近畿大学学術情報リポジトリ

全文

(1)Humanity in Computer Jokes'. KITAZUME. Humanity in Computer Jokes * Sachiko Kitazume. o. Introduction Since the time of Greek philosophers such as Plato (427-347 BC) and Aristotle (383-322 BC), humor research has witnessed numerous discussions about the cause of laughter. A great number of psychologists, philosophers, as well as linguists, have attempted to explain what causes laughter and have expressed a variety of views on the subject. These theories can be classified into three main categories: the superiority theory, the incongruity theory and the relief theory.l Among the three groups of theories, the superiority theory is the oldest and most widespread theory.. Plato explained the essence of. laughter as an attack on the weakness, and indirectly, on the person. 2 Aristotle presented a theory that laughter comes from the pleasure of humiliating and belittling someone else. 3 These ideas are clearly expressed in Bergson's (1899) argument.. He argued that the object of. our laughter is always a human being. 4 The questions now arise. The first is if the target of laughter is restricted to a human being. There are cases where the targets of laughter are non-human beings, such as animals and even inanimate objects. The second is if these ancient theories which define laughter as an attack on someone else or a form of derision, still hold true in the present age. Admitting the cruelty incident to human nature, we wonder if peo-29-.

(2) x~. . ~1r-r . x1t. 16~. 1 . 2 %{jf~'. 2005. 2. pIe called "humorists" are enjoying the feeling of superiority by deriding, belittling and humiliating others. In response to the questions above, we shall now look into various computer jokes obtained through the internet by classifying them on the basis of their target: a computer technician, Microsoft, Bill Gates, users and a computer itself as the butt of humor. First we will examine jokes whose target of laughter is a human being to find out the cause and the essence of laughter.. Secondly we will focus on humor whose. butt of laughter is seemingly a computer. We will study the cause, the real target and the essence of laughter.. Finally we will illustrate an ex-. ample of wordplay which does not involve any feeling of superiority, as a typical counter example against the arguments by Plato, Aristotle and Bergson. Let us start by explaining the three theories of laughter: the superiority theory, the relief theory and the incongruity theory.. 1. Previous Studies 1.1. Superiority theory. Morreall (1983). 5. explains, "The oldest, and probably· still most. widespread theory of laughter is that laughter is an expression of a person's feelings of superiority over other people." This theory goes back as far as Plato, who wrote that people laugh when they come across a weakness in another person, the laughter being an attack on the weakness, and indirectly, on the person. laughter is human evil and folly.. For Plato·· the proper object· of. Aristotle agreed with Plato that laugh-. ter is basically a form of derision. Aristotle presented a theory that laughter comes from the pleasure of humiliating and belittling someone -30-.

(3) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. else. Hobbes (1650) 6 put these two opinions in a stronger form.. He ex-. presses laughter as "a sudden glory arising from some conception of some eminency in ourselves, by comparison with the infirmity of others, or with our own formerly." Bergson (1899). 7. argued that the object of our laughter is always a. human being by saying that the comic does not exist outside the pale of what is strictly human.. He claimed that you may laugh at an animal,. but only because you have detected in it some human attitude or expression.. He further argued that you may laugh at a hat, but what you are. making fun of, in this case, is not the piece of felt or straw, but the shape that men have given it, -. the caprice whose mould it has. assumed. The superiority theory, originally presented by Plato and Aristotle, was supported by various other analysts such as Rapp (1949) (1970) 9 and Gruner (1978). 10.. 8,. Mikes. Rapp (1949) proposed a theory of the de-. velopment of humor as an aggressive expression, connecting it with the physical aggression and behavior of a primitive man, "the roar of triumph in an ancient jungle dual." He says, "At the end of the battle, the victor would relieve his tension with a vocal 'Ha ... ha ... ha.'. The. loser would relieve his tension by crying. And so laughter came to symbolize victory.. In addition to his tears, the loser was usually swollen. and covered with bruises, looking grotesque. When people laughed at these outward signs of losing, they were actually identifying with the winner. This is how humor directed against losers came into being." Cantor and Zillman (1973). 11,. from the results of an experiment, con-. cluded that aggression aimed at those who possess authority is more -31-.

(4) Xl!J: . ~1f.f . x1t. 16~. 1 . 21rHf:-j}. 2005.2. amusing than aggression aimed at someone of similar or lower status. It has been argued that jokes give us momentary but enjoyable pleasure. by allowing us to achieve superiority over others in a socially accepted way.. 1.2. Incongruity theory. While the superiority theory attributes causes of laughter to the emotional side of human beings, we need to turn our attention to the cognitive side. The incongruity theory was first hinted at by Aristotle in Rhetoric. 12 He points out that one way for a speaker to get a laugh is to set up a certain expectation in his listeners and then to hit them with something they did not expect.. However, it was not until the eighteenth century. that the incongruity theory was developed and worked out in detail. Kant 13 claimed that laughter arises from a sudden juxtaposition of incongruous situations somehow made logical by the clever use of language or other mode of communication. This theory was supported by many theorists.. Koestler (1964). 14. contends that humor as well as creativity is based on bisociation; connecting two frames of references in an unusual way can create a new theory in science or a humorous situation.. Raskin (1985). 15. proposes a. semantic analysis of jokes, claiming that humorous element is a result of a partial overlap of two different and in a sense opposite scripts. Ziv (1984). 16. claims that the intellectual activity that leads to understanding. incongruous situations provides a sense of mastery and causes enjoyment and satisfaction, which is often accompanied with a smile and the -32-.

(5) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. laughter of success.. 1.3. Relief theory. Having reviewed the two groups of theories of humor, we may now turn our attention to the relief theory.. While the superiority theory fo-. cuses on emotional side of laughter, and the incongruity theory on cognitive aspect of laughter, the relief theory deals with physiological side of laughter. Spencer (1860) 17 writes that laughter is the organism's way of freeing accumulated tension.. Freud (1905). 18. developed Spencer's. idea further and proposed a more complex version of the relief theory. Freud says, "We use psychic energy to suppress our sexual and aggressive thoughts and feelings. The energy normally used for inhibitions suddenly becomes superfluous, and this energy is released in laughter" . What are inhibitions or social taboos in our society? Freud emphasized that one of the important functions of humor is to approach the subject of sex in a socially acceptable fashion. (1979). 19,. Hasset and Houlihan. after a survey of various types of jokes, indicated that sexual. jokes are the most popular type. The second taboo is death. When jokes touch upon major human fears, such as death, they may change the tensions that arise from fears into relief by a sense of victory over such frightening phenomenon. Black humor deals not only with death, but also with other subjects that arouse fear in general, such as sickness and danger. Religion is the third taboo to be studied. Ross (1998). 20. points out. the present situation in Britain as "there is still a blasphemy law in Brit-33-.

