Talk:Irony

The "Wrong" definition is rapidly becoming the right one

I know it drives lexicographers crazy, but... The "wrong" use of the term has clearly gained enough currency to be acknowledged as legitimate. See definition 3 here. Languages are defined by their current, not historical use. Time to let this one go, just like "gay" and "nice". - Richfife (talk) 00:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

3. Poignantly contrary to what was expected or intended: madness, an ironic fate for such a clear thinker. Yes, I believe the article as such contains references to this kind of irony: poignantly contrary to expectation. I don't think the dictionary gives a particularly good example-- at least it's not poignantly contrary to MY expectation that clear-thinkers sometimes later go mad. Or that firefighters die in fires, or doctors die of disease, or whatever. The Devil is in the detail, and the detail here are the examples used as illustration. They need to be as poignant as possible.

Ah, I'm looking upward in your reference and see that definition #3 is also "sharp and unexpected coincidences" in life. Yes, that needs to be mentioned, too. There was some stuff about the pop song "Irony" which got removed because the purists didn't like it. But it fits here under a changing definition. SBHarris 02:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Irony involves opposites. When something is the opposite of what is usually intended, it can be ironic. But there must always be an opposite in irony.Lestrade (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

That's not always true, see the article for examples of tragic/dramatic/situational irony BubbaStrangelove (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Irony is simply the expression of the direct opposite of that which is meant. For example, if I didn't enjoy the party and I say "I just loved the party," I am being ironic. I recently read the following sentence in an article about the stolen "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign: "The cruelly ironic phrase means 'Work Sets You Free' and ran completely counter to the purpose of Auschwitz…." The words "completely counter" mean "direct opposite." Because many people do not realize this, the word "irony" is often used incorrectly to designate other concepts. This is not surprising, due to the high rate of illiteracy and ignorance in today's society.Lestrade (talk) 20:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

Okay, the word "irony" is overused today for some stuff that's not irony but more 'tongue-in-cheek' or verbal slapstick, but I don't agree 'real irony' has to be as obtuse as you put it Lestrade. Sometimes the contrastive comment is more veiled, but still quite readable. I remember one morning in the summer of 1988, I was reading the morning paper and glancing at the umpteenth piece discussing the heritage of 1968. My brother came in and I said, without explanation "It was twenty years ago today!" He got the cue at once and replied "Yeah you need only say... /mentions the name of a well-known radical writer and professor/" Those lines were ironic for sure, playing around with the self-inflated image of many '68 veterans and the amount of space they got in the news - and both of these factors were much more obvious then than they are now. It was instantly decipherable to us (and would have been to many others at the time) even though there was no direct reference to the backwards glancing, self-publicizing "we are the centre of history" style of many '68 torchbearers.

My quote from Sgt.Pepper quipped about the idle amount of retro attention, while adding to the joke that the words had applied originally to 1967 - or even to some earlier fictional date! - not 1968. '67 of course was the hippie revolt that had been derided by many of the more orthodox left-wing radicals who came after - and he showed he got it and added a line to the effect that "they're everywhere and they don't even need to argue a point, saying your name is quite enough". Irony? Absolutely, and it wouldn't have worked if we'd felt compelled to be so obvious every John Blow could understand it. Strausszek (talk) 12:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, now the herd of miscomprehension has taken over this venerable word how shall we now refer to the well defined concept of irony that people use in the correct sense; literary critics for example? --IRONY-POLICE (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems very unencyclopedic to include content that's wrong just because it's commonly repeated. Isn't that generally called an urban myth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.51.45 (talk) 23:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

It's not really an urban myth since those are claiming fact when they aren't. Ultimately, it's use of language is what defines it. If enough people use a word wrong, then it becomes legitimate. Languages constantly evolve. Many people think irregardless isn't a word, but linguists would say it is a word because people use it. Words aren't based on definitions. Definitions are there to describe how words are used and understood. Thus, if irony is used and understood by enough English speakers as to mean what the colloquial meaning then that's what the word means. Brend0 (talk) 09:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that irony wasn't simply something unexpected or deceiving, but something so bizarre and contrary to the premises that it seems comical or satirical. Most of these examples don't seem ironic at all. Real irony is noticing that a lot of pro-lifers are also for the death penalty. Or a mechanic that gets stranded when his car breaks down. Or a celebrity's biggest fan meeting them in passing and not recognizing them until they're gone. The Sir Arthur Sullivan bit is a good example, while the AHD example isn't ironic at all, it's just sarcastic. The whole verbal irony section just seems like sarcasm. The Ronald Reagan, Gus Grissom, and Gift of the Magi examples are great though, that's true irony. Wizard of Oz... no. Thoughts? TheBaron87 (talk) 09:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be a distinction, perhaps "Classical Irony", meaning involving opposites and absurd coincidence, and "Irony" meaning the foolish way people think of it today. -DJLO (talk) 04:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Knowledge

