Chapter 1 Introduction

Irony in its numerous manifestations has been studied throughout history beginning

with the ancient Greeks, and has been the subject of much debate among linguistic

scholars due to the difficulty of clarification. Irony is a conception uniquely known to

mankind, although even among human beings irony remains elusive, notably when taking

into account cultural and linguistic differences. Through this research we seek to

contribute to the understanding of verbal irony through analysis of discourse found in

literature. The analysis elucidates the purpose of verbal irony by illustrating its role in

character construction. This study centers on verbal irony between the protagonists Mr.

Darcy and Elizabeth within the novel Pride and Prejudice (1813)1 by renowned novelist

Jane Austen.

The remainder of this chapter provides background information for the novel in

addition to the purpose and significance of this study. Pride and Prejudice is well-known

for being a prime example of an ironical work in literature; in particular the novel was

chosen for its impact over the last two centuries, and the publication has marked its 200-

year anniversary. Verbal irony as the principal form of communication between the

novel’s two protagonists Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth further provides an ideal source of

data, as this research analyzes the significance of verbal irony in character construction.

To find a reliable method of analyzing verbal irony, in this study we adopt a two-

tiered approach pairing speaker intent with hearer uptake: first classifying speaker intent

via modified speech act theory and then further identifying hearer uptake with echoic

allusions of disagreement, neutral, and agreement groupings. Searle’s speech act theory

(2001b) [1979] is modified using Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act to

replace declarations in order to provide a more inclusive classification. Echoic theory’s

allusion (Wilson & Sperber, 2012) and a modified speech act theory are utilized in

combination for examining each ironical utterance for data collection. Speech act theory

elucidates the speaker’s intent and echoic allusions provide the site of infelicity within

each ironical utterance for the hearer’s uptake. Speaker intent is found in the illocutionary

act and hearer uptake intended by the speaker is located through the perlocutionary act

1 Pride and Prejudice was originally published in London by T. Egerton in 1813. This study uses a reprinted edition from Penguin Classics based upon the first edition (Austen, 2003: xii).

1

meant to explicate the incongruity in the utterance. Using a modified speech act theory

and echoic allusions as the basis for interpretation, the ironical utterances are then subject

to further analysis according to incongruity and superiority theories. The verbal ironies

are analyzed through incongruity theory (e.g. Norrick, 2003) to stress their infelicity

through the dual layers of intended meaning and literal meaning. Superiority theory (e.g.

Morreall, 2009) successfully explains the characteristics inherent within verbal irony and

thus is useful for analyzing utterances.

1.1 The Author and the Novel

1.1.1 Jane Austen

Jane Austen has been analyzed repeatedly, both prior to and since her death (Litz,

1975; Husbands, 1954). Yet there is no consensus on her novels or her personality. The

only consensus that can be drawn is that she had a strong sense of humor and a critical

view of the world. She has been variously described within literature as a feminist, a

prude, a romantic, a conservative, and a radical (Brown, 1973; Downie, 2006; Bochman,

2005; Litz, 1975). The scope of this study cannot conjecture exactly who Austen was or

the underlying meaning of all her works; instead we focus on the elucidation of her

writing to inform subsequent discussion on her ironical characters Mr. Darcy and

Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice. Austen was born in 1775, one of seven children of a

village clergyman. In similar financial circumstances as so many of her heroines, Austen

was never to enjoy economic largesse despite her success (Newton, 1978; Bate, 1999:

546). Austen’s status in literature, in her lifetime and posthumously, is demonstrated by

the continual analysis of her literature and by the fact that all her works, especially Pride

and Prejudice, have been adapted, abridged, and rewritten often since the early 19 th

century (Wright, 1975).