(6) Y.:.l!f- . ~~r . Y.:.1t. 16~. 1 . 2 ~Hf:~. 2005.2. ain" it can be a crime to make offensive references to the Christian religion.. In practice the decline in church attendance seems to go along. with a decline in the amount of shock caused by flippant, or offensive, references to religion.". 2. Problems of the Superiority Theory and Bergson's Argument. Having reviewed the three groups of theories, the superiority theory, the incongruity theory and the relief theory, we would like to focus attention on the definitions of the superiority theory in this section. It is true that the superiority theory expresses certain important aspects of humor.. Plato, who claims that the proper object of laughter is human. evil and folly, and Aristotle, who proposed that laughter is basically a form of derision of someone else, account for some important aspects of laughter. However, the question anses whether these ancient theories still hold true in the present age. If laughter is basically an attack on someone else or a form of derision, we should not recommend anyone to enjoy laughter, because it may be harmful to others and it is not recommendable to feel good about ourselves by looking down upon others, unless they are our enemies, oppressors or torturers. There must be something wrong with humorists who enjoy this kind of humor, if their real intention is to deride, belittle or humiliate others including their family, friends, acquaintances and people around them.. Putting. the moral questions aside, we will study computer jokes to explore what the essence of humor in modern age is. The second point we should examine is whether the target of hu-34-.

(7) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. mor is restricted to a human being. Admitting that the targets of laughter in many cases are human beings, there are cases where the targets of laughter are non-human beings, such as animals and even inanimate objects. This fact stands contrary to Bergson's argument: the object of our laughter is always a human being.. Bergson claims that you may. laugh at an animal, but only because you have detected in it some human attitude or expression. One might find enough room for criticism to his argument.. First. of all it is easy to find out examples in which the targets of laughter are animals. My family keeps a dog as a pet, which often makes us laugh. We always laugh seeing our dog sniffing eagerly for its favorite food hidden under a cover without actually getting it by itself. We see nothing human in its behavior, rather sniffing is a typical behavior of a dog trying to find something to eat and we find it quite amusing. (1983). 21. Morreall. comments that in general humor the laughter is ridicule tem-. pered with love, because we sometimes add to the ridicule an affectionate, benevolent attitude toward the person being laughed at.. I would. say that our laughter in this case is not a derision, nor humiliation.. It. comes from our feeling of mild amusement at weakness or predicament of our loving dog with a large quantity of affection. Another example is a comic strip which depicts a dog going round and round endlessly chasing its tail.. We can easily see that the dog's. attempt is impossible, because its tail is attached to its own body. Human beings, who have no tail to chase, cannot do the same.. It is obvi-. ous that we see nothing human in its behavior and still find the behavior typical to a dog very funny.. In this case too, we are amused. at the foolishness of the dog with affectionate feelings, which are not ap-35-.

(8) x~. . *f,\Ij . x1t. 16~ 1 . 2. i'lHf:% 2005.2. propriately called feelings of derision or ridicule. The instances shown above lead us to conclude that we laugh at animals amused at their foolish behavior, or their weakness with a large quantity of affection. Therefore, Bergson's argument that the target of laughter is restricted to a human being does not hold true in these cases. Bergson, who sticks to his argument of overly restricted target, further insists that you may laugh at a hat, but what you are making fun of, in this case, is not the piece of felt or straw, but the shape that men have given it, - the caprice whose mould it has assumed. There is room for argument against his claim about a hat too. The deformity of the hat does not necessarily entail that it was distorted by the producer. We can assume various factors which cause the deformity.. It is a farfetched interpretation to claim that we deride the pro-. ducer of the hat.. More natural interpretation is that we are amused at. the unexpected form. This has nothing to do with the emotions such as superiority or derision. The similar laughter occurs when we happen to find a hole in our purse or bag unexpectedly.. Many people laugh when they find a hole. in their sock. The laughter in these cases is not laughter in derision. We are just amused to find an unexpected form, which does not fit into a normal pattern. These cases are most properly explained by the incongruity theory, which claims that laughter occurs when we unexpectedly find an incongruous situation. Morreall (1983). 22. introduced the following story to show an exam-. ple of humor that does not fit into the superiority theory:. -36-.

(9) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. (1) Absurd or nonsense humor often makes us laugh without involv-. ing us in any self-evaluation.. Someone for a joke once put a. bowling ball in my refrigerator while I was not home. When I next went to the refrigerator and opened the door I broke out laughing. But not at anyone, and not out of any feeling of superiority - I was simply amused by the sight of this object in a completely inappropriate place.. Indeed, we sometimes enjoy. absurdities of this type not only without feelings of superiority, but even in situations that show us up as inferior in some way.. Obviously laughter in (1) does not occur from the feeling of superiority over the bowling ball.. It is the incongruous situation of a bowling ball. in a refrigerator that causes laughter. There are many instances of laughter which is caused by an incongruous situation. Judging from these examples, it is clear that Bergson's claim that the target of laughter is restricted to human beings does not hold true. We have seen that Bergson overly restricts the cause of laughter only to the cause involving the feelings of superiority. We have to add many other examples that do not fit into the superiority theory. There are many verbal plays which are not designed to evoke feelings of superiority, as seen in (2).. (2) What's black and white and red/read all over? A newspaper. 23 (3) When is a car not a car? When it turns into a garage. 24. Joke (2) is one of the earliest riddles which children hear and tell. This verbal play is based on the fact that there can be two possible interpre-37-.

