Education of the republic of uzbekistan state world languages university

Script opposition (SO) references the script opposition included in Raskin's SSTH. This includes, among others, themes such as real (unreal), actual (non-actual), normal (abnormal), possible (impossible).

Logical mechanism (LM) refers to the mechanism which connects the different scripts in the joke. These can range from a simple verbal technique like a pun to more complex LMs such as faulty logic or false analogies.

Situation (SI) can include objects, activities, instruments, props needed to tell the story.

Target (TA) identifies the actor(s) who become the "butt" of the joke. This labeling serves to develop and solidify stereotypes of ethnic groups, professions, etc.

Narrative strategy (NS) addresses the narrative format of the joke, as either a simple narrative, a dialogue, or a riddle. It attempts to classify the different genres and subgenres of verbal humor. In a subsequent study Attardo expands the NS to include oral and printed humorous narratives of any length, not just jokes.

Language (LA) "...contains all the information necessary for the verbalization of a text. It is responsible for the exact wording ...and for the placement of the functional elements."^[38]

To illustrate their theory, the authors use 7 examples of the light bulb joke, each variant shifted by a single Knowledge Resource. Each one of the KRs, ordered hierarchically above and starting with the Script Opposition, has the ability to "determine the parameters below themselves, and are determined [circumscribed] by those above themselves. 'Determination' is to be intended as limiting or reducing the options available for the instantiation of the parameter; for example, the choice of the SO [script opposition] DUMB/SMART will reduce the options available to the generation in the TA (in North America to Poles, etc.)
One of the advantages of this theory (GTVH) over Raskin's script-based semantic theory (SSTH) is that through the inclusion of the Narrative Strategy (NS) any and all humorous texts can be categorized. Whereas Raskin's SSTH only deals with jokes, the GTVH considers all humorous text from spontaneous one-liners to funny stories and literature. This theory can also, by identifying how many of the Knowledge Resources are identical for any two humorous pieces, begin to define the degree of similarity between the two.
As to the ordering of the Knowledge Resources, there has been much discussion. Willibald Ruch, a distinguished German psychologist, and humor researcher, wanted to test empirically the ordering of the Knowledge Resources, with only partial success. Nevertheless, both the listed Knowledge Resources in the GTVH and their relationship to each other has proven to be fertile ground in the further investigation of what exactly makes humor funny.
According to George Eman Vaillant's (1977) categorization, humor is level 4 defense mechanism: overt expression of ideas and feelings (especially those that are unpleasant to focus on or too terrible to talk about) that gives pleasure to others. Humor, which explores the absurdity inherent in any event, enables someone to call a spade a spade, while wit is a form of displacement (level 3).  Wit refers to the serious or distressing in a humorous way, rather than disarming it; the thoughts remain distressing, but they are "skirted round" by witticism.
One must have a sense of humor and a sense of seriousness to distinguish what is supposed to be taken literally or not. An even more keen sense is needed when humor is used to make a serious point. Psychologists have studied how humor is intended to be taken as having seriousness, as when court jesters used humor to convey serious information. Conversely, when humor is not intended to be taken seriously, bad taste in humor may cross a line after which it is taken seriously, though not intended.
Tony Veale, who takes a more formalised computational approach than Koestler, has written on the role of metaphor and metonymy in humour, using inspiration from Koestler as well as from Dedre Gentner's theory of structure-mapping, George Lakoff and Mark Johnson's theory of conceptual metaphor, and Mark Turner and Gilles Fauconnier's theory of conceptual blending.
Mikhail Bakhtin's humor theory is one that is based on "poetic metaphor", or the allegory of the protagonist's logosphere.
The O'Shannon model of humor (OMOH) was introduced by Dan O'Shannon in "What Are You Laughing At? A Comprehensive Guide to the Comedic Event", published in 2012. The model integrates all the general branches of comedy into a unified framework. This framework consists of four main sections: context, information, aspects of awareness, and enhancers/inhibitors. Elements of context are in play as reception factors prior to the encounter with comedic information. This information will require a level of cognitive process to interpret, and contain a degree of incongruity (based on predictive likelihood). That degree may be high, or go as low as to be negligible. The information will be seen simultaneously through several aspects of awareness (the comedy's internal reality, its external role as humor, its effect on its context, effect on other receivers, etc.). Any element from any of these sections may trigger enhancers / inhibitors (feelings of superiority, relief, aggression, identification, shock, etc.) which will affect the receiver's ultimate response. The various interactions of the model allow for a wide range of comedy; for example, a joke needn’t rely on high levels of incongruity if it triggers feelings of superiority, aggression, relief, or identification. Also, high incongruity humor may trigger a visceral response, while well-constructed word-play with low incongruity might trigger a more appreciative response. Also included in the book: evolutionary theories that account for visceral and social laughter, and the phenomenon of comedic entropy.
We discussed four different schools of humor theories and noted how each reveals aspects common, if not necessary, to humor. Presenting these theories as rivals is misleading since, as we have seen, theorists in each classification focus on different problems and may draw upon the answers to different questions from another school. For instance, while focusing on why we find something funny, Spencer offers a functional explanation and relies on the answer incongruity theorists give to the question of what we find funny. Relief theories and Play theories tend to focus on the function humor serves in human life, though the functional question cannot be separated from characterizing amusement, or the humor response. Superiority theorists tend to focus on what feelings are necessary for there to be humor, or why we find some things funny. Incongruity theories have the most to say about the object of humor, though variants identify humor with the way we respond to a perceived incongruity. Though the functional, stimuli, and response questions are not neatly separated, the differing schools tend to assume that one question is more basic than the others.

