Source: http://www.linguisticstudies.org/home/linguistics-studies/volume-28/problems-of-text-linguistics-discourse-studies-and-discourse-analysis/the-tactics-of-lies-in-american-comic-discourse
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 03:56:47+00:00

Document:
The conducted research reveals that the communicative tactics of lies is widespread in American comic discourse. It is implemented through various types of insinuative communicative acts which use the following variants of comic lies: ‘Snowball lies’, ‘Invention Pretension’, ‘Backup Bluff’, ‘Brandishment Bluff’, ‘Faking Amnesia’, ‘Con Artist Lies’, etc. At least partly they are based on such cognitive pattern as Illusionary Superiority. The beginning of the third millennium is characterized by the process of the nomination and standardization of McCoy American terminology, coined specially for American literature and film making.
Keywords: american comic discourse, stylistic figure, trope, cognitive pattern, reframing.
The research of American comic discourse is an actual problem of modern cognitive linguistics because of active promotion of its exhibitions in Ukrainian communicative space. Generalization of conceptual and terminological developments in American comic discourse studies allows to develop new methods and approaches to its research.
The purpose of the analysis is to establish nationally biased qualifying and classifying features of cognitive and stylistic means leading to a comic effect in American comic discourse.
5) description of some American stylistic tropes, stylistic figures and stereotypical personages leading to a comic effect and its intensification.
The novelty of the proposed analysis is defined with synthesis of theoretical and practical studies of American comic discourse and the tactics of comic lies, introduction of such terms as reframing of inferences and registers, cognitive pattern.
The theoretical value of the study is reasoned with definition of characteristic cognitive mechanisms of humor and the disclosure of the basic methods of the analysis of American comic discourse and its three main varieties: American humor discourse, American satiric discourse and American ironic discourse.
The practical importance of the research, which may be used in sociolinguistic, cultural, cognitive linguistic, psycholinguistic, discourse analysis and other studies, is determined by the introduction of modern American terms relating to the variants of classic stylistic tropes and figures used for the creation of a comic effect.
The cognitive and lingo stylistic analyses of a number of American comic discourse fragments permits us to affirm that the key cognitive mechanism of humor, satire and irony is reframing of inferences, cognitive patterns, registers, contexts, that lead to a clash of explicit and implicit meanings and a comic effect. The communicative tactics of lies, as one of the possible American comic discourse tactics, is based on a number of variants of comic lies, which received American informal, expressive and metaphoric names, such as Backup Bluff, Brandishment Bluff, Snowball Lies, Invention Pretension, Faking Amnesia, Con Artist Lies.
The number of these American comic lies variants, as well as other tropes and figures variants, leading to a comic effect, is not limited by those mentioned in the research, so the perspective of the analysis of American comic discourse is the further disclosure, classification and codification of all, not only classical but also American lingo stylistic means of humor,sarire and irony.
► The conducted research reveals that the communicative tactics of lies is widespread in American comic discourse. ► It is implemented through various types of insinuative communicative acts which use the following variants of comic lies: ‘Snowball lies’, ‘Invention Pretension’, ‘Backup Bluff’, ‘Brandishment Bluff’, ‘Faking Amnesia’, ‘Con Artist Lies’, etc. ► At least partly they are based on such cognitive pattern as Illusionary Superiority. ► The beginning of the third millennium is characterized by the process of the nomination and standardization of McCoy American terminology, coined specially for American literature and film making.
Bahtin, M. M. (1979). Tvorchestvo Fransua Rable i narodnaja kul'tura Srednevekov'ja i Renesannsa. Moskva: Mysl'.
Karasik, V. I. (2002). Jazyk social'nogo statusa. Moskva: Gnosiz.
Propp, V. Ja. (1999). Problemy komizma i smeha. Ritual'nyj smeh v fol'klore (po povodu skazki o Nesmejane). Moskva: Labirint.
Samohina, V. A. (2008). Sovremennaja anglojazychnaja shutka. Monografija. Har'kov: Har'kovskij nacional'nyj universitet imeni V. I. Karazina.