(10) )C'¥ .. ~1\Ij. . )tit. 16~. 1 . 2 i:t1*~. 2005.2. tations of the same group of sounds. In (3), "turn into" can be a phrasal verb meaning "change" or the "verb +preposition" (turns + into garage). The pleasure arises from solving the wordplay, as is explained by the incongruity theory and it gives a counter example to the Bergson's claim. It is clear that the Bergson's argument is shown false in many cases of laughter which can be explained by the incongruity theory.. 3. Computer Jokes 3.1. Target, essence and cause of laughter. In the preceding section we have reviewed the superiority theory pointing out the weakness of the theory, especially Bergson's argument that the target of laughter is always restricted to human beings. Admitting that the targets of laughter in many cases are human beings, we have exemplified some cases where the targets of laughter are non-human beings, such as animals and even inanimate objects. In addition, we have described another aspect of laughter which is different from the aspect suggested by Plato, Aristotle and Bergson. While admitting Plato's claim and Aristotle's argument account for some important aspects of laughter, we have argued that these theories describe only a malignant and harmful aspect of laughter. We have introduced Morreall's argument that the laughter is ridicule tempered with love. We have also demonstrated some examples of laughter which fit into the incongruity theory, as shown in a bowling ball in a refrigerator. We have seen that we laugh at the incongruous situation in this case and the laughter does not come from any feelings of superiority over -38-.

(11) Humanity in Computer Jokes*. KITAZUME. the bowling ball, nor do we ridicule it with love. The claim above that we do not have any feeling of superiority over the bowling ball raises another question: Can we have any feelings of superiority over inanimate things, that is, do we evaluate ourselves by comparing human beings with inanimate things. Technological development in modern times has changed the world drastically.. Computers,. through the internet, have enabled us to create computer jokes which make fun of computers themselves. This brings us to wonder what elements are causes of laughter in computer jokes and what the real target of laughter is. The following sections will illustrate vanous computer jokes obtained through the internet by classifying them on the basis of their target: a computer technician, Microsoft, Bill Gates, users and a computer itself as the butt of humor.. First we will examine jokes whose targets. of laughter are human beings to find out (1) the cause of laughter; what theory explains the laughter in each case, (2) the essence of laughter in an example whose laughter can be explained by the superiority theory; whether it can be defined as derision, humiliation, belittling or attack, as Plato, Aristotle and Rapp defined. Next we will focus on humor whose butt of laughter appears to be a computer. We will study (1) the cause of laughter (2) the target of laughter; is a computer possibly the target of humor, (3) the essence of laughter; can we have any feelings of superiority over inanimate things? Finally we will illustrate an example of wordplay, which do not involve any feeling of superiority, as a typical counter example against the arguments by Plato, Aristotle and Bergson.. -39-.

(12) )c~ . ~{;f\r •. )cit. 16~. 1 . 2 ir1:Jf-ry-. 2005.2. 3.2. Computer technicians as targets of humor. First we will examine jokes whose targets of laughter are computer technicians.. (4) ISDN Mouth You'll have to excuse our field technician, he has an ISDN mouth, but his brain only runs at 28.8!. 25. The cause of laughter in joke (4) arises from making fun of the technician, who is expected to be smart enough to support customers, but turns out to be an incompetent fast talker.. People enjoy this kind of. joke by finding similar weakness in others that we feel inside; we are somewhat relieved to know that we are all imperfect human beings regardless of our position. The deictic expression "our" and the request for excuse express a nuance that the speaker is making fun of the technician with affection. The joke expresses ridicule with "fellow feeling" rather than "superiority" over the technician. With the computer vocabulary "ISDN", which enables a speedy access to the internet and the description "x only runs at 28.8", which reminds us of a slower modem speed, the speaker makes fun of the technician with these metaphorical expressions. The use of computer terms adds the pleasure of solving wordplay, as the incongruity theory dictates. We enjoy jokes even by finding some analogy in contrasting domains such as a lifeless computer and human beings. Religious figures are often used in making jokes even in an unreligious world like that of a computer. Jokes (5) and (6) are examples. -40-.

(13) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. (5) God in Computer Terms Some important technological questions are answered if we think of God as a computer programmer. Q: Why does God allow evil to happen?. A: God thought he eliminated evil in one of the earlier revs. (6). Q: Does God know everything? A: He likes to think so, but he is often amazed to find out what. goes on in the overnight job. 26. The word "evil" in (5) implies a problem which occurs in a newly revised version. The phrase "what goes on in the overnight job" in (6) implicitly expresses imperfections of the computer.. Laughter in these. jokes arises, because it may lead us to fancy a foolish script that God created the earth in the overnight job, if we dare to interpret the Bible's description, "Thus the heaven and earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made." (Genesis 12:2). We enjoy these jokes by finding some analogy. in contrasting domains such as a computer programmer and God, as is dictated by the incongruity theory. We are amused to find the puzzle-. ment and predicament of God as well as the computer programmer. The essence of this joke is more properly called "a mild ridicule with empathy" rather than "humiliation, belittling or an attack". It is also possible to explain the joke from the relief theory, because it is making fun of a religious figure. The following joke involves two meanings, one of which is derived from an allusion to a quotation and another is a criticism to program-41-.

(14) x* . ~{;jIf . xit. 16~ 1 . 2 if1*~. 2005.2. mers.. (7) Programmers Don't Die. Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.27. The incongruity of joke (7) can be recognized when a listener shares the knowledge of General Douglas MacArthur's famous" old soldiers never die, they just fade away" speech. An allusion to the quotation helps to create two contradicting scripts, which produce laughter, as is explained by the incongruity theory. The joke mildly criticizes the programmers for leaving customers at a loss without offering enough support, in an amusing way, as is dictated by the superiority theory. We have to note, however, that criticism with humor derives some confrontational aspect from direct criticism, which is considered as one of the main functions of humor. A close study of these examples above has revealed that the laughter of these jokes actually arises from a net of complex and various causes explained by the three groups of theories, the superiority theory, the incongruity theory and the relief theory. It has also shown that these jokes, whose targets of laughter are human beings like a computer programmer and a support, make fun of the targets with affection. People enjoy these jokes by finding similar weakness in others that we feel inside; we are somewhat relieved to know that we are all imperfect human beings regardless of the status, position, wealth, race or fame. This feeling should be called more properly described as "amusement at weakness" or "empathy" in finding the weakness in others rather than "superiority" over others. -42-.

