
Review Essay: Humor Without Interaction: A Joke Without a Punch Line
Management Communication Quarterly, February 1, 2009; 22(3): 512 - 520.
[PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Business CommunicationHome page
H. Kangasharju and T. Nikko
Emotions in Organizations: Joint Laughter in Workplace Meetings
Journal of Business Communication, January 1, 2009; 46(1): 100 - 119.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 DISCOURSE & COMMUNICATIONHome page
Guowei Jian, A. M. Schmisseur, and G. T. Fairhurst
Organizational discourse and communication: the progeny of Proteus
Discourse & Communication, August 1, 2008; 2(3): 299 - 320.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
C. Cooper
Elucidating the bonds of workplace humor: A relational process model
Human Relations, August 1, 2008; 61(8): 1087 - 1115.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
J. Swann and J. Maybin
Introduction: Language Creativity in Everyday Contexts
Applied Linguistics, December 1, 2007; 28(4): 491 - 496.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
J. Holmes
Making Humour Work: Creativity on the Job
Applied Linguistics, December 1, 2007; 28(4): 518 - 537.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
N. D. Bell
Book review: MICHAEL BILLIG, Laughter and Ridicule: Towards a Social Critique of Humour. London: Sage, 2005. 264 pp. $39.95 (pbk), $104.00 (hbk)
Discourse Society, July 1, 2007; 18(4): 508 - 510.
[PDF]

Home page
 Feminism PsychologyHome page
J. Watts
IV. Can't Take a Joke? Humour as Resistance, Refuge and Exclusion in a Highly Gendered Workplace
Feminism Psychology, May 1, 2007; 17(2): 259 - 266.
[PDF]

Home page
 LeadershipHome page
J. Holmes
Humour and the Construction of Maori Leadership at Work
Leadership, February 1, 2007; 3(1): 5 - 27.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
C. Prichard
Challenging Academic Imperialism: Some Tactics for Constructing an Organizational Communication of the Elsewhere
Management Communication Quarterly, November 1, 2005; 19(2): 270 - 278.
[PDF]

Home page
 Discourse StudiesHome page
N. D. Bell
Book Review: Laughter in Interaction
Discourse Studies, February 1, 2005; 7(1): 137 - 138.
[PDF]

Home page
 Qual Health ResHome page
A. Chapple and S. Ziebland
The Role of Humor for Men with Testicular Cancer
Qual Health Res, October 1, 2004; 14(8): 1123 - 1139.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Qualitative ResearchHome page
R. R. Gouin
What's So Funny?: Humor in women's accounts of their involvement in social action
Qualitative Research, April 1, 2004; 4(1): 25 - 44.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse StudiesHome page
R. E. Page
Evaluation in childbirth narratives told by women and men
Discourse Studies, February 1, 2002; 4(1): 99 - 116.
[Abstract] [PDF]