विनोद

साचा:Wiktionary
Humourorhumor(seespelling differences) is the tendency of particular cognitive experiences to provokelaughterand provideamusement. Many theories exist about what humour is and what social function it serves. People of all ages and cultures respond to humour. The majority of people are able to be amused, to laugh or smile at something funny and thus they are considered to have a "sense of humour".
The term derives from thehumoral medicineof theancient Greeks, which stated that a mix of fluids known as humours (Greek:χυμός,chymos, literallyjuiceorsap, metaphorically,flavour) controlled human health and emotion.
Asense of humouris the ability to experience humour, although the extent to which an individual will find something humorous depends on a host of variables, includinggeographical location,culture,maturity, level ofeducation,intelligenceandcontext. For example, young children may favourslapstick, such asPunch and Judypuppet shows or cartoons such asTom and Jerry.Satiremay rely more on understanding the target of the humour and thus tends to appeal to more mature audiences. Nonsatirical humour can be specifically termed "recreational drollery".
साचा:Cleanup-section
Arthur Schopenhauerlamented the misuse of the term "humour" (aGermanloanwordfromEnglish) to mean any type of comedy. However, both "humour" and "comic" are often used when theorizing about the subject. The connotation of "humour" is more that of response, while "comic" refers more to stimulus. "Humour" also originally had a connotation of a combined ridiculousness and wit in one individual, the paradigm case being Shakespeare's Sir John Falstaff. The French were slow to adopt the term "humour" and in French, "humeur" and "humour" are still two different words, the former still referring only to the archaic concept ofhumours.
Western humour theory begins withPlato, who attributed toSocrates(as a semihistorical dialogue character) in thePhilebus(p. 49b) the view that the essence of the ridiculous is an ignorance in the weak, who are thus unable to retaliate when ridiculed. Later, in Greek philosophy,Aristotle, in thePoetics(1449a, pp. 34–35), suggested that an ugliness that does not disgust is fundamental to humour.
In ancientSanskrit drama,Bharata Muni'sNatya Shastradefined humour (hāsyam) as one of the eightnava rasas, or principlerasas(emotional responses), which can be inspired in the audience bybhavas, the imitations of emotions that the actors perform. Eachrasawas associated with a specificbhavasportrayed on stage. In the case of humour, it was associated with mirth (hasya).
The terms "comedy" and "satire" became synonymous after Aristotle'sPoeticswas translated intoArabicin themedieval Islamic world, where it was elaborated upon byArabic writersandIslamic philosopherssuch as Abu Bischr, his pupilAl-Farabi,Avicenna, andAverroes. Due to cultural differences, they disassociated comedy fromGreek dramatic representation, and instead identified it withArabic poeticthemes and forms, such ashija(satirical poetry). They viewed comedy as simply the "art of reprehension" and made no reference to light and cheerful events or troublous beginnings and happy endings associated with classical Greek comedy. After theLatin translations of the 12th century, the term "comedy" thus gained a new semantic meaning inMedieval literature.
The Incongruity Theory originated mostly withKant, who claimed that the comic is an expectation that comes to nothing.Henri Bergsonattempted to perfect incongruity by reducing it to the "living" and "mechanical".
An incongruity like Bergson's, in things juxtaposed simultaneously, is still in vogue. This is often debated against theories of the shifts in perspectives in humour; hence, the debate in the seriesHumor Researchbetween John Morreall and Robert Latta.Morreall presented mostly simultaneous juxtapositions,with Latta countering that it requires a "cognitive shift" created by a discovery or solution to a puzzle or problem. Latta is criticized for having reduced jokes' essence to their own puzzling aspect.
Humour frequently contains an unexpected, often sudden, shift in perspective, which gets assimilated by the Incongruity Theory. This view has been defended by Latta (1998) and byBrian Boyd(2004).Boyd views the shift as from seriousness to play. Nearly anything can be the object of this perspective twist; it is, however, in the areas of human creativity (science and art being the varieties) that the shift results from "structure mapping" (termed "bisociation" by Koestler) to create novel meanings.Arthur Koestler argues that humour results when two different frames of reference are set up and a collision is engineered between them.
Tony Veal, who takes a more formalised computational approach than Koestler, has written on the role of metaphor and metonymy in humour,using inspiration from Koestler as well as fromDedre Gentner's theory of structure-mapping,George LakoffandMark Johnson's theory ofconceptual metaphor, andMark TurnerandGilles Fauconnier's theory ofconceptual blending.
Some claim that humour cannot or should not be explained.AuthorE.B. Whiteonce said, "Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but the thing dies in the process and the innards are discouraging to any but the pure scientific mind."[३]
As with any form of art, acceptance depends on social demographics and varies from person to person. Throughout history, comedy has been used as a form of entertainment all over the world, whether in the courts of the Western kings or the villages of the Far East. Both a social etiquette and a certain intelligence can be displayed through forms of wit and sarcasm. Eighteenth-centuryGermanauthorGeorg Lichtenbergsaid that "the more you know humour, the more you become demanding in fineness."
Alastair Clarke explains: "The theory is an evolutionary and cognitive explanation of how and why any individual finds anything funny. Effectively, it explains that humour occurs when the brain recognizes a pattern that surprises it, and that recognition of this sort is rewarded with the experience of the humorous response, an element of which is broadcast as laughter."  The theory further identifies the importance of pattern recognition in human evolution: "An ability to recognize patterns instantly and unconsciously has proved a fundamental weapon in the cognitive arsenal of human beings. The humorous reward has encouraged the development of such faculties, leading to the unique perceptual and intellectual abilities of our species."[४]Archived2009-12-04 at theWayback Machine.
साचा:Refimprovesect
Humour can be verbal, visual, or physical.
Root components:
Methods:
Rowan Atkinsonexplains in his lecture in the documentary "Funny Business"that an object or a person can become funny in three different ways. They are:
Mostsight gags fit into one or more of these categories.
Humour is also sometimes described as an ingredient in spiritual life. Humour is also the act of being funny. Some synonyms of funny or humour are hilarious, spiritual, wise-minded, outgoing, and amusing. Some Masters have added it to their teachings in various forms. A famous figure in spiritual humour is thelaughing Buddha.
साचा:Aesthetics navigation