Shevchenko, I. S. & Morozova, E. I. (2003). Diskurs kak myslekommunikativnoe obrazovanie. Visnyk Kharkivs'koho natsional'noho universytetu imeni V. N. Karazina. Kharkiv, 586, 33-38.
Attardo, S. (1991). Script Theory Revisited: Joke Similarity and Joke Representation Model. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 4, 293-347.
Bandler, R. (1987). Reframing: NLP And The Transformation Of Meaning. Washington: Real People Press.
Brest, Martin (1984). Beverly Hills Cop. 106 Min. Paramount Pictures.USA.1984. E-portal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Hills_Cop(10.11.09). Beverly Hills Cop.
Columbia, M. (2006). Ethnic Jokes. E-portal: http://www.sekoj.com/ethnicjokes/index.html (12.11.09).
Gartner, Alex. (2008). Get Smart. 2008: spy-fi comedy film. 110Mn. Warner Bros. E-portal : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425061/(7.02.2013) – Get Smart.
Hobbs, T. (1958). Levithan. Parts One and Two. New York: The library of liberal Arts.
Jackson, A. (2009). Funny Jokes. E-portal: http://www.allfunnypictures.com (11.11.09) – All Funny Pictures.
Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Levy, D. M. (1979). Communicative goals and strategies: between Discourse and Syntax. Discourse and Syntax, 12, 183-210. N.Y.: Academic Press.
Raskin, V. (1985). The Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Reidel: Dordrecht.
Rifkin, Alfred. (1994). The Chase. 1994: action comedy film. 89Mn. 20th Century Fox. E-portal: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109402/quotes?ref_=tt_trv_qu (10.02.13). – The Chase.
Tversky, A. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-332.
Turtelbaum, Jon. (1995). While You Were Slipping. 1995: romantic comedy. 102Mn. Hollywood pictures. E-portal: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3RSYSsgz3w (01.01.2013) – While You Were Slipping.
White, John. (2013). Amnesia jokes: jokes. E-portal: http://www.jokebuddha.com/Amnesia#ixzz2Gjwtij00 (01.01.2013) – Amnesia.
Zinnerman, Tim. (1987). The Running Man 1987: science-fiction-action film. 101 Mn. TriStar Pictures. E-portal: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093894/quotes (15.01.2013).
Oleg V. Kharchenko is Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor, Chief of Department of Theory and Practice of Translation in Inter Regional Academy of Personnel Management (IRAPM), Kyiv. The areas of research include discourse analysis, cognitive linguistics, and modern American stylistics.
The purpose raises the following tasks: 1) determination of characteristic cognitive mechanisms of comism; 2) disclosure of the main communicative tactics of American comic discourse; 3) the clarification of aspects of analyzing the tactics of comic lies; 4) establishment of basic variants of stylistic means realization of comic lies tactics; 5) description of some American stylistic tropes, stylistic figures and stereotypical personages leading to a comic effect and its intensification.
The novelty of the proposed analysis is defined with synthesis of theoretical and practical studies of American comic discourse and the tactics of comic lies, introduction of such terms as reframing of inferences and registers, cognitive patterns.
The proposed analysis is based on the works of V.I. Karasyk [Карасик 2002: 10-120], V.O. Samohyna [Самохина 2008: 7-220], V.Y. Propp [Пропп 1999: 15-155], M.M. Bakhtin [Бахтин 1979: 20-125], V. Raskin [Raskin 1985: 5-155] and S. Attardo [Attardo 1991: 289-320] who researched the problems of humor and comism in the most comprehensive way.
Taking into account the definition of humorous discourse made by V.I. Karasyk [Карасик 2002: 10-120] and V.O. Samohyna [Самохина 2008: 7-220], we define American comic discourse as a text of an American sender with specific linguistic and extra linguistic stock of realization of inner laughing intention, unrolled in the dynamic social situation of laughing, joy and playful communication. The main variants of comic discourse are humorous discourse, satiric discourse, sarcastic discourse, ironic discourse.Analyzing the phenomenon of comism, we rely on the point of view of M.M. Bakhtin [Бахтин 1979: 20-220] and V.Y. Propp [Пропп 1999: 15-220] who affirm that the continuum of comism consists of humor and wittiness, its intellectual variant, satire, sarcasm and partly irony (tragic irony is not included). So we determine comism as an intellectual and emotional activity of playful and creative character, based on unexpected reframing of meaning, aimed at audience laughter, and has such underlying intentions as aggression, libido, pejorativeness, lighthearted fun.