In all irony there are two degrees of knowledge or belief or understanding - the greater and the lesser. In all cases, the more the two messages or situations or beliefs or understandings contradict one another the stronger is the irony. In verbal irony, there are two meanings, M(A) and M(B), present at the same time. Which meaning is understood depends on which code the listener is aware of, A or B. The person aware only of code A (e.g. the words taken alone - "literally") understands it to mean one thing, M(A). The person detecting code B (= code A + (e.g.) the extra inflection that undermines the literal meaning) understands the mesage to means something else, M(B). The person insensitive to the inflection picks up less information than the more sensitive listener who typically understands both messages.(Irony depends on someone being conscious of the discrepancy between the two meanings.) The extra inflection could be many things (e.g. a wink, a tone of voice, the implausibility of a literal meaning); it can function as extra substantive information or be an indication that the information given is to be decoded in a different way. In dramatic irony, the character understands a situation, A, to mean one thing, M(A), the audience knowing more (situation A + extra knowledge) understands things differently M(B). In cosmic irony, the extra knowledge ("the true fate") is gained later (by the character and/or the audience), even though it could be seen in retrospect that it was "fated to be so all along". In situational irony, a belief ("that A is the case"), based on a certain set of assumptions, is shown to be wrong (indeed generally "the opposite of right") in the light of a set of circumstances not previously contemplated (the world is more complicated than we think). Tsinfandel (talk) 23:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I agree real irony has a cognitive side: it plays around with two or more levels of knowledge, misknowledge or perception, it turns its object inside out and makes you see something new. That's what's missing in a lot of pretend irony these days, which doesn't really bring out anything other than idle cheekiness. Lots of people vaguely think if you act like John Cleese in Fawlty Towers it has to be ironic because he's so highly strung and so out of place: 'nobody would ever behave like that irl'. "Ironic" comes to mean "pathetically silly" or even "bathetic", provided that we're looking in on it and are not implicated in the situation ourselves. Too loose, isn't it?

Now there is an ironic quality to a lot of the foot-in-his-mouth storylines of FT - and to some in sitcoms of the same kind - but the histrionic style of Basil Fawlty (whom I'm a fan of btw), and his approach to running his hotel, or the heightened talking style of people like Eddie Murphy or Borat are not irony in themselves. Nor is it ironic when we hear that Armin Meiwes complained that his victim's "flesh was tough" and that he was angry the man had lied about his age, though it's a morbidly funny quote. Strausszek (talk) 07:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for Expansion by an Expert

I am not qualified to expand this, but I do wonder if the concepts of irony/sarcasm are limited only to western languages and cultures. It would not surprise me if true, since other things are culturally limited. But, for instance, do the Japanese use sarcasm when they speak/write and was it original to Japan or brought in by the Westerners?

Just an observation. Thank you.Aaaronsmith (talk) 22:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

• • Sarcasm and related ironies are present in every language that has ever been examined for such things. Japanese people certainly incorporate sarcasm, although differently because of various differences in conversational norms and politeness. The concept of irony is inherent to thinking for people - it's not linguistic.

Is Ecology example of Dramatic Irony?

Because Ecology is (1) study of relation which are in nature a.s.n but is NOT (2) way how to protect nature (though Ecology contains knowledge for doing that).

Nevertheless it is used mainly in the "nature protection" sense ((2)) even by such reliable sources of information as newspapers (which is just irony?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.16.123.194 (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Philosophy spelling in slovanic languages (namely Czech)

Philosophy is normally translated as "filosofie". In Czech they say "filozofie" and write "filozofie" or "filosofie", because both are allowed by official grammar rules.

(reason) Trouble is that "filozofie" woudl be made of words "philo" (to love) and "zoofos" (darkness) , whereas "filosofe" would be made of words "philo" (to love) and "sofia" (wisdom). (source: You can ask some language expert for it, it is also in some dictionaries.)

(rules) People making grammar rules know about it for a long time (though I do not have source for that) and they just allow it, because in czech people tend to say ~filozofie~ rather than ~filosofie~ .

(use) It is very common and even some universities use it and even make titles (source: http://www.google.com/search?q=filozoficka+fakulta ) http://www.google.com/search?q=filozof+titul+akademicky.

(what is funny) Philosophy is usually mocked as not being useful at all and philosophers for guys who make obscure sentences. Czech word "filozofie" = obscurantism or "filozof" = obsurant makes it official.

(also note) People at Czech Wikipedia know about it, at least in "discussion to the page".

(problem) What is it - pun, irony or something else? It certainly mocks the Czech republic, but by publishing it it may change ...

Popular culture examples, esp Futurama episode

There should be a section with some notable examples of irony (of various types) in the media. One episode of Futurama artfully gives examples of every kind of irony. The Devil's Hands are Idle Playthings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.61.208 (talk) 00:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)