(15) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. 3.3. Microsoft as a target of humor. Little support programmers and technicians offer is not limited to an individual, but it also extends to a computer company.. Microsoft,. one of the top computer giants, is in many cases the target of humor. The frustrations that computer users sometimes get create the following joke.. (8) Helicopter Flight into Seattle A helicopter was flying around above Seattle when an electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic navigation and communications equipment.. Due to the clouds and haze,. the pilot could not determine the helicopter's position and course to steer to the airport. The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew a handwritten sign, and held it in the helicopter's window. The pilot's sign said, "WHERE AM I?" in large letters. People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a large sign, and held it in a building window. Their sign said ''yOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER." The pilot smiled, waved, looked at his map, determined the course to steer to SEATAC airport, and landed safely. After they were on the ground, the copilot asked their pilot how the ''yOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position. The plot responded, "I knew that had to be the MICROSOFT building because they gave me a technically correct, but -43-.

(16) Jt'F . ~{;IIj . Jt1t. 16~. completely useless answer.". 1 . 2 ir1*ij-. 2005.2. 28. Until the last sentence we cannot figure out why the pilot knew that the tall building is the Microsoft building. The punch line, which reveals an amusing criticism of Microsoft for giving technically correct, but completely useless answers, creates laughter explained by the superiority theory.. Computer users who have been frustrated by useless advices. from the company will find their frustrated feelings released by the joke, as the relief theory explains.. Kant explained laughter as resulting from. incongruity, claiming that the source of laughter is "the sudden transformation of a strained expectation into nothing" .29. The speaker of the. joke leads us astray and then clarifies the whole picture by the punch line, which creates laughter dictated by the incongruity theory. Joke (9) makes fun of Microsoft for the very little support it offers.. (9) Microsoft and a Halter Top A: What do Microsoft and a halter top have in common? B: Both offer very little supportPO. Using a popular joke phrase "What do x and y have in common?" indicates that we are in the field of humorous discourse where incongruous but partly overlapping two domains are presented and this kind of joke produces laughter the incongruity theory dictates. The joke also creates laughter explained by the superiority theory by amusingly teasing Microsoft for the very little support it offers to customers. Very little support women's sexy dress offers arouses men's sexual expectation creating laughter explained by the relief theory. -44-.

(17) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. This joke, as well as (8) are examples where the three elements are combined to enhance laughter.. It should be also reminded that al-. though the jokes are meant to be mild ridicule of Microsoft, they should not be properly called "derision", "humiliation" or "an attack". Rather it should be more properly described as "mild criticism with empathy" in expressing the weakness of the computer giant.. Most of the. computer jokes I collected are of this type which involves combined causes of laughter, "amusement at weakness", "relief" and "incongruity".. 3.4. Bill Gates as a target of humor. Now we will examine jokes, in which Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft, is the target of laughter.. Needless to say, Bill Gates is known as. one of the richest and smartest men in the world and a close examination of jokes whose target of humor is Bill Gates will help to clarify the nature of superiority in modern humor.. aD) "640K ought to be enough for anybody." -. Bill Gates, 1981. (NerdSaying 50) (11) Microsoft and a light bulb A: How many Microsoft engmeers does it take to change a light bulb? None - Bill Gates just declares darkness the new standard! Q2) Microsoft Since their wedding night, Bill Gates' wife finally knows why he called his company "Microsoft" .31. -45-.

(18) )(~ . ~f,jIj .. )(1t. 16~. 1 . 2 it1*~. 2005.2. While joke aD) makes fun of the poor foresight of Bill Gates, by presenting the contradiction between what Bill Gates predicted in 1981 and the present situation, joke a1) tries to laugh away Bill Gates' tyrannical predominance by creating a fictional script that he can decide anything in the world according to his own will.. In a2) , the phrase, "Since their wed-. ding night", serves as information to guess what is the other thing which Bill Gates' wife knows as being "micro" and "soft". The sexual connotation also works as a tease of Bill Gates who is one of the world's richest and most successful businessmen. The· unexpected analogy between the contrasting domains such as Microsoft and the sexual implication interpreted from the company name gives the pleasure of surprise proposed by the incongruity theory. Talking about the sexual weakness of Bill Gates produces the temporary feeling of empathic superiority claimed by the superiority theory as well as the psychic release of talking about sex proposed by the relief theory. Next we will consider examples which deals with social taboos.. a3) Bill Gates - World's Smartest Man. One night, a Delta twin-engine puddle jumper was flying somewhere above New Jersey. There were five people on board: the pilot, Michael Jordan, Bill Gates, the Dali Lama, and a hippie. Suddenly, an illegal oxygen generator exploded loudly in the luggage compartment, and the passenger cabin began to fill with smoke. The cockpit door opened, and the pilot burst into the compartment. "Gentlemen," he began, "I have good news and bad news. The bad news is that we're about to crash in New Jersey. The -46-.

(19) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. good news is that there are four parachutes, and I have one of them!" With that, the pilot threw open the door and jumped from the plane. Michael Jordan was on his feet in a flash. "Gentlemen," he said, "I am the world's greatest athlete. The world needs great. athletes. I think the world's greatest athlete should have a parachute!". With these words, he grabbed one of the remaining. parachutes, and hurtled through the door and into the night. Bill Gates rose and said, "Gentlemen, I am the world's smartest man. The world needs smart men.. I think the world's. smartest man should have a parachute, too.". He grabbed one,. and out he jumped. The Dali Lama and the hippie looked at one another.. Fi-. nally, the Dali Lama spoke. "My son," he said, "I have lived a satisfying life and have known the bliss of True Enlightenment. You have your life ahead of you; you take a parachute, and I will go down with the plane." The hippie smiled slowly and said, "Hey, don't worry, pop. The world's smartest man just jumped out wearing my backpack.". 32. The misfortunes of the world's smartest man is a bliss for the less fortunate people. Talking about the danger of Bill Gates possibly resulting to death gives both a speaker and a hearer a joy of talking about a social taboo (death) and the feeling of temporary triumph over the smartest man in the world. However, most of the people who enjoy this joke laugh not because they enjoy humiliating or deriding Bill Gates, -47-.

