[net.nlang] Puns and pains

preston@valid.UUCP (Preston Gardner) (02/20/86)

> In article <1335@gitpyr.UUCP> jkr@gitpyr.UUCP (J. Kenneth Riviere) writes:
> >Why are puns considered to be offensive?  I have come to the
> >conclusion that puns are considered painful to the listeners since there is
> >at least a subconsious understanding that there cannot be humor unless it
> >involves pain for someone.  Since puns do not explicitly degrade, insult, or
> >otherwise hurt anyone the pain involved must be experienced by the listeners.
> >Just a thought.
> 
> How about this for an explanation of the "offensive" character of
> puns.  When we hear a sentence, and reparsing it yields punishment,
> our expectations and reality grind together.  And this contrast
> between our ideals (a non-ambiguous utterance) and the reality (a
> punjab in the linguistic processor) can be pungent enough to bring
> tears to the eyes.

Jacques Derrida, in his book Of Grammatology (couldn't find page,
since there is no index) and in his other writings, says people don't
like puns because in Western culture we like to believe that when we
speak we are conveying our meaning or intention directly to the hearer
without intervention of such imperfect physical things as sounds.  We
don't like to have someone be confused about what we mean and
sometimes we even take others' confusion as an attack.  To have to use
these cruddy word sound letter character things for our lofty
important meanings is an indignity to us, just as our bodily functions
are -- and there are a vast number of jokes about bodily functions.

I don't know that I want to try to describe his ideas about what he
calls the `metaphysics of presence' but it is easy enough to interpret
a pun as an offense (a) against the speaker, if you pun on something
he said; (b) against the listener, if you are deliberately making
him misunderstand something; (c) against the language, for fracturing and
abusing its words.

Derrida in talking about puns is thinking mainly about why puns are
not considered kosher in literature or serious discourse; he isn't so
much concerned with jokes.  Of course literature is full of puns, most
notably James Joyce's _Finnegans Wake_, but `serious readers' often turn
up their nose at them.  Derrida has made some serious philosophical
jargon terms out of puns.

I'm sure that anything that anyone laughs at can be interpreted as
involving pain or aggression.  But I wouldn't conclude from this that
the basic meaning of humor is aggression -- I don't think there is a
basic meaning of humor, there are only meanings, none of which are
privileged or fundamental.  (This is also an idea I got from
Derrida.)

mjs@sfsup.UUCP (M.J.Shannon) (02/21/86)

I find even the suggestion that puns inflict "pain" humorous.  In my
experience, the only hint of pain at a pun is the groan usually uttered
by the listeners.  On the other hand, I myself groan only to show my
appreciation of the pun.  Why?  Good question.  I assume it's due to
the environment I was brought up in (linguistic humor was strongly
encouraged by my parents and their friends I met), and the "accepted"
reaction in that environment.  In any event, I find good puns to be a
lot of fun (more so when I come up with them myself, of course).
-- 
	Marty Shannon
UUCP:	ihnp4!attunix!mjs
Phone:	+1 (201) 522 6063

Disclaimer: I speak for no one.

"If I never loved, I never would have cried." -- Simon & Garfunkel