This status owes greater thanks to her ironically witty writing style than to her

subject matter centered on marriage. Robinson suggests that the literary style of an author

is defined as the way he or she does things, expression of personality, thoughts, and their

character, positing when analyzing authors their usage of certain language is what

provides clues of their style (1985: 233). Austen’s works have been romanticized and

historicized to display nostalgia for a green and pleasant England rich in tradition (Bate,

2

1999). This focus on country life has led to Austen’s critics preeminently positing her as

bourgeois and focused on criticizing establishment through a “reproduction of aristocratic

culture,” yet this stereotype may have been wrongly assigned (Gilroy, Lynch, Park,

Rajan, & Tuite, 2002: 120). Analysis of Pride and Prejudice finds that Austen is still

writing about high society; for example, while the Bennets are not considered to be high

in social status by the likes of Lady Catherine de Bourgh, they are in fact more than

comfortably well off, as can be realized through an examination of the number of

servants that they employ (Downie, 2006: 70). Furthermore, Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley,

while lacking titles, are both rich by the standards of the day. This suggests that Austen

did not hold any disdain for economic wealth and independence, only the social

constraints which society placed upon its members.

Austen consistently attempts to provide her characters with a break from the

inflexible societal rules. For example, Elizabeth frequently defies social conventions by

mocking Mr. Darcy, intentionally using irony. This ironic view of feminist behavior and

how it could be displayed shows Austen’s skeptical views of her society (Brown, 1973:

331-332). This “sentimental novel” at the time was that any woman who had wronged in

society’s eyes should be removed from the story, usually through death brought on by her

shame (Johnson, 1989: 172). Austen, however, shows that young women who have come

to a bad decision but regret their mistakes should be allowed to be rehabilitated within

society, for example Elizabeth’s sympathy towards Miss Darcy’s near elopement with Mr.

Wickham.

Authors were mostly bound by the views of society; it was virtually outside of their

imaginative scope to write female protagonists who not only had a role in their own

destiny but impacted the lives of others. Nonetheless, Austen pushed past the bounds of

her own creativity and challenged societal constraints to provide enduring heroines with

the capability to control their own fates. Elizabeth as a female protagonist shows Austen’s

pride in her gender. Toolan remarks that few examples of “agentive” females appear in

literature until the approach of the 20th century, from which we extrapolate Austen as

having been ahead of her time as seen by her use of a female protagonist able to affect

her own situation (1988: 246). Even later in the 19th century, while heroines are found in

literature, many fail to be in charge of their fates to the same extent that Elizabeth is.

It is impossible for the author, and thus her characters, to remain immune from the

3

situation in which they live and thus their views of society will be portrayed within the

novel (Sullivan, 1991: 578). Feng notes that “narratives are one of the forms through

which a culture understands itself and its past” (2008: 187), therefore Austen’s

commentary on the cultural norms of her time attempt to view her culture from a

particular perspective. Donovan suggests that the rise and development of the novel as a

literary art form can in large part be attributed to female writers. The artistic quality of the

novel was enhanced by the “polyvocal” form (Donovan, 1991: 443), signifying polyvocal

as having many voices, and seen in female writers’ novels through their use of many

characters’ voices as opposed to male authors’ narrations from a male protagonist’s

perspective. This aspect is particularly observed in Pride and Prejudice’s depiction of

multiple characters through discourse. The female protagonist Elizabeth is portrayed as a

“studier of character,” (Austen, 2003: 42) illustrating the significance of Austen’s

polyvocal style to show the alternative perspectives of her characters.

1.1.2 Pride and Prejudice: Plot Overview

Pride and Prejudice is set in the world of Regency England and centers on the

fortunes of the five daughters of the Bennet family of Hertfordshire, particularly the two

eldest Jane and Elizabeth. Elizabeth takes the role of the female protagonist. With the

sisters’ introduction to a new single man of substantial means in the setting of

Netherfield, Mrs. Bennet resolves that the newcomer shall marry one of her daughters.

This plot point illustrates Austen’s articulation of her antecedent ironical statement, “It is

a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must

be in want of a wife” (Austen, 2003: 5). The new neighbor Mr. Bingley also brings with

him his sisters and good friend Mr. Darcy. Upon meeting at a ball hosted at Meryton, Mr.