(20) X$ . ~1\Ir . x1f:. 16~. 1 . 2 itHf-ry-. 2005.2. but they laugh teasing him with a quantity of affection by fancying the improbable and absurd script. Let us review what happened to Diana jokes after her tragic death. 33 There used to be tremendous amount of jokes about Diana when she was alive.. Since her death, people began questioning if Diana jokes. would be felt acceptable or not. This consideration means that we laugh at Diana jokes when she appeared to have almost everything, high position, beauty, wealth and so on.. Her tragic death brought us. too much sympathy towards her that we dare not ridicule her any more. This feeling is clearly distinctive from the aggressive expression of laughter proposed by Rapp (1949), who identifies laughter as a sign of victory over a loser.. Considering what happened after Diana's death, it. is easy to predict that we would not enjoy Bill Gates jokes when he really faces this kind of danger or tragedy. We enjoy imagining the predicament of Bill Gates only when he is apparently one of the richest, the most successful men who are envied by many people around the globe.. 3.5. Users as a target of humor. We have seen the jokes whose targets of laughter are computer technicians, programmers, Microsoft and Bill Gates. It can be easily assumed that the frustration computer users always suffer produces these· jokes.. Next we will look into jokes whose butt of humor is a computer. user.. Q4)ll th commandment - Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's Pen-. tium. -48-.

(21) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. (15) To err is human.. KITAZUME. To blame it on a computer is even more. SO.34. In order to enjoy joke Q4), the listener needs to know the 10th commandment in the Bible, which goes, "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.". In this computer age, we need to add the 11th command-. ment, because most of us have felt an impulse to purchase a new machine. This joke makes fun of our urge by an allusion to the quotation in a completely incongruous domain of Bible. Joke (15), which also involves an allusion to the quotation "To err is human, to forgive divine,". 35. makes us remind of our common faulty behavior of placing. blame on a computer when it does not work as we wish. It should be noted that the all-too-common flaws described in these. jokes will arouse the feeling of empathy rather than the feeling of superiority.. We would laugh because we know we are all vulnerable to the. desires for better computers and we tend to shift the blame onto others. The allusion to the religious quotations adds the pleasure of talking about religion in an amusing way to the causes of laughter described above. Religious figures are easy target of humor, as seen in (16) •. Q6) Mr. Johnson, a businessman from Wisconsin, went on a business trip to Louisiana.. He immediately sent an e-mail back home to. his wife, Jennifer to let her know he had arrived safely.. Unfortu-. nately, he miss typed a letter and the e-mail ended up going to a Mrs. Joan Johnson, the wife of a preacher who had just passed -49-.

(22) x/:'f- . ~H~J . xft. 16~. 1 . 2 ~1*%. 2005.2. away. The preacher's wife took one look at the e-mail and promptly fainted. When she was finally revived, she nervously pointed to the message, which read: "Arrived safely, but it sure is hot down here.". 36. The preacher's wife misunderstands that her husband is in Hell after his death. The idea of a preacher in Hell gives us a psychic release of making fun of a religious figure and talking about death in a socially accepted way. It also makes jeers at the businessman's common fallacy. We easily understand that a mistake like mistyping frequently occurs and we enjoy the amusing absurdity caused by the common mistake.. 3.6. Computers and human beings as a target of humor. So far we have seen computer jokes whose targets of humor are apparently human beings such as computer technicians, Microsoft, Bill Gates and users. We may now study computer jokes whose target are both computers and human beings. Joke 07) illustrates a boast of Bill Gates and an amusing rebuttal of the chairman of General Motors.. 07) Bill Gates and General Motors Bill Gates is hanging out with the chairman of General Motors. "If automotive technology had kept pace with computer tech-. nology over the past few decades," boasts Gates, "you would now be driving a V-32 instead of a. V~8,. and it would have a top. speed of 10,000 miles per hour," says Gates. -50-. "Or, you could.

(23) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. have an economy car that weighs 30 pounds and gets a thousand miles to a gallon of gas. In either case, the sticker price of a new car would be less than $50," he continues.. In response to all this goading, the GM chairman replies, "Yes, but would you really want to drive a car that crashes four times a day?". 37. The chairman of General Motors counterreplies to Bill Gates, who goaded him into anger by boasting the more rapid improvement of computer technology over automotive technology, by ironically pointing out the serious defects of a computer. This joke works as a corrective method of the opponent's impolite behavior in an amusing way. The following jokes describe misleading computer vocabularies and the bewilderment of computer users confronted with troubles.. (I8) Fatal Error! User: Hello, my computer is reporting a fatal error! Support: Well there's nothing we can do now, you should have called us when it was still critical! (19) A Confused Caller A confused caller was having troubles printing documents. He told the technician that the computer had said that it "could not find the printer.". The user had even tried turning the com-. puter screen to face the printer - but his computer still could not "see" the printer. 38. The laughter of joke (I8) arises from the incongruity between the com-51-.

(24) x-!!f: . ~f,IIf . x1t. 16~. 1 . 2 if1*~. 2005.2. puter language "fatal" and its actual usage in an ordinary society and, therefore, the laughter of the joke can be explained by the incongruity theory. The cause of laughter which also involves teasing of the support for his/her irresponsible attitude and the amusement we get from enjoying the predicament of the user, can be also explained by the superiority theory.. In joke (19), the different usages of the word "find" cre-. ate incongruity. Laughter in this joke comes from the peculiar usage of computer vocabulary which is different from the ordinary usages of the word. The joke also makes fun of the computer user who is perplexed and annoyed by the misleading computer languages. Computer users are so often embarrassed by the imperfection of computers, as seen in (20) and (21).. (20) The Definition of an Upgrade: Take old bugs out, put new ones in. (Nerd Saying 12) (21) Buy a Pentium 586/90 so you can reboot faster. (Nerd Sayings 3). 39. Joke (20) expresses the troubles computer users often experience in upgrading. The incongruity between the purpose of upgrading and the troublesome result of new bugs creates something funny. Joke. ~1),. by re-. minding users that they have to reboot the Pentium 586/90, succeeds in implying that even an expensive new model will have a crash creating the users another trouble. The contradiction between the purpose of spending a lot of money and the ironical result that the users are expected to face also creates the joke. The joke laughs at the imperfection of the machine, while mildly ridiculing the users with a clever use ,. -52-.

