Automatic Sarcasm Detection: A Survey <s> Relationship with irony, deception, metaphor, and humor <s> Humor and wit are complex cognitive, social, and linguistic phenomena that are relevant to research in text comprehension, pragmatics, and discourse processing. We begin by presenting a taxonomy of jokes and wit as a useful, descriptive tool. Next, we argue that humor processing may occur in a parallel rather than serial fashion by contrasting a serial‐processing, incongruity‐resolution model with an alternative dual‐processing model. We subsequently endorse a theory of speech acts as a theoretical framework for the consideration of wit in discourse processing. Specifically, we argue that detailed analytical theories such as Allen's (1983) are needed to clarify the semantic and computational foundations of humor and wit. We present a taxonomy of the social functions of wit and argue that the consideration of wit as a plan for the fulfillment of social and discourse goals will enrich our theories of conversation. <s> BIB001 </s> Automatic Sarcasm Detection: A Survey <s> Relationship with irony, deception, metaphor, and humor <s> Kreuz and Glucksberg (1989) argued that sarcasm and irony are similar in that both are forms of reminder, yet different in that sarcasm conveys ridicule of a specific victim whereas irony does not. This article reports two experiments that provide empirical evidence of this relation. In both experiments, undergraduates read a series of passages. One group rated a target utterance in terms of the extent to which it was a good example of sarcasm, and a second group rated it in terms of the extent to which it was a good example of irony. In Experiment 1, a manipulation of ridicule was found to affect the participants' ratings of sarcasm hut not their ratings of irony. In Experiment 2, it was found that ratings of the extent to which an utterance ridiculed a specific victim were correlated with sarcasm to a greater extent than with irony. These findings provide support for the notion that ridicule of a specific victim is one way in which sarcasm differs from irony. <s> BIB002 </s> Automatic Sarcasm Detection: A Survey <s> Relationship with irony, deception, metaphor, and humor <s> Abstract Humor is an essential part of our life and an important means to cope with stressful life events. Recent research established that humor is a multi-faceted construct that includes both adaptive and maladaptive humor styles. Whereas self-enhancing and affiliative humor styles seem to be beneficial, aggressive and self-defeating humor styles may be less beneficial or even detrimental to mental health. Self-defeating humor correlates positively with loneliness, shyness, depression, and negatively with explicit (i.e., conscious, deliberate) self-esteem. Furthermore, research has found that individuals possessing “damaged” self-esteem (i.e., a self-esteem discrepancy where individuals exhibit low explicit but high implicit [i.e., unconscious, automatic] self-esteem) have very similar characteristics as individuals using self-defeating humor. We therefore theorized that there is an association between damaged self-esteem and self-defeating humor, which we indeed found. Possible mechanisms and explanations for this link are discussed. <s> BIB003
Sarcasm is related to other forms of incongruity or figurative language. Sarcasm has an element of ridicule that irony does not BIB002 . Deception also appears to be closely related to sarcasm. If a person says "I love this soup," then they could be speaking the truth (literal proposition), they could be lying (deception), or they could be sarcastic (sarcasm). The difference between literal proposition and deception lies in intention of the speaker  , while the difference between sarcasm and deception lies in shared knowledge between speaker and listener BIB001 . If the speaker saw a fly floating on the soup, then the statement above is likely to have a sarcastic intention. Whether or not the listener understands the sarcasm depends on whether the listener saw the fly in the soup and whether the listener believes that the presence of a fly in a soup makes it bad. Reference BIB003 refers to sarcasm as a form of aggressive humor. Thus, the peculiarity that distinguishes sarcasm from other forms of incongruent expression, humor, is the element of mockery or ridicule. Reference  distinguishes between metaphor and sarcasm in terms of the plausibility of the statement. The authors state that a metaphor is never literally plausible. For example, A says to B, "You are an elephant" to imply that B has a good memory is metaphorical, because a human being cannot literally be an elephant. However, a sarcasm, as in the case of "You have a very good memory," may be plausible for people with a good memory but sarcastic if said to a forgetful person. These characteristics of sarcasm relate it to these linguistic expressions like humor or metaphor. It is also these characteristics such as incongruity, shared knowledge, plausibility, and ridicule that form the basis of many works in automatic sarcasm detection, as described in the forthcoming sections.