xxv In this theory, humor is symbolized by X and a circumstance of
intersection in the mind of two disjointed but logically justified associative contexts is symbolized by M
1
and M
2
. The humor occurs when X = M
1
and X = M
2
but M
1
= M
2
The example: Dialogue in a French film:
“Sir, I would like to ask for your daughter’s hand.” “Why not? You have already the rest.
39
The word “hand” is perceived first in a metaphorical frame of reference, then suddenly in a literal bodily context. Here is the conflict between the expected and
the achieved result occur and create a comic effect. Hand is identified as a humor, X, the circumstance when hand is perceived in a metaphorical frame of reference
is identified as M
1
and the circumstance when hand is perceived in a literally bodily context as M
2.
This situation can be formulated in the following: M
1
= M
2
Hand in a metaphorical = = hand in a literally frame of reference bodily context
X Hand
Wilson 1979 :31
b. The theories of hostility
This theory often called by the theory of superiority. Such theories state that funniness consists of attaining a feeling of superiority over something, or in
39
Jacob E. Safra and Ilan Yoshua, Humour and Wit, The New Encyclopedia Britannica vol. 20 Chicago: Britannica, Inc., 1768, p. 682.
xxvi overcoming an obstacle, or aggression, in the attack of some object.
40
The philosopher Thomas Hobbes author of Leviathan, 1651 characterized laughter as
a ‘sudden glory’ at a triumph of our own or at indignity suffered by someone else. He claimed that those who laugh are momentarily released from awareness of
their own lack of ability. These accords with a commonsense perception of much humor being a form of mockery – a way of attacking others, so maintaining power
and status by gaining support from other who join in the laughter. People most likely to laugh, according to Hobbes, are those ‘that are conscious of the fewest
abilities in themselves; who are forced to keep themselves in their own favor, by observing the imperfections of other men
41
. The example:
Jennifer : Before we go for your Record Choice, let’s see if wee can paint a picture of the young Eleanor Wood, and maybe recall a few childhood
memories for you. You excelled in school academically and at sport. I love to imagine this picture of you, this Cornish dumpling, probably
goalie in the hckey team, cheerfully bouncing around in goal, lifting everyone’s spirits. You were, I should imagine, a happy, jolly, sturdy
person.
Dawn : I suppose so. Jennifer : The class clown, perhaps? So many people with physical disadvantages
like yourself often end up compensating. Was it, dare I say, your chunkiness, the fact that you were and are a fuller-figured person, that
made you more determined to succeed? Dawn : Oh all right, you can describe me as chunky, ample, bubbly, huggable,
and so on, as log as I can describe you as slow-witted, uninteresting, obtuse, dull, tedious, mentally stagnant…because what you’re really
wanting to say about me is ‘fat’and what I’m skirting around about you is ‘stupid’.
42
40
Tom Veatch, Humor Theory, Linguistics. Accessed on February 15, 2009. http:www.lebed.comHumorTheoryHumorheoryfinal3.htm. Accessed on November 22, 2008.
41
Alison Ross 1998, op.cit p. 53
42
Ibid. p. 54.
xxvii
c. The theories of liberation