(25) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. of implication. Jokes from (17) to (21) , while describing the weakness, irresponsibility and embarrassment of human beings, are simultaneously pointing out the weakness of the high-performance machine. The imperfections of computers are described in the illogicality of computer messages, as seen in jokes from (22) to (25).. (22) Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue. (Nerd Saying 49) (23) Press any key to continue or any other key to quit... (Nerd Saying 53) (24) Press any key ...... no, No, NO!! Not THAT one! (Nerd Saying 54). (25) Best file compression around: "DEL * *". =. 100% compression.. (Nerd Saying 11) 40. The message in the window in (22) is completely illogical, because it is of no use to press any key if the keyboard is not attached. The message in (23) gives an incompatible order to press any key for the opposite purposes of continuing and quitting. The order in joke (24) is contradicting, because "any" key does not exclude the key indicated by "Not THAT one". Joke (25) reminds us what will happen if the file is deleted. These jokes are funny mainly because of the illogicality of the orders.. Yet. you can also imagine the embarrassment of the computer users, which serves to increase the laughter created by the illogicality of the computer messages.. -53-.

(26) xllJ'- . ~Wr . xft. 16~. 1 . 2 i-;13f:Jf}. 2005.2. 3.7. Computers as a target of humor. The previous sections have studied jokes whose target of laughter involves human beings. This section will examine jokes whose butt of humor appear to be a computer, as seen in (26) and (2V.. (26) Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes.. (Nerd Say-. ings 5) (2V Computer: A device designed to speed and automate errors.. (Nerd Sayings 41). 41. The essence of laughter in joke (26) is assumed to be pointing at the weakness of the super-human machine. While human beings have the ability to think over the appropriateness of the order and correct mistakes, if any, high-performance computers only follow the instruction without any adjustment. They have no ability to think, unlike human beings whose most important characteristic is the capability to think. Consequently, computers easily make very fast and very accurate mistakes without any adjustment. The laughter is enhanced by the way it is presented. The listener of the joke, expecting a high performance of the machine, suddenly comes up with another contrasting interpretation with the last word "mistakes". The contrast between what is expected and what occurs creates the joke. Joke (2V indicates the computer's flaws similar to that shown in joke (26). It implies that despite the accuracy and speed of the computer, it. cannot act according to its own will, pointing out the weakness of the high-efficiency machine. -54-.

(27) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. Compared with jokes from (4) to (2@ , which involve human beings such as technicians, Microsoft, Bill Gates and computer users as well as computers as the target of humor, jokes (26) and (27) directly point a finger at computers for their imperfection and inability to think.. The. speaker, while admitting the accurateness and speed of computers which far surpass those of human beings, emphasizes the demerits of the computers. You may claim that the butt of humor in these jokes are still human beings behind computers, and not the machines themselves, because the errors are caused by computer operators or programmers. Yet it is also clear that what is mainly described in these jokes is not the problems of human beings as is described in jokes from (4) to (2@ : (4) makes fun of the incompetence of the technician, jokes from (5) to (9) laugh away the irresponsibility of the programmers, (10) to 03) express the poor foresight, the arrogance, the sexual weakness and the foolishness of Bill Gates, jokes from 04) to (2@ describe the greediness, the buck-passing, the imperfection and the embarrassment of computer users. The development of modern technology has given a tremendous influence on the life of human beings to the extent that we have a new rival which may in a way have more abilities than human beings and in many working places are replacing human forces. The causes of laughter in jokes (26) to (27) are derived from pointing out the weakness of computers for their inability and imperfections.. An overall study of computer jokes has revealed that the laughter of these jokes actually arises from a net of complex and various causes explained by the three groups of theories. -55-. It should be also reminded.

(28) Jt~. . ~Wj . Jtit. 16~. 1 . 2 -@-fjf~. 2005.2. that in modern humor, people enjoy making fun of others with fellow feelings by finding weakness in someone or something; we are somewhat relieved to know that we are all imperfect regardless of the status, position, wealth, race, capability or fame. This feeling should be more properly called the feeling of "empathy" of finding weakness in a person or a thing being laughed at rather than "superiority" over others. Although we cannot deny the derisive laughter, claimed by Plato, Aristotle, Rapp, Bergson and other humor theorists supporting the feeling of superiority as a cause of laughter, we can safely conclude that it certainly is not the essence of laughter in modern humor and the butt of laughter is not restricted to human beings, contrary to the Bergson's argument.. 4. Analogies between contrasting domains. We have argued that the target of laughter is not restricted to human beings, contrary to Bergson's claim, by showing computer jokes (26) and whose butt of laughter is the weakness of a computer.. ~1). However, it is. also true that we tend to laugh at things around us by finding something human in their behavior or appearance, as is argued by Bergson. amples shown below manifest this tendency. Jokes (28) and. ~9). Ex-. describe. a computer clash in a poetic form called "haiku" answering the question, "What if errors were written in the form of haiku?". ~8). What if errors were written in the form of haiku? First snow, then silence. This thousand-dollar screen dies -56-.

(29) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. so beautifully. (29) Windows NT crashed.. I am the Blue Screen of Death. No one hears your screams.42. Joke (28) makes fun of a computer by metaphorically describing a computer crash as "snow", "silence" and "death".. In joke (29), a crash is. figuratively described as "the Blue Screen of Death" and "no scream" . The pleasure and relief of talking about death can be argued by the relief theory and the fun of finding weakness in "something" (please note that it is not someone) can be explained by the superiority theory.. In. both examples, we find the analogy between the contrasting phenomena (an inanimate thing like a computer crash and animate phenomenon like death) in that there is no movement nor any sound. The metaphorical process of finding the analogy in the contrasting domains contributes to giving us a pleasant surprise.. In addition, the poetic form. of haiku in which a metaphorical joke is presented produces the pleasure of recognizing the incongruity between the content and the form. It is interesting to note that one of the most common topics of. jokes is still sex, even in computer jokes.. (30) WARNING!!I. !!I There is a new virus: Viagra I It turns your 3.5 "floppy into a hard drive III 43. Expressions like. "wARNING!!I". and "I!! There is a new virus" lead us. to expect a computer world. Suddenly, with the word "Viagra", the lis-. -57-.