In the theory of neuro-linguistic programming developed by Richard Bandler and John Grinder, the term ‘reframing’ means the methods of changing the way some people understand things and trying to find alternative ways of seeing ideas, situations etc [Bandler 1987: 100-157]. Since then ‘reframing’ is used by psychiatrists to help their patients to get rid of various phobias.
In our research we define the term ‘reframing’ from the lingo cognitive point of view as the complex mechanism of unexpected switching of inferences (from logic to illogic, mystic-religious, insinuative, imaginative, absurd, unpredicted but probable etc), registers (from polite neutral to ironic, informal, rude taboo etc), patterns (first of all from neutral to illusory superiority), contexts (first of all situational), which leads to the clash of explicit and implicit meanings and to a comic effect.
The reframing of situational context, leading to a comic effect, could illustrate the following American comic discourse fragment from ‘The Running Man’, a sci-fi action film (1987, produced by Tim Zinnerman). When Damon Killian, a ruthless businessman killer imprisoned Ben Richards (actor Arnold Swarzenegger), Damon says joyfully: “Hello, cutie-pie. One of us is in deep trouble” [Zinnerman 1987]. But when Ben Richards managers to run away and then to encounter his enemy, Ben says sarcastically the same phrase and punishes Damon Killian. In different situation the same phrase receives the different meaning. In American communicative space such means of comism creation, from the stylistic point of view, is called as ‘Ironic Echo’ [Ambinder 2009: 1].
While creating the comic effect, the mechanisms of meaning reframing are accompanied with cognitive patterns, for the flow of discourse is conducted within some definite cognitive frames.
In our opinion, a cognitive pattern is a mental filter, which presents a scheme of connecting of a set of several frames and a dynamic model of the reality cognition., amalgamated around some key value dominant, the frequent usage of which forms and sometimes deforms the cognitive frames of reality cognition and leads to the fixation of a cognitive bias of the same name. in the world view of a communicant. The majority of cognitive biases were discovered and experimentally confirmed by D. Kahneman and A. Tversky [Kahneman 1982: 49-81; Tversky 1992: 332]. In fact, a cognitive pattern is an intermediate chain between a frame and a cognitive bias.
According to our research, in American humor, the cognitive pattern of Illusory Superiority, when people estimate their qualities too highly and the quality of others too lowly, which lies in the foundation of the same named cognitive bias, is displayed very distinctly, because such stylistic figure as bathos (unexpected transition from polite neutral register to rude informal register), which leads to laughter, is used almost in every modern American comedy film. D. Kahneman affirms that such cognitive bias is intrinsic to a lot of Americans [Kahneman 1982: 82-92]. This pattern is based on such value dominant as “I am Number 1” (I am the best!), and consists of two main frames: the frame “I” of a sender (IQ, gender, profession,, ethnic group, social position),and the frame “The USA is the most modern state” (American is super, non-American is backward, “It`s Not Invented Here!”). Rather often this cognitive pattern is displayed through various types of ‘funny insults’ (Flowery. Insults, Stealth Insults etc). As T. Hobbes affirms, “The passion of laughter is nothing else but sudden glory arising from a sudden conception of some eminency in ourselves by comparison with the infirmity of others, or our own formerly”[Hobbs 1958: 75-77]. In the following example the neutral cognitive pattern is changed into the cognitive pattern of Illusory Superiority: “Why do Mexicans wear sombreros? God said, "Wear this because I am tired of looking at my mistakes!" [Columbia 2006: 10]. The reframing of logical and mystic religious inferences is accompanied with the actualization of the cognitive pattern of Illusionary Superiority, the underlaying intention of pejorativeness, and such cultural reality of Mexico as ‘sombrero’ intensifies the comic image of a stereotypical Mexican. Typically, the lexical markers of this pattern are the rude and insulting words and saying relating to some object of mockery (funny freak, dull dupe etc ), or the pathos words and saying relating to the sender or his or her social or ethnic group (It`s so difficult to be the best).