Bingley is soon enamored by the eldest Miss Bennet, while Mr. Darcy ends the evening

snubbing Elizabeth, thus raising her ire. However, the machinations of Mrs. Bennet cause

the four to be drawn closer together, providing Mr. Darcy with the opportunity to revise

his opinions of Elizabeth.

Met with more enthusiasm by the ladies of the neighborhood is the billeting of a

regiment in the local town. Elizabeth particularly enjoys the company of Mr. Wickham,

who does not portray Mr. Darcy in the best light. Mr. Wickham’s testimony reinforces

Elizabeth’s assumptions about Mr. Darcy’s lack of moral character. Meanwhile, Elizabeth

4

has been pursued by her cousin, Mr. Collins, who has the distinction of Mr. Bennet’s

good will being given to him. Elizabeth rejects his marriage proposal directly, upon

which he turns to Elizabeth’s good friend Charlotte Lucas who accepts Mr. Collins’

proposal.

Elizabeth leaves for a promised visit to the Collins’s only to discover Mr. Collins’

patroness is Mr. Darcy’s aunt, with whom Mr. Darcy is visiting. The proximity of Mr.

Darcy and Elizabeth leads to a marriage proposal from Mr. Darcy. Elizabeth ironically

informs him that he could not have proposed in any way which would have “tempted”

her to accept him (Austen, 2003: 188); particularly once she discovered that he was

responsible for meddling in the romance of Jane and Mr. Bingley. Mr. Darcy angrily

decides to notify Elizabeth through a letter of the perfidy of Mr. Wickham. Deciding this

information is best kept private Elizabeth leaves to tour the lakes with her aunt and uncle,

where she visits Pemberley, Mr. Darcy’s residence, and starts to notice her changing

opinion of Mr. Darcy. Unfortunately, the trip is cut short due to the news that the

youngest Bennet daughter, Lydia, has eloped with Mr. Wickham.

After a worrying time, Lydia returns to the Bennets married to Mr. Wickham. Lydia

inadvertently alerts Elizabeth that Mr. Darcy played a primary role in resolving the

scandalous affair, thus completing Elizabeth’s revision of her opinion regarding Mr.

Darcy’s character. The return to the neighborhood of both Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy

provides great excitement and ultimately marriage proposals for Jane and Elizabeth,

showing that pride and prejudice can be conquered on both sides to form a lasting bond,

leading to a happy marriage for Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth. The willfulness and feminism

of Elizabeth have made her easily relatable, even to modern readers, while Mr. Darcy has

become one of the greatest romantic heroes of all time (Wright, 1975). Through an

analysis of the linguistic features of the novel, this paper will attempt to understand more

about its enduring appeal.

1.1.3 Verbal Irony within Pride and Prejudice

Jane Austen has been referred to as “that expert ironist” and Pride and Prejudice is

recognized for its wryly ironic twist (Wilson & Sperber, 1992: 62). As a novel, Pride and

Prejudice presents a complex world in which characters stage a series of events that

convey a realistic approach to uniformity with the actual world in which it was created.

5

Irony, specifically verbal irony, is employed throughout the novel by Austen. According

to Liu (1997), a writer’s style is carried out through the linguistic features of a text.

Verbal irony as a linguistic feature is the major characteristic of Pride and Prejudice,

illustrating Austen’s unique writing style. Austen is able to make known the deeper

complexities present within relationships through the verbal ironies existent between

Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy (see section 2.4 for further discussion on verbal irony).