(30) )(~ • ~f,jIJ • )(1~. 16~. 1 . 2 it1*%. 2005.2. tener is led to connect the computer with sexual connotations and the phrase "turns your 3.5" floppy into a hard drive" is consequently interpreted as a sexual phenomenon. A computer virus has troublesome effects on a computer, while Viagra has surprising effects on our body. The analogy, successfully connecting the two contrasting images, sex and a sexless machine, makes this joke. The metaphorical process of finding analogy between the two contrasting domains contributes to create the joke and give us the pleasure of talking about sex in a socially approved manner.. It shows one of the characteristics of human beings. that we inclined to find something human in various things around us. The targets of laughter in the following metaphorical jokes, called "virus jokes" , are regarded as both human beings and computers.. (31) Virus Joke. POLITICALLY CORRECT VIRUS: Never calls itself a "virus" , but instead refers to itself as an "electronic microorganism." (32) GOVERNMENT ECONOMIST VIRUS: Nothing works, but all. your diagnostic software says everything is fine. (33) ADAM AND EVE VIRUS: Takes a couple of bytes out of your Ap-. ple.. (34 ELVIS VIRUS: Your computer gets fat, slow and lazy, then self destructs; only to resurface at shopping malls and service station across rural America. (3@ SEARS VIRUS: Your data won't appear unless you buy new ca-. bles, power supply and a set of shocks. (36) KEVORKIAN VIRUS: Helps your computer shut down as an act. of mercy.44. -58-.

(31) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. In these examples, troublesome characters or organizations are compared to a computer virus. The analogy between a trouble-maker and a computer virus creates these jokes.. 5. Identification of computers and human beings. When people become overly devoted to computers, they no longer find an analogy between human beings and computers. Rather human beings become identical to computers, as seen in jokes from (3V to (40) :. (3V You Know You're Addicted to the Net When···. All your friends have @ in their names. (38) Your spouse makes a new rule ... Computers don't come to bed. (39) Wife@Intro A computer programmer at a party. IS. introducing his wife,. "Meet my [email protected]." (40) You start introducing yourself as "[email protected].". 45. In jokes from (3V to (40), your friends, your spouse, your wife and even yourself become identical to e-mail addresses. To the people who are even more addicted to the net, we will introduce a warning called "MEMORANDUM".. (41) MEMORANDUM RE: Computer Software Warning Last year a friend of mine upgraded GirlFriend 1.0 to Wife 1.0 and found that it's a memory hog leaving very little system re-59-.

(32) x~. . ~;fillj . xft. 16~. 1 . 2 it1*~. sources for other applications.. 2005.2. He is only now noticing that. Wife 1.0 also is spawning Child-Processes which are further consuming valuable resources. nomena. was. included. in. No mention of this particular phethe. product. brochure. or the. documentation, though other users have informed him that this is to be expected due to the nature of the application.. Not only. that, Wife 1.0 installs itself such that it is always launched at system initialization where it can monitor all other system activity. He's finding that some applications such as Poker Night 8.3, BeerBash 2.5, and Pub Night 7.0 are no longer able to run in the system at all, crashing the system when selected (even though they always worked fine before).. ***** BUG WARNING ******** Wife 1.0 has an undocumented bug. If you try to install Mistress 1.1 before uninstalling Wife 1.0, Wife 1.0 will delete MSMoney files before doing the uninstall itself. Then Mistress 1.1 will refuse to install, claiming insufficient resources.. *** BUG WORK-AROUNDS *************** To avoid the above bug, try installing Mistress LIon a different system and never run any file transfer applications such as LapLink 6.0. Also, beware of similar shareware applications that have been known to carry viruses that may affect Wife 1.0. Another solution would be to run Mistress 1.0 via a UseNet provider under an anonymous name.. Here again, beware of the. viruses which can accidentally be downloaded from the UseNet. 46 Joke (41) is funny, because it reminds us of the embarrassment of a man who faces troubles both with his computer and the ladies called Girl-60-.

(33) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. Friend, Wife and Mistress. When a computer becomes identical to a human being, it begins to think, just like human beings, as seen in (42) and (43) .. (42) Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.. (Nerd Saying 6) (43) As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing. 47 (Nerd Saying 20). In jokes (42) and (43), the speaker treats computers as having the equal ability as human beings: computers having the ability to think. In jokes (26) and (21;, computers were characterized as mere machines which can-. not think, contrary to human beings who have the capability to think. Although it is surely improbable that machines can think, imagining an improbable world gives us a relief from everyday logic by which we have been bound. The direct target of humor in (42) and (43) as well as (26) and (21; are not· human beings, but computers themselves. These examples lead us to suggest that we can laugh at many things around us even by imagining a world where computers can make fun of human beings as seen in joke (43). Surely we have to admit that we tend to see something human in many things around us, as seen in jokes from (28) to (36) and, in an extreme case, computers become identical with human beings, as shown in jokes from (31; to (41).. However, it is also apparent that we can laugh. at many things around us and it is not always because we see something human in its behavior or appearance.. It is important to bear in. mind that the close examination of the computer jokes above revealed -61-.

(34) )(¥ . :j'ff,jlj •. )(1~. 16~. 1 . 2 it1:jf~. 2005.2. that the object of our laughter is not always human beings; the target can be animals and even inanimate things, contrary to the Bergson's arguement. Finally, let us illustrate a joke which does not involve any feeling of superiority.. (44) All wiyht. Rho sritched mg kegtops awound? (Nerd Saying 48). 48. Joke (44), which should be read as "All right. Who switched my key tops around?", exemplifies spoonerism where sounds of words are transposed. Uw/ and /r/, and /y/ and /g/). There are many instances of laughter that are not designed to evoke feelings of superiority nor any emotional feelings, as are seen in various examples of worplay which do not involve any self-evaluation.. 6. Conclusion. This paper has attempted to explore the essence of laughter in modern humor and its possible target by studying computer jokes obtained through the internet. We have examined if the essence of laughter is an attack on the weakness, and indirectly, on the person, as Plato explained and if laughter comes from humiliating and belittling someone else, as Aristotle proclaimed. We have tried to examine if the target of humor is always a human being, as Bergson insisted. A close study of the computer jokes has revealed that the laughter of these jokes actually arises from a net of complex and various causes explained by the three groups of theories, the superiority theory, the in-62-.