While analyzing American comic discourse, we could single out two main communicative strategies of a sender: the strategy of entertainment and the strategy of manipulation. D. Levy thinks that “any strategy is a cognitive process, in which a sender correlates his or her communicative goal with some definite language expression” [Levy 1979: 191]. In our opinion, a communicative strategy of comic discourse could be defined as the process of development and implementation of some definite communicative goal, which is set because of some effective influence and receiving the laughter of a sender or an audience.
Under tactics we understand the set of language means (typically stylistic devices) which cause a comic effect and the ways of realization of some definite strategy [Шевченко, Морозова 2003: 55-60].
The communicative strategy of manipulation could be realized through the tactics of ambiguity, tactics of wrong logics, tactics of comic lies and tactics of reticence.
The tactics of lie is realized through the variants of comic lie, which have been codified recently in American communicative space, and have been discovered through the monitoring of Hollywood film makers web sites. So, we shall try to consider them through the analysis of the examples, taken from a number of American comedy films.
‘Backup Bluff’ is a variant of comic lie, which presents an insinuative communication act, using which a sender tries to convince an addressee to surrender, because that addressee is allegedly surrounded by the unit of police officers or military troops.
In ‘Get Smart’, an American spy comedy film (2008, produced by L.B. Stern) there is the following dialogue: “Maxwell Smart: I think it's only fair to warn you, this facility is surrounded by a highly trained team of 130 Black Op Snipers. Siegfried: I don't believe you. Maxwell Smart: Would you believe two dozen Delta Force commandos? Siegfried: No. Maxwell Smart: How about Chuok Norris with a BB gun?“ [Gartner 2008]. Using the tactics of lies, for three times Max tries to persuade his opponent to surrender because he is surrounded. The tactics of lies turned out to be successful, Siegrfried got fooled and it leads to a comic effect, which is intensified by such precedent name as Chuok Norris, which is used metaphorically, such stylistic figure as anticlimax (a unit from 130 snipers turns into 12 military men and after that just in one Chuok Norris), and comic word BB gun (a gun shooting with BB balls).
‘Brandishment Bluff’ is a variant of comic lies, which presents an insinuative communication act, using which a sender tries to threaten his addressees with some weapon, which he does not have. If he manages to fool his opponents, quite often it leads to a comic effect.
In ‘The Chase’, an American action film (1994, produced by Cassian Elves), the main character Jack kidnaps Natalie threatening her with a big candy bar, pretending that it is a real gun. After that he disarms two police officers. Just only in a car Natalie notices that Jack uses Butterfinger, a long candy, instead of a gun: “Natalie: You kidnapped me with a candy bar? Jack: It makes a handy weapon in a pinch… Officer Figus: You're confused. He's confused you! It's very confusing!!!” [Rifkin 1994: 2]. The comic effect of this discourse fragment is caused by the comic lies of Jack (Brandishment Bluff), oxymoron (kidnapped… with a candy bar), diacope (confused… confused… confusing), climax (You're confused. He's confused you! It's very confusing!!!). The comism is intensified by the stereotypical comic personages – an American blonde girl, an American police officer, who are not very smart.
“A police officer pulls a guy over for speeding and has the following exchange: Officer: May I see your driver's license? Driver: I don't have one. I had it suspended when I got my 5th DUI. Officer: May I see the owner's card for this vehicle? Driver: It's not my car. I stole it. Officer: The car is stolen? Driver: That's right. But I think I saw the owner's card in the glove box when I was putting my gun in there .Officer: There's a gun in the glove box?! Driver: Yes sir. That's where I put it after I shot the woman who owns this car and stuffed her in the trunk. Officer: There's a BODY in the TRUNK?!?!? Driver: Yes, sir. Hearing this, the officer immediately called his captain. The car was quickly surrounded by police, and the captain approached the driver: Captain: Sir, can I see your license? Driver: Sure. Here it is. It was valid. Captain: Who's car is this? Driver: It's mine, officer. Here's the owner' card. The driver owned the car. Captain: Could you slowly open your glove box so I can see if there's a gun in it? Driver: Yes, sir, but there's no gun in it. Captain: Would you mind opening your trunk? I was told you said there's a body in it. Driver: No problem. Trunk is opened; no body. Captain: I don't understand it. The officer who stopped you said you told him you didn't have a license, stole the car, had a gun in the glovebox, and that there was a dead body in the trunk. Driver: Yeah, I'll bet the liar told you I was speeding, too” [Jackson 2009: 7].