1.3 Common types of humor used in literature

Humor is one of the most effective literary weapons to please the audience, as it develops characters and makes plots useful and memorable. Humor plays many functions in a literary work. It arouses interest among readers, sustains their attention, helps them connect with the characters, emphasizes and relates ideas, and helps the readers picture the situation. Through this tool, writers can also improve the quality of their works by pleasing the audience. Apart from that, the most dominant function of humor is to provide surprise, which not only improves quality, but improves memorable style of a literary piece. The writers learn how to use words for different objectives.
If you're studying literature or trying to figure out how to make your own work more amusing, it's a good idea to learn about the many varieties of humor found in books and poems. Literary humour may take many forms, and learning to recognize them is both enjoyable and beneficial to your own writing. In literature, one form of humour is incongruity or surprise. This form of humor might be as basic as an absurd sight, such as a pig in a submarine, or it can be based on a situational surprise. Something unexpected occurs, causing the reader to chuckle. There are several types of devices that create humor. Humor is, in fact, the end product and not the device itself. These devices are:

• 
  Hyperbole/Exaggeration
  
• 
  Incongruity
  
• 
  Slapstick
  
• 
  Surprise
  
• 
  Sarcasm
  
• 
  Irony
  
• 
  Pun
  

Consider the following excerpt from Douglas Adams' The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
“So this is it,” said Arthur, “We are going to die.”
“Yes,” said Ford, “except… no! Wait a minute!” He suddenly lunged across the chamber at something behind Arthur’s line of vision. “What’s this switch?” he cried.
“What? Where?” cried Arthur, twisting round.
“No, I was only fooling,” said Ford, “we are going to die after all.”
Self-deprecating humor is when the speaker or a character makes fun of himself or herself. This makes the character vulnerable to the reader, but at the same time, it also shows strength. It’s a unique type of humor, but you see it in some of the great stories.
Here’s an example from Right Ho, Jeeves by P.G. Wodehouse:
“Beginning with a critique of my own limbs, which she said, justly enough, were nothing to write home about, this girl went on to dissect my manners, morals, intellect, general physique, and method of eating asparagus.”
A situation can be downright hilarious when it’s described properly. The situation, whether real or imaginary, is just funny. Throughout literature, there are many examples of situational humor that leave readers laughing.
Often situational humor is based on perspective as in this example from The Accidental Tourist by Anne Tyler:
“Ever consider what pets must think of us? I mean, here we come back from a grocery store with the most amazing haul - chicken, pork, half a cow. They must think we're the greatest hunters on earth!”
Many literary texts use irony in a humorous way. There are several types of irony, but they all involve the contrast between what is said or seems to happen and what actually happens. One specific type is dramatic irony, in which the reader knows something the character does not. You’ll also see situational irony and verbal irony.
In Cold Comfort Farm, Stella Gibbons offers a great example of verbal irony in the difference between what her character Flora says and what she really thinks:
“‘That would be delightful,’ agreed Flora, thinking how nasty and boring it would be.”
When the writer describes a situation or event in an obviously understated way, this can be hilarious for the reader. The key here is that the reader knows the full extent of the real situation and is conscious of the ridiculous understatement that is happening.