Before examining Pride and Prejudice in depth as an ironical work, we first seek to

define verbal irony and consider the differences between ironic and ironical. Irony

presents itself in different ways, and recognizing the difference between the concepts of

ironic and ironical is essential to the understanding of this research. Ironic is referred to

as the “the irony of fate” or “practical irony” and is used to describe an event that occurs

in which the outcome reveals a coincidence that unintentionally makes a victim out of

someone (Hutchens, 1960: 357). Ironical, on the other hand, describes one who intends to

show something ironic is occurring, and an ironist is the ironical figure who induces the

irony that takes place (Muecke, 1980 [1969]: 42). From Muecke’s understanding, “we

call Jane Austen an ironist not simply because of her frequent recourse to irony but also

because she frequently presents ironic situations” (Muecke, 1980 [1969]: 44). Verbal

irony, which Muecke refers to as ironical (1980 [1969]: 44), is a trope that relates an

utterance’s figurative meaning to its literal meaning as even the opposite of its literal

meaning, or as an understatement or overstatement meant to strengthen or weaken the

speaker’s literal meaning (Wilson, 2006: 1723).

Muecke described the ironist as one “who presents or evokes, or puts us in the way

of seeing such a confrontation” (1980 [1969]: 42), in regard to a double-layered

opposition such as that created by Elizabeth. Duality in meaning occurs when any given

utterance suggests a figurative meaning that belies its literal understanding (Wright,

1969: 324). In claiming that Mr. Darcy “is all politeness” Elizabeth alludes to the

opposition in her literal meaning, for she intends to mean that Mr. Darcy is impolite

(Austen, 2003: 27). She also intentionally alludes to her inability to be “tempted”

(Austen, 2003: 188) to accept his marriage proposal when “tempted” in the utterance

creates a duality referring back to when Elizabeth was slighted by Mr. Darcy for her

insufficient appearance that could not “tempt” him to dance with her (Austen, 2003: 13).

For Elizabeth, duality is the contrast between her praise and encouragement of the

6

predicament of women with disagreement masked in her words but harbored in her heart.

In the examples under the analytical focus, one finds appreciation for the artfully tacit

exchanges between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy that employ verbal irony, which conceals

accusation and disapprobation.

The progress of the relationship between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy is gradually

established in their characterization, specifically through verbal irony, which acts

rhetorically to convince the reader that there are dualities existing in their discourse. The

character’s utterances spoken to each other show two contrasting layers; often their

discourse infers something that does not faithfully describe their true feelings. The dual

language juxtaposing literal and figurative meanings constructs each character and

reflects an opposition between the story world’s expectation of socially adequate

behaviors and some contrary notion within the ironist, which upsets the accepted social

schemata. In this novel, the verbal ironies latent within interactions involving Elizabeth

and Mr. Darcy reveal their true characters.

Wilson and Sperber cite a prime example of verbal irony from Mr. Darcy in Pride

and Prejudice which they characterize as an understanding of echoic irony where, they

state, “indeed, it seems to accord with the intuitions of that expert ironist Jane Austen,

who has Mr. Darcy say to that other expert ironist Elizabeth Bennet: ‘. . . you find great

enjoyment in occasionally professing opinions which . . . are not your own’” (Wilson &

Sperber, 1992: 62) (see section 2.4.2 for further discussion on echoic theory). This

particular example of verbal irony also accords with Hutchens’ concept of the “rhetorical

ironist” as one who uses words, which by seeming to assert the opposite actually

reinforces the ironist’s intended meaning (1960: 354). Austen regularly uses these

rhetorically ironical utterances in conversations between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth.

Austen uses verbal irony to convey her opinion of society and share her notions of

its failings and limitations, such as the lack of opportunities for women. Austen also uses

ironical utterances within the narration of the novel in order to expand the detail within

the plot. Often cited as an exemplary case of irony is Austen’s first statement of the novel

that “it is a truth universally acknowledged that a young man in possession of a good

fortune must be in want of a wife” (Austen qtd. in Donovan, 1991: 455; Austen qtd. in

Newman, 1983: 696). In fact, this statement has a dual layer of meaning: even the men

with fortune seem to want a wife; instead it is the women who, relying on a spouse for

7

material needs, are in want of a husband (Donovan, 1991: 455). This statement also

contains considerable implicit criticism at the society who would make such a statement,

when it is clearly untrue.