In this example the driver resorts to comic lies (‘Snowball lies’ variant) and intensifies the emotional tension using climax (There's a gun in the glove box?! There's a BODY in the TRUNK?!?!?) and anaphora (May I see… May I see etc.). At the end, the driver changes the communicative tactics and instead of comic lies he uses enthymeme (a false syllogism) and comic insult, while calling the police officer as a ‘liar’. On a cognitive level we observe the reframing of logic and insinuative inferences, the actualization of the Illusory Superiority pattern, the reframing of neutral and rude informal registers.
‘Faking Amnesia’ is a variant of comic lies, which presents an insinuative communication act, using which a sender tries to persuade his addressees that he suffers from Amnesia and in such a way to deceive them. If he manages to fool his opponents, quite often it leads to a comic effect.
In ‘While You Were Slipping’, an American romantic comedy film (1995, produced by Roger Bimbaum) the whole plot of the movie revolves around the comic situation ‘Faking Amnesia’, which is imposed on the stereotypical love situation ‘Love Triangle’. Peter Callaghan, a rich and young lawyer, was saved by Lucy, a poor girl, who was taken by the whole Calaghan family as Peter`s fiancée. So Peter started to play ‘Faking Amnesia’ in order not to disappoint his family and even fell in love with her. Let`s analyze two discourse fragments from this movie: (a)“Peter: I'm making a clean start with Lucy. She is – She is – She... What is she? She's... Jack: I'd say that she gets under your skin as soon as you meet her. She drives you so nuts you don't know whether to hug her or, or just really arm wrestle her. She would go all the way to Europe just to get a stamp in her passport. I don't know if that amounts to insanity, or just being really, really... likable. Peter: No, that's not it… But she's gotta be really special. She's gotta be. And I can spend the rest of my life finding out why.” (b) “Peter: Ashley! Ashley: Scumbag! You're engaged? [Peter nods] Ashley: May I remind you that you proposed to me?… Yes, well, I didn't think you were going to run out and marry the first bimbo you came across. Peter: Lucy's not a bimbo. Ashley: Lucy? Lucy who? Peter: I don't remember. I was in a coma. I have amnesia” [Turtelbaum 2009].
In the first dialogue, while speaking to his brother, Peter plays ‘Faking Amnesia’ to get more information about his ‘fiancée’. The comism of the dialogue is intensified by irony and tautology used by Peter (But she's gotta be really special. She's gotta be) plus bathos which is based on the reframing of neutral (even pathos) register and rude informal register (she drives you nuts).
In the second dialogue, while dealing with his ex-fiancée, once again Peter resorts to ‘Faking Amnesia’ (I don't remember. I was in a coma. I have amnesia), using anaphora. In contrast to Peter with his polite neutral register of communication, Ashley starts using rude informal register (stylistic figure bathos), trying to insult Peter and his new love (Scumbag… bimbo). The complex application of bathos, ‘Faking Amnesia' and anaphora leads to the creation of a comic effect.
‘Faking Amnesia’, as a variant of comic lies, is used in a lot of American jokes: (a) “Knock, knock? Who's there? Amnesia. Amnesia who? See? You forgot too!" (b) “Don't lend people money... it gives them amnesia.”(c)“I have amnesia... I don`t have amnesia… I don`t have amnesia… I don`t have amnesia... Volcano?” [White 2013: 1-2]. Together with enthymeme, personification and Socratic irony (the first joke), enthymeme (the second joke), antitheses and non sequitur (the third joke), ‘Faking Amnesia’ leads to the creation of a comic effect.
‘Invention Pretension’ is a variant of comic lies, which presents an insinuative communication act, using which a sender tries to deceive his addressees that it was he who invented something.
