Abstract
Subjects read scenarios where a speaker made a comment that, depending on information that was privileged to the subjects, could have been interpreted as sarcastic or not sarcastic. Their task was to take the perspective of an uninformed addressee and determine whether he or she would perceive sarcasm. Overall, when subjects believed that the speaker was actually being sarcastic they were more likely to attribute the perception of sarcasm to the addressee - even when the message was conveyed in writing and could not have involved disambiguating cues such as intonation. Data from four different experiments suggest that readers do use information that is perspective-irrelevant and thus pose a problem for theories of language use that assume readers only use "relevant" information.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
