Abstract
In verbal irony, the speaker’s intended meaning can be counterfactual to the literal meaning of their words. This form of figurative language can help speakers achieve a number of communicative aims, but also presents an interpretive challenge for some listeners. There is debate about the skills that support the acquisition of irony comprehension in typical development, and about why verbal irony presents a challenge for many individuals, including children with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders and second-language learners. Researchers have explored teaching verbal irony in a very small number of training studies in disparate fields. We bring together and review this limited research. We argue that a focus on training studies in future research could address a number of theoretical questions about irony comprehension and could help refine interventions for individuals who struggle with this form of social language.
Highlights
Irony is a common form of figurative language, widespread across cultures and languages (Booth 1974)
Irony comprehension is an important aspect of pragmatic language skills, and one that is challenging for typically developing children (e.g., Capelli et al 1990; Filippova and Astington 2008; Winner 1988), for many clinical populations (e.g., Dennis et al 2013; Happé 1993; Langdon et al 2002) and for second-language learners (e.g., Bouton 1999; Kim 2014)
We will argue that a future focus on training studies could provide important theoretical insights about the development of irony appreciation and could help address how best to help those who struggle with this form of figurative language
Summary
Irony is a common form of figurative language, widespread across cultures and languages (Booth 1974). Irony comprehension is an important aspect of pragmatic language skills, and one that is challenging for typically developing children (e.g., Capelli et al 1990; Filippova and Astington 2008; Winner 1988), for many clinical populations (e.g., Dennis et al 2013; Happé 1993; Langdon et al 2002) and for second-language learners (e.g., Bouton 1999; Kim 2014). For members of these groups, deficits in irony understanding can have negative social consequences, including social exclusion and misunderstandings The primary communicative purposes of sarcastic irony are to mock or tease, to criticize indirectly, and to be funny (Kreuz et al 1991; Roberts and Kreuz 1994)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