Austen’s ironical narration is often aimed at the follies of society as a whole,

although it is the failings of human nature that cause people to act in certain ways. Take

for example, upon Meryton society learning of Mr. Wickham’s accusations against Mr.

Darcy “everybody was pleased to think how much they had always disliked Mr. Darcy

before they knew anything of the matter” (Austen qtd. in Zimmermann, 1968: 68).

Austen uses this ironical narration to comically expose the hypocrisies existent in society

(Shaw, 1975: 282). Furthermore, Austen’s ironical narration illustrates Elizabeth’s

judgment of Charlotte Lucas for marrying Mr. Collins for material reasons. However,

Elizabeth considers Mr. Wickham’s pursuit of Mary King, who has just inherited 10,000

pounds, justified although it is for the same reasons (Austen, 2003: 123, 151). This

demonstrates how the same actions, conducted by men and women, are viewed in

different ways by society.

This mockery further reveals the ironies existent in the plot. Brown suggests that the

conclusion of Jane Austen’s works, including Pride and Prejudice, are basically “parodic

in structure and theme,” and thus designed to display the ironies existent within Austen’s

novels (1969: 1582). Downie cites as example the fact that the reader is told at the end of

Pride and Prejudice that the Gardiners are most welcome guests at Pemberley (2006: 72).

The irony in this situation can be found as they were Elizabeth’s inferior connections that

Mr. Darcy cited as being a barrier to his wishing to marry Elizabeth (Austen, 2003: 188).

Brown states that Austen’s comic conclusions are used as “an ironic vehicle for final

judgments on the individual and his society” (1969: 1587). This study further gives the

example of the conclusion of Pride and Prejudice, which finds the heroine Elizabeth has

succeeded in altering Mr. Darcy’s prejudiced views against her lower position in society.

Austen’s portrayal of her characters abounds with verbal irony, and as Gubar notes

“Austen repeatedly uses imagination or wit or irony as an attribute that defines the

assertive independence, the spirited willfulness of females” (1975: 254). Thus,

Elizabeth’s wit and ironical utterances display her character. Elizabeth’s growing self-

awareness of her pride and unfounded prejudices are generally exposed within the novel

through ironical utterances. For example, to Jane’s insistence that Elizabeth cannot really

8

love Mr. Darcy, Elizabeth uses ironical understatement when she replies “perhaps I didn’t

always love him as well as I do now” (Austen, 2003: 353). This is clearly ironical when

one compares it to her earlier strong feelings of dislike for Mr. Darcy.

As evidenced in the examples above, the verbal irony within Pride and Prejudice is

predominantly exemplary. Austen employed irony in the novel with a purpose—to

satirize her society in order to express her criticism. The verbal irony is primarily found

in the conversations between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth throughout the duration of the

novel to support their characterization. Discourse analysis has shown through

examination the broad strokes of the ways in which verbal irony can be portrayed in

Pride and Prejudice.

1.2 Rationale, Significance and Scope of this Study

The rationale for analyzing Pride and Prejudice in this study is that the novel is, and

specifically its endearing characters Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy are, distinguished, with

verbal irony depicting their characters. Many readers are familiar with Austen’s work and

the plot of Pride and Prejudice, but the readership may not be familiar with the way

Austen employs verbal irony to present the characterization of Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth

within the novel. Thus, the study aims to provide a framework for analyzing verbal irony

to illustrate how her characters’ identities are constructed.

This study provides a lens for analysis by constructively articulating a paradigm by

which this goal can be accomplished, using a developed theoretical framework which

utilizes performative speech acts to depict characterization, first theorized by Butler

(2002) [1990]. Echoic groupings, an original approach of analysis for echoic theory

proposed by this research, show correlation with performative speech acts, therefore

echoic groupings depict characterization. Our major argument in this research is the logic

of the relationship between performative speech acts, characterization, and echoic

groupings. The three steps of the relationship are as follows:

Step 1. Performative speech acts depict characterization.

(Butler’s performative speech act)

Step 2. Performative speech acts have a correlation with echoic groupings.

(Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test results)

9

Therefore:

Step 3. Echoic groupings demonstrate characterization.

This study provides a way to view verbal irony through a modification to Searle’s

(2001b) [1979] speech act theory by incorporating a new classification of speech act,

performative, to replace declarations. The significance of this study is not only to help the

reader understand how verbal irony is recognized, but also the effectiveness of verbal

irony to the plot of the novel in that it aids in characterization. Modification of speech act

theory allows for a more inclusive analysis of characterization that is unaccounted for by

Searle’s speech act theory due to the limitations of the declaration classification. The role

of verbal irony in characterization is revealed through modified speech act theory and

echoic theory, with an additional combination of the incongruity and superiority theories

to complete its elucidation.

The hypothesis that echoic allusions depict characterization when utterances are

comprised of disagreement, neutral, and agreement groupings is examined through the

analytical framework. The significance of our contribution is that it validates the

evaluation of Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization that concurrently identifies

major phases within the plot. Instead of dividing the novel into volumes, as Austen

situated the story, the plot is better displayed through the three phases of echoic grouping

dominance (disagreement dominant phase, neutral dominant phase, agreement dominant

phase). The disagreement dominant phase shows Mr. Darcy’s and Elizabeth’s opposing

views of society, and their verbal ironies are more critical. The neutral dominant phase

illustrates Mr. Darcy’s and Elizabeth’s attempts to display their individualities through

bantering, using a lighter tone of irony to show their increasing ease with each other

through civility. The agreement dominant phase is comprised of Mr. Darcy’s and

Elizabeth’s light-hearted banter, taking on a playful tone as they tease each other in a

display of their love, which reveals the two characters’ emotions to be in accord.

Due to time and space constraints, this study has a clearly-defined scope. Irony in

and of itself is a general category from which data can be drawn, and this research will be

conducted on verbal irony found within the conversations between Mr. Darcy and

Elizabeth of Pride and Prejudice. By placing limitations on the scope we avoid

unrealistic expectations of data analysis in addition to providing an in-depth study.

10

1.3 Objectives and Research Questions

The objective is to provide those studying the role verbal irony plays in language

with a perspective on how it expresses its figurative intentions. The study attempts this

through analysis of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Inspection of the literature on

Pride and Prejudice shows that readers are too quick to accept the novel at face value.

Cursory examination shows humor and irony provide context illustrating the skill of

Austen’s rhetoric. Further research exhibits linguistic analysis pays little attention to what

purpose figurative language fulfills within discourse analysis.

This study seeks to contribute to understanding the purpose of figurative language

through the analysis of verbal irony. Verbal irony abounds in Pride and Prejudice and as

this paper will discuss, the ironical utterances between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy in their

conversations intend to portray characterization. This study purports performative speech

acts depict Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s characterization through the use of verbal irony to

echo their perspectives on issues such as social norms, class and gender roles. Verbal

irony has a purpose, which is to convey Elizabeth’s and Mr. Darcy’s views through

performativity to construct their ironical identities. It is our goal in this study to show that

the verbal irony in the novel is of greater importance than the dialogues and the plot, and

even today, 200 years post-publication, produces Austen’s intentional effect showing her

ironical characters. Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization is represented through the

opinions and views they echo. The reader will not be able to appreciate character and plot

developments without properly comprehending the use of verbal irony in regard to the

three echoic grouping dominance phases (disagreement dominant, neutral dominant,

agreement dominant) in the execution of characterization.

This study posits and analyzes the following research questions in order to achieve

those objectives of discovering:

1. What purpose does speaker intent and hearer uptake in verbal irony serve?

2. How does Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization occur in the novel?

3. How does verbal irony pragmatically function in characterization?

4. What is the essential link between characterization and verbal irony?

In order to answer these questions above, a research methodology focused on

11

articulating how verbal irony is utilized in character depiction must be employed. More

specifically, this research seeks to answer how those ironical utterances found in

character construction can be interpreted. This study attempts to answer these questions

using discourse analysis of Pride and Prejudice, focusing on the exchanges between the

novel’s protagonists Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy.