(35) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KITAZUME. congruity theory and the relief theory. Although the superiority theory is a widespread theory, we have exemplified jokes which do not involve any feeling of superiority, as seen in (44). We have also studied the feeling of "superiority" claimed by the superiority theory. It has been clarified that these jokes, whose targets of laughter are human beings make fun of the targets with fellow feelings.. It can be safely assumed that people in modern age tend to enjoy. these jokes by finding similar weakness in others that they feel inside. They are somewhat relieved to know that they are all imperfect human beings regardless of status, position, wealth, race or fame.. We have ar-. gued that this feeling should be more properly called "amusement at weakness" or "empathy" rather than "superiority" over others. It is safe to conclude that "the feeling of superiority" claimed as the cause of laughter should be characterized as "empathy" of sharing the feeling of weakness incident to our nature as well as "superiority" over others. It has been made clear that the target of laughter is not restricted. to human beings.. Some jokes make fun of not only human beings but. also inanimate things like computers for their inabilities and imperfections.. Computer technology has seen such a great development that. we can enjoy imagining a world where computers can even think as human beings. Admitting that we tend to see something human in many things around us, it is possible that we can make fun of not only human beings but also animals and inanimate things around us. Notes * This is a revised version of a paper I presented at the 2000 International Humor Con-. ference of the International Society for Humor Studies held on July 25, 2000 in Osaka, Japan. I am indebted to Robert Kowalczyk for his valuable comments and sugges-. -63-.

(36) x"¥- . ~1iIIr . x1t. 16~ 1 . 2 -%1*~. 2005.2. tions. I also wish to express my sincere gratitude to the participants of the conference for their comments. 1 See Morreall (1983), Ziv (1984) and Ross (1998) for details. 2 See Plato (1961) for details. 3 See Aristotle, Rhetoric for details. 4 See Bergson (1956, Originally published, 1899), Le Rire p.62 for details. 5 See Morreall (1983) p.4 for details. 6 See Hobbes (1996, Originally published, 1650) p.38 for details. 7 See Bergson (1956, Originally published, 1899), Le Rire p.62 for details. 8 Rapp (1949) suggests that all laughter has developed from one primitive behavior, "the roar of triumph in an ancient jungle duel". 9 Mikes (1970) insists that all humor is aggressive. 10 Gruner (1978) describes a more modern version of the Rapp's theory. 11 Canter and Zillman (1973) came to the conclusion after carrying out a survey with a group of 76 psychology students. 12 Aristotle expresses the element of incongruity in Rhetoric. See Morreall (1983) p.16 for details. 13 Immanuel Kant argues that incongruity plays the central role. 14 See Koestler (1964) pp.1-3. 15 See Raskin (1985) pp.99-127. 16 See Ziv (1984) pp.70-80. 17 See Spencer (1860) for details. 18 Freud (1905) is the first to emphasize that one of the important functions of humor is to approach the subject of sex in a socially acceptable fashion. 19 Hasset and Houlihan (1979) asked readers of Psychology Today to indicate their preference from among 30 jokes and 14,500 readers responded to the researchers' questionnaire. 20 See Ross (1998) p.70. 21 See Morreall (1983) pp.7-8. 22 See Morreall (1983) p.11. 23 See Ross (1998) p.9. 24 See Ross (1998) p.18. 25-28 'Fhese jokes are obtained through New Yorks Com Search, http://www.jokes.com//. 29 Morreall (1983) exlpains the problems with Kant's theory. See Morreall (1983) pp.20-37. 30-31 These jokes are obtained through New Yorks Com Search, http://www.jokes.com//. 32 The joke is obtained through Electronic Software Publishing Corporation, http://www.elsop.com//. 33 See Ross (1998) p.68.. -64-.

(37) Humanity in Computer Jokes *. KIT AZUME. 34 This joke is obtained through New Yorks Com Search, http://www.jokes.com//. 35 A quotation by Alexander Pope in An Essay on Criticism. 36- 48 These jokes are obtained through New Yorks Com Search, http://www.jokes.com//.. References Aristotle. 41h century. De Arte Poetica. English Translation: "Poetics". In Aristotle,. Rhetoric, Poetics. New York: Random House, 1954, 219-66.. Bergson, Henry. 1899. Le Rire. Essai sur la Signification du Comique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. English Translation: "Laughter". In Wylie Syper (ed.), Comedy. Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1956, 59-190. Japanese Translation: Tatsuo Hayashi, Warai. Tokyo: Iwanami, 1998. Cantor, Joanne R. & Zillman, D. 1973. "Resentment toward Victimized Protagonists and Severity of Misfortunes They Suffer as Factors in Humor Appreciation". Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 6, 321-9. Freud, Sigmund. 1905. Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious, James Strachey (trans.). London: The Hogarth Press, 1975. Gruner, Charles R. 1978. Understanding Laughter: The Workings of Wit and Humor. Chicago: Nelson Hall. Hasset,J., and Houlihan, ]. 1979. "Different Jokes for Different Folks". Psychology Today, pp.64-68. Hobbes, Thomas. 1650. Leviathan. J.C.A.Gaskin (ed.) , Oxford World,s Classic, Thomas Hobbes Leviathan. Oxford: Oxofrd University Press, 1996. Kant, Immanuel. 1892. Kritik of Judgement, J.H. Bernard (trans.). London: Macmillan. Koestler, Arthur. 1964. The Act of Creation. London: Hutchinson Press. Mikes, George. 1970. Humor: In Memoriam. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Morreall, John. 1983. Taking Laughter Seriously. Albany: State University of New York Press. Plato. 1961. The Collected Dialogues of Plato. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (eds.). New York: Pantheon. Pope, Alexander. 1911. An Essay on Criticism. Raymond Southall (ed.) London: Collins, 1973. Rapp, Albert. 1949. "A Phylogenetic Theory of Wit and Humor". Journal of Social Psychology 30, 81-96. Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. Ross, Alison. 1998. The Language of Humor. London: Routledge. Spencer, Herbert. 1860. "On the Physiology of Laughter". Essays on Education, Etc. London: Dent, 1911, pp.298-309. Ziv, Avner. 1984. Personality and Sense of Humor, New York: Springer. Electronic Software Publishing Corporation. http://www.elsop.com//. 2000.. -65-.

(38) )(~. . l'Hf-r . )(1t. 16~. 1 . 2 it1*{}. New Yorks Com Search, http://www.jokes.com//. 2000.. -66-. 2005.2.

(39)