Sunteți pe pagina 1din 1


Humour delivers significant social functions in young peoples lives. A range of psychological functions, such as cognitive processes, language, memory, problem solving, creativity, play and emotion, to name just a few, have been the focus of a body of research that has accumulated over the past 40 years in the developmental psychology of humour (Chapman and Foot 1976; Martin 2007; McGhee and Goldstein 1983; Ruch 1998). It has been recognized that humour is one important social competence that can affect a childs status within the social group (Alberts 1992; Bergen 1998; Masten 1986; Shapiro, Baumeister, and Kessler 1991; Warnars- Kleverlaan, Oppenheimer, and Sherman 1996), but, as Dana N. Klein and Nicholas A. Kuiper (2006), as well as Rod Martin (2007, 249) note, there is still a lack of research on the social dynamics of humour and status in middle childhood and adolescence.

Acknowledging that humour often promotes social relations and well-being, more attention should be paid to the negative aspects of humour. Additionally, the interplay of gender with different dimensions of status; perceived popularity, peer likeability and power position (see e.g. Vaillancourt and Hymel 2006) should be strengthened in humour research. (DI KO ALAM KUNG SAN KO ITO IPAPASOK) In gender-sensitive research, humour is investigated from the perspective of gender and power, and the violent use of humour is recognized in peer relations and in constructing masculinities in schools, although this kind of research is exiguous (see Dubberley 1993; Walker and Goodson 1977; Willis 1977). Nigel Edley and Margaret Wetherell (1996, 109) suggest that dominant students, often boys, create funny events in class communities and strengthen their power positions at the same time.

According to Khoury (1977), jokes often serve as a vessel for funniness; a thought which is couched in a special linguistic form of expression and it is the syntax of a verbal statement which imparts to a thought the funniest of its impacts. Freud (1960) has identified many of semantic techniques from which the funniest of jokes derives. (DI KO ALAM KUNG ISSUES ITO O ARGUMENT/ELABORATION). Freud (1960) has also pointed out that two general types of jokes exist. Nontendentious jokes serve no particular purpose beyond the denouement of a semantic mechanism. Nontendentious humor solely at producing pleasure from the exercise of those mental processes used to fathom a semantic technique. Tendentious jokes have an aim beyond the denouement of a semantic mechanism. Tendentious humor has a point or a moral as well. These jokes are the instruments of satire, parody and derision. (Elaboration)

Bibliography Humour as a resource and strategy for boys to gain status in the field of informal school Tuija Huuki*, Sari Manninen and Vappu Sunnari SEX AND INTELLIGENCE DIFFERENCES IN HUMOR APPRECIATION: A RE-EXAMINATION Robert M. Khoury (GUYS THIS ONE IS A BIG HELP, I HOPE NA MA READ NIYO TONG ARTICLE NA TO.)