In ‘The Simpsons’, an American Animated sitcom (1989-2013, produced by Al Jean), grandfather Simpson affirms that it was he who invented kissing, toilet etc, and father Simpson (Homer) persuades that thunder and lightning, Morse Code, etc. were invented by the Leader [O`Donnel 2009: 5]. Surely, such claims lead to a comic effect because their based on the reframing of logic and insinuative inferences.
‘Con Artist’ or ‘Impersonator’ is a stereotypical personage of American comedy films who imitates some celebrity just for entertainment or assumes the identity of another to deceive some audience and to commit some fraud. Such variant of comic lies is called as ‘Con Artist Lies’ (an American term) or ‘Impersonation’ (a classic term).
As an example we could take the monologue of Axel Foley, a smart Detroit cop from ‘Beverly Hills Cop’, an American action comedy film (1984, produced by Don Simpson), pretending to be a journalist, who writes about Michael Jackson and wants to check in one of the most prestigious hotels: “Don't you think I realize what's going on here, miss? … I'm not some hotshot from out of town, I'm a small reporter from "Rolling Stone" magazine that's in town to do an exclusive interview with Michael Jackson that's gonna be picked up by every major magazine in the country. I was gonna call the article "Michael Jackson Is Sitting On Top of the World," but now I think I might as well just call it "Michael Jackson Can Sit On Top of the World Just As Long As He Doesn't Sit in the Beverly Palm Hotel 'Cause There's No Niggers Allowed in There!" [Brest 1984]. In this comic discourse fragment impersonation is accompanied with antitheses (some hotshot / a small reporter), hyperbole (interview… be picked up by every major magazine in the country), climax and innuendo with racial background. On a cognitive level, the reframing of logic and insinuative inferences is followed with the reframing of polite neutral register (miss… the Beverly Palm Hotel etc.) and rude informal register (hotshot … No Niggers etc).
Conclusions. The cognitive and lingo stylistic analyses of a number of American comic discourse fragments permits us to affirm that the key cognitive mechanism of humor, satire and irony is reframing of inferences, cognitive patterns, registers, contexts, that lead to a clash of explicit and implicit meanings and a comic effect. The communicative tactics of lies, as one of the possible American comic discourse tactics, is based on a number of variants of comic lies, which received American informal, expressive and metaphoric names, such as Backup Bluff, Brandishment Bluff, Snowball Lies, Invention Pretension, Faking Amnesia, Con Artist Lies.
The number of these American comic lies variants, as well as other tropes and figures variants, leading to a comic effect, is not limited by those mentioned in the research, so the perspective of the analysis of American comic discourse is the further disclosure, classification and codification of all, not only classical but also American lingo stylistic means of humor, sarire and irony.
Бахтин 1979: Бахтин, М.М. Творчество Франсуа Рабле и народная культура Средневековья и Ренессанса [Текст] / Михаил Михайлович Бахтин. – М. : Мысль. – 1979. – 280 с.
Карасик 2002: Карасик, В.И. Язык социального статуса [Текст] / В. И. Карасик. – М. : Гносиз. 2002. – 389 c.
Пропп 1999: Пропп, В.Я. Проблемы комизма и смеха. Ритуальный смех в фольклоре (по поводу сказки о Несмеяне) [Текст] / Владимир Яковлевич Пропп. – М. : Лабиринт, 1999. – 288 с.
Самохина 2008: Самохина В.А. Современная англоязычная шутка. Монография. [Текст] / Виктория Афанасьевна.Самохина – Харьков : Харьковский национальный университет имени В.И. Каразина, 2008. – 355 с.
Шевченко, Морозова 2003: Шевченко И.С., Морозова Е.И. Дискурс как мыслекоммуникативное образование [Текст] / И. С. Шевченко // Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. – Харків : Константа, 2003. – № 586. – С. 33-38.
Ambinder 2009: Ambinder, Mark. An ironic Echo For an RNC 2009 [Electronic resource] : article [Text] / Mark Ambinder. – Access mode : URL : http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/11/an-ironic-echo-for-the-rnc/29440/ (9.08.2013).
Attado 1991: Attardo, S. Script Theory Revisited : Joke Similarity and Joke Representation Model [Text] / Salvatore Attardo, V. Raskin // Humor : International Journal of Humor Research. – 1991. – № 4 – Pp. 293-347.
