Mizahı ve Mizahın Sınıftaki İşlevlerini Keşfetmek: Bir Türk Dil Sınıfı Örneği

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 64, 1855 - 1881, 30.06.2025

Vildan İnci Kavak

https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1588010

Öz

Bu makale, doğal olarak oluşan etkileşimlerde mizahın işlevlerini Konuşma Analizi (CA) ve metodolojik çerçeve olarak gözlem yoluyla tanımlamayı ve analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın verileri, özel bir dil okulunda iki ay boyunca düzenli olarak yapılan yetişkinlere yönelik İngilizce yabancı dil dersinin ses kayıtları ve sınıfın gözlemlenmesi yoluyla elde edilmiştir. Ses verilerden toplanan bilgileri tamamlamak için gözlem kullanılmıştır. Mizah kullanımının farklı işlevlerini, kapsamını ve buna verilen tepkileri içeren kalıpları belirlemek için 16 ders saati (her biri 40-45 dakika) yazıya geçirilmiş ve incelenmiştir. Kaydedilen etkileşimler, mizahın çoğunlukla spontane olsa da amaçsız bir uygulama olmadığını gösteriyor. Daha ziyade mizah, etkileşimlerle bütünleştirilmiş ikinci dil kültürel bilgi kaynaklarına erişimi kolaylaştırmak, katılımcılar arasında uyum oluşturmak ve öğretmeni daha ulaşılabilir kılmak gibi pedagojik nedenlerle sıklıkla kullanılır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Mizah , İngilizce dil sınıfı , sınıf etkileşimi , konuşma analizi.

Exploring Humour and its Functions in the Classroom: A Sample of a Turkish Language Class

Öz

This paper aims to identify and analyse the functions of humour in naturally occurring interactions through Conversation Analysis (CA) and observation as the methodological framework. The data for this study were obtained through audio recordings and regular observation of an adult EFL class held regularly for two months at a private language school. Observation has been used to complement the information gathered from the audio-recorded data. Sixteen teaching hours (40-45 minutes each) have been transcribed and studied to identify the patterns featuring the different functions of humour use, its extent and responses to it. The recorded interactions demonstrate that humour is not only a gratuitous practice, even though it is mostly spontaneous. Rather, it is frequently used for pedagogical reasons such as facilitating access to L2 cultural knowledge resources embedded in humorous exchanges, building rapport among participants and making the teacher more approachable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Humour , EFL classroom , classroom interaction , conversation analysis.

Kaynakça

• Abdullah, S., & Akhter, J. (2015). Uses of humour in an English language class. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 2(2), 16–21.
• Aylor, B., & Oppliger, P. (2003). Out-of-class communication and student perceptions of instructor humour orientation and socio-communicative style. Communication Education, 52(2), 122–134.
• Bell, N. D. (2009). Learning about and through humour in the second language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 13(3), 241–258.
• Berk, R. (1996). Student ratings often strategies for using humour in college teaching. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 7(3), 71–92.
• Bonjour, R. (2011). The Essence of Good Teaching-Humour. Language in India, 11.
• Brown, W., & Tomlin, J. (1996). Best and worst university teachers: The opinion of undergraduate students. College Student Journal, 30(1), 431–434.
• Bryant, J., Comisky, P., & Zillmann, D. (1997). Teachers’ humour in the college classroom. Communication Education, 28, 110–118.
• Bryant, J., & Zillman, D. (1988). Using humour to promote learning in the classroom. Journal of Children in Contemporary Study, 20, 49–78.
• Bryant, J., Comisky, P. W., Crane, J. S., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers’ use of humour in the classroom and students’ evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(4), 511.
• Bushnell, C. (2009). ‘Lego my keego!’: An analysis of language play in a beginning Japanese as a foreign language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 30(1), 49–69.
• Casper, R. (1999). Laughter and humour in the classroom: Effects on test performance. University of Nebraska.
• Cazden, C. (1988). Environmental assistance revisited: Variation and functional equivalence. In The development of language and language researchers: Essays in honor of Roger Brown (pp. 281–297).
• Cekaite, A., & Aronsson, K. (2005). Language play, a collaborative resource in children’s L2 learning. Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 169–191.
• Conkell, C. S., Imwold, C., & Ratliffe, T. (1999). The effects of humour on communicating fitness concepts to high school students. Physical Educator, 56(1), 8.
• Claire, E. (1984). What’s So Funny? A Foreign Student’s Introduction to American Humour. Eardley.
• Cornett, C. E. (1986). Learning through Laughter: Humour in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
• Crump, C. A. (1996). Teacher immediacy: What students consider to be effective teacher behaviours. Retrieved 04.05.2023 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ839897.pdf
• Çopur, N., Atar, C., & Walsh, S. (2021). Humour as a pedagogical tool in teacher-initiated repair sequences: The case of extreme case formulations and candidate hearing. Classroom Discourse, 12(3), 280–294.
• Damanik, S. F., Hutasuhut, M. L., Andayani, W., & Nasution, N. S. (2025). Listening with a smile: How humour enhances student engagement in EFL courses. English Review: Journal of English Education, 13(1), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v13i1.10726
• Darling, A. L., & Civikly, J. M. (1986). The effect of teacher humour on student perceptions of classroom communicative climate. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 24–30.
• Davis, A. P., & Apter, M. J. (1980). Humour and its effect on learning in children. In P. McGhee & A. Chapman (Eds.), Children’s Humour (pp. 237–253). Wiley.
• Deneire, M. (1995). Humour and foreign language teaching. Humour: International Journal of Humour Research, 8(3), 285–298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humr.1995.8.3.285
• Devadoss, S., & Foltz, J. (1996). Evaluation of factors influencing student class attendance and performance. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78, 499–507.
• Dodge, B., & Rossett, A. (1982). Heuristic for humour in instruction. NSPI Journal, 5, 11–14.
• Downs, V. C., Javidi, M., & Nussbaum, J. F. (1988). An analysis of teachers’ verbal communication within the college classroom: Use of humour, self-disclosure, and narratives. Communication Education, 37(2), 127–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634528809378710
• Dörnyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual Review Of Applied Linguistics, 21, 43–59.
• Heritage, J., & Drew, P. (1992). Talk at work. Interaction in Institutional Settings, 2.
• Dávila, L. T. (2019). “J’aime to be funny!”: Humour, learning, and identity construction in high school English as a second language classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 502–514.
• Duffy, D. K., & Jones, J. W. (1995). Creating magic in the classroom. In D. K. Duffy & J. W. Jones (Eds.) Teaching within the Rhythms of the Semester. Higher and Adult Education Series (pp. 27–54).
• Edwards, A. D., & Furlong, V. (1978). The Language of Teaching. Heinemann.
• Fisher, M. S. (1997). The effect of humour on learning in a planetarium. Science Education, 81(6), 703–713.
• Forman, R. (2011). Humorous language play in a Thai EFL classroom. Applied Linguistics, 32(5), 541–565. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr022
• Frymier, A. B., Wanzer, M. B., & Wojtaszczyk, A. M. (2008). Assessing students’ perceptions of inappropriate and appropriate teacher humour. Communication Education, 57(2), 266–288.
• Frymier, A. B., & Weser, B. (2001). The role of student predispositions on student expectations for instructor communication behavior. Communication Education, 50(4), 314–326.
• Garner, R. (2