It is seen that understatement in action in Kurt Vonnegut’s Breakfast of Champions:
“Vietnam was a country where America was trying to make people stop being communists by dropping things on them from airplanes.”
Similarly, overstating a situation can be funny too. In this case, the reader understands the real situation and is amused when the writer exaggerates it.
Steve Martin uses overstatement in this passage about dieting from his book Cruel Shoes:
“The problem with the diets of today is that most women who do achieve that magic weight, seventy-six pounds, are still fat.”
When a writer uses a serious tone to discuss a ridiculous subject, that type of humor is satire. You’ll find many examples of satire in literature. This technique is popular with everyone from Shakespeare to Douglas Adams.
One famous example of satire is A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift. In this essay, Swift pretends to propose that people should eat children to take care of the hunger problem and overpopulation at the same time:
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.
Jane Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice is one of her most popular works. Throughout the entire novel, Jane Austen uses humor. She presents a very hilarious scene between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet. Mrs. Bennet endlessly breaks down and makes complaints for her husband’s lack of understanding her nerves, and then he responds by saying:
“You mistake me, my dear. I have a high respect for your nerves. They are my old friends. I have heard your mention them with consideration these twenty years at least.”
He constantly pokes fun at her. Likewise, Austen bursts with humor in the case of Elizabeth and Darcy as, upon their first meeting, both feel a sense of disgust for one another. However, later they enjoy teasing each other.
In The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (By Mark Twain) it is highlighted such sentences:
“No, don`t you worry; these country jakes will not ever think of that. Besides, you know, you will be in costume, and that makes all the difference in the world; Juliet is in a balcony, enjoying the moonlight before she goes to bed, and she has got on her nightgown and her ruffled nightcap. Here are the costumes for the parts.”
In this example, the duke is unable to notice the silliness of his own actions, instead he makes comments on the low level of understanding of the country jakes.
Harper Lee has inserted humor by creating funny situations with a serious tone in her novel, To Kill a Mockingbird. Many descriptions about Dill are funny and humorous, as he is presented as a larger-than-life person. When we first meet him, the kids take him a puppy. Then he says his name is Charles Baker Harris, saying that he can read, in spite of his age.
We also see a lot of humor in Scout’s actions, coming from her efforts to comprehend adult ideas, which are very complex for a child like her. Author is showing her to be a very smart kid. A humorous event occurs during Scout’s first day at school. Miss Caroline, the teacher, is naive, and “looked, and smelled like a peppermint drop.” We meet her when Scout tells her she had already been punished before lunch on her very first day at school, making children mildly suspicious.
Charles Dickens derives humor through characterization in his novel Great Expectations. The tone is serious, but there are humorous touches that punctuate the main action. We see a humorous scene in the dinner party when Joe Gargery tells his life story to Pip, and subtly measures gravy on Pip’s plate, while Mrs. Gargery gets onto him. Another funny situation happens when Magwitch wants to sleep and asks Pip:
“Where will you put me?” (Magwith) asked, presently. “I must be put somewhere, dear boy.”