Bandler 1987: Bandler, R. Reframing : NLP And The Transformation Of Meaning [Text] / Richard Bandler. – Washington : Real People Press, 1983. – 208 pp.
Brest 1984: Brest, Martin. Beverly Hills Cop [Electronic resource] / Martin Brest. – 106 Min. Paramount Pictures. USA. 1984. – Access mode : URL : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Hills_Cop(10.11.09). – Beverly Hills Cop.
Columbia 2006: Columbia, M. Ethnic Jokes [Electronic resource] [Text] / M. Columbia. –2006. – Access mode : URL : http://www.sekoj.com/ethnicjokes/index.html (12.11.09). – Ethnic Jokes.
Gartner 2008: Gartner, Alex. Get Smart. 2008 [Electronic resource] : spy-fi comedy film / Alex Gartner. – 2008. – 110 Mіn – Warner Bros. – Access mode : URL : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0425061/(7.02.2013) – Get Smart.
Hobbs 1958: Hobbs, T. Levithan. Parts One and Two [Text] / T. Hobbs. – New York : The library of liberal Arts, 1958. – 310 pp.
Jackson 2009: Jackson, A. Funny Jokes [Electronic resource] / Antony Jackson. – 2009. – Access mode : URL : http://www.allfunnypictures.com (11.11.09) – All Funny Pictures.
Kahneman 1982: Kahneman, D. A. Judgment Under Uncertainty : Heuristics and Biases [Text] / Daniel Kahneman, P. Slovic, A. Tversky. – New York : Cambridge University Press. – 1982. – 556 pp.
Levy 1979: Levy, D.M. Communicative goals and strategies : between Discourse and Syntax [Text] / D. M. Levy // Discourse and Syntax – N.Y. : Academic Press, 1979. – Vol. 12. – Pp. 183-210.
Raskin 1985: Raskin, V. The Semantic Mechanisms of Humor [Text] / Victor Raskin. – Reidel : Dordrecht. 1985. – 280 pp.
Rifkin 1994: Rifkin, Alfred. The Chase. 1994 [Electronic resource] : action comedy film / Alfred Rifkin. – 89 Mіn. – 20th Century Fox. – Access mode : URL : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109402/quotes?ref_=tt_trv_qu (10.02.13). – The Chase.
Tversky 1992: Tversky, A. Advances in prospect theory : cumulative representation of uncertainty [Text] / Amos Tversky // Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1992. – № 5 – Pp. 297-332.
Turtelbaum 1995: Turtelbaum, Jon. While You Were Slipping. 1995 [Electronic resource] : romantic comedy / Jon Turtelbaum. – 102 Mіn. – Hollywood pictures. – Access mode : URL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3RSYSsgz3w (01.01.2013) – While You Were Slipping.
White 2013: White, John. Amnesia jokes [Electronic resource] : jokes / JohnWhite. – Access mode : URL : http://www.jokebuddha.com/Amnesia#ixzz2Gjwtij00 (01.01.2013) – Amnesia.
Zinnerman 1987: Zinnerman, Tim. The Running Man 1987 [Electronic resource] : science-fiction-action film / Tim Zinnerman – 101 Mшn. – TriStar Pictures. – Access mode : URL : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093894/quotes (15.01.2013).
Проведене дослідження виявляє те, що комунікативна тактика брехні є поширеною в американському дискурсі комічного. Вона застосовується через різні типи інсінуативних комунікативних актів із використанням наступних різновидів комічної брехні ‘Сніжна лавина брехні’, ‘Претензія на винахід’, ‘Блеф підтримки’, ‘Блеф загрози зброєю’, ‘Удавання амнезії’, ‘Брехня шахрая артистаs’ тощо. Щонайменше частково комічна брехня базується на когнітивному патерні ілюзорної переваги. Початок третього тисячоліття характеризується процесом номінації та стандартизації суто американської термінології, розробленої спеціально для американської літератури та кінематографа.
Ключові слова: американський дискурс комічного, стилістична фігура, троп, когнітивний патерн, рефреймінг.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.