1.4 Structure of the Dissertation

Chapter 1 introduces the basis for this study, positing the specific research questions

the paper aims to answer through discourse analysis. The significance of the research is

that it provides a useful method for classifying verbal irony into the modified speech act

taxonomy. Verbal irony is included through a modification to Searle’s (2001b) [1979]

speech act classifications using Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act. The first

chapter also provides a brief introduction to the novel and author, to explain how the use

of verbal irony is pervasive throughout the novel and was employed by Austen to achieve

her ends. The ironical significance is relevant to understanding the character

developments of both Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, the two protagonists. The key notations

(refer to section 1.5 for key notations) explain any ambiguous terms or certain

abbreviations used within this research.

Chapter 2 provides the main components related to this research: firstly, a broad

overview of discourse analysis and conversational analysis, followed by a thorough

review of speech act theory’s connection to verbal irony. Secondly, it provides a focused

examination of verbal irony, including an explanation of figurative language. The chapter

also discusses the echoic theory of verbal irony, which is imperative to this study.

Humorology also falls under this section (see section 2.4.3 for humorology theories) on

verbal irony, and includes relief theory, incongruity theory, and superiority theory, which

incorporates the banter principle, and these last two major theories provide explication to

further aid in the interpretation of verbal irony. Following there is clarification for the

functions of verbal irony. Finally, in Chapter 2 we discuss the previous research on verbal

irony, including an evaluation of the theories and studies conducted by scholars with

special attention paid to verbal irony within Pride and Prejudice.

In Chapter 3 the theoretical framework formulated for the analysis is introduced.

12

Verbal irony will be clearly defined for the framework of this study. The analytical

framework introduces a modified speech act classification based on Searle’s (2001b)

[1979] speech act theory to incorporate Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act

into the taxonomy to replace declarations. Declarations are insufficient to include a more

extensive classification of speech acts with little or no extralinguistic institutional

authority to back them up. Performative speech acts, a more inclusive classification of

speech act, allow speech acts lacking institutional authoritative support to exist depicting

characterization. Echoic groupings of verbal irony as our original contribution to echoic

theory is also further explicated. Incongruity theory explains the echoic allusion,

highlighting the duality inherent within, which provides a locale for irony. Superiority

theory, which incorporates the banter principle, enhances understanding in explaining the

intricacy of verbal irony that takes place in characterization. The logical connections

between the theories as a basis for classifying verbal irony are discussed for the analytical

framework. The hypotheses and the methods used to test them are also included in

Chapter 3.

Chapter 4 comprises the data collection methods and explains how the relevant data

will be analyzed in order to prove the posited theories this study puts forth for

explanatory power in the study of verbal irony and characterization. Chapter 4 also

includes the methodology used to analyze the speech acts, offering rationale for

classifying the speech acts according to the modified speech act taxonomy to identify

speaker intent and verifying the ironical utterances through echoic allusions which

provide the location of irony intended by the speaker for the hearer’s uptake. Searle’s

(2001b) [1979] and Austin’s (2002) [1962] felicity conditions from speech act theory

indicate the location of irony. To incorporate hearer uptake into the verification of verbal

irony, echoic theory’s allusion (Wilson & Sperber, 2012) allows for objective

classification of ironies. The classification section (refer to section 4.1.1 for method of

classification) provides examples to illustrate the ironical speech acts classifications

found within Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s conversations. In the data section (for the data,

see section 4.2), Table 4.1 displays the data set of the 157 ironical speech acts, and the

graphs show the frequency of each classification of modified speech acts throughout the

course of the novel; the study has a focus on the ironical speech acts (Figure 4.7) to

determine the three phases of characterization shown in Figure 5.1 (disagreement

13

dominant, neutral dominant, agreement dominant). This chapter also explains the

statistical test of the data using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences)

software to show if a significant correlation exists between ironical performative speech

acts and echoic groupings. The Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit statistical test

results of the 157 ironical speech acts are provided (refer to section 4.3 for test results),

revealing a correlation between ironical performative speech acts and echoic groupings

with disagreement, neutral or agreement echoic allusions found within each utterance

specifically for the hearer’s uptake (intended by the speaker). The statistical test results

conclude the hypothesis that echoic groupings portray characterization is supported.

Chapter 5 provides the data analysis to address character construction by analyzing

ironical utterances through echoic groupings. The analysis proves our argument using the

data collected as evidence to support a focus on the 81 ironical performative speech acts

depicting characterization through phases of echoic grouping dominance. The three

echoic groupings have concurrently been designated into three phases according to the

novel’s plot through the echoic grouping dominance: disagreement, neutral, and

agreement (see Figure 5.1). Found within each phase is an idiosyncratic premise on

which the characterization is based, and the analysis is structured according to the

conversational themes within each premise. This analysis includes all ironical

performative speech acts within Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s conversations alongside other

adjacent utterances necessary to explicate and elucidate the interpretation of Mr. Darcy

and Elizabeth’s characterization. Echoic groupings (refer to section 3.1.2 for an

explanation of echoic groupings) are the original contribution of this study to echoic

theory to highlight the prominence of verbal irony in characterization. Searle’s (2001b)

[1979] and Austin’s (2002) [1962] felicity conditions found in speech act theory and

echoic allusions as keys to denoting verbal irony are the foundation of the data analysis,

in addition to a combination of incongruity theory and superiority theory as an expedient

premise to reveal and construe verbal irony presented in characterization. Incongruity

theory lends greater explanatory power for the duality inherent in verbal irony through its

perlocutionary act for the hearer’s uptake. Superiority theory further elucidates the

speaker’s dissociative attitude. Included in the analysis is how Elizabeth’s feminist views

impact Mr. Darcy’s moral character in the novel.

Chapter 6 provides the major findings of the research wherein the research

14

questions are addressed. We illuminate the key discoveries of the data analysis and how

these findings provide a contribution to the fields of linguistics and literature. We contend

the special contribution herein to discourse analysis of character construction within

verbal irony is the two-tiered method of pairing speaker intent with hearer uptake in light

of the findings of the data analysis. Finally, this chapter addresses possible limitations to

our research and offers perspectives to improve future research related to this study.

1.5 Key Notations

It is necessary to be aware of the abbreviated expressions in order to interpret the

representations of the key concepts and data in this study. For example, borrowing from

Searle, the following discussion will sometimes abbreviate speaker as the S and hearer as

the H. Furthermore, the five classifications under the modified speech act taxonomy this

study proposes will also be abbreviated as ASR for assertive, DIR as directive, EXP

meaning expressive, COM as commissive, and PER meaning performative. The numbers

following these abbreviations also have significance; the number before the period

indicates chapter and the number after indicates an assigned number given to that

utterance according to its particular classification. Take PER03.02 for example: PER

means the utterance is performative, “03” indicates it is found in Chapter 3 of the novel,

and “02” signifies the utterance is the second of this classification found within the

chapter. Using the above representations will allow the reader better guidance within this

paper.

Regarding the Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test, the results include the

following values: the Chi-square value, which shows the difference in the expected count

as calculated by the program and the actual count of utterances found within each echoic

grouping. Note that we will shorten the name to Pearson’s Chi-squared test throughout

the paper. The value df means degrees of freedom, which shows the number of rows and

columns being analyzed. In our study, df will always be two as we are testing the possible

correlation between one speech act and echoic groupings (disagreement, neutral, and

agreement). The Asymp. Sig. refers to asymptotic significance, meaning we test the data

based on the assumption that it will be distributed in a particular order; however,

asymptotic significance is only an approximation and thus we have calculated the exact

15

significance due to our smaller sample size. A significance level reaching 0.05 or less is

necessary to determine dependence of two variables (Mehta & Patel, 2010: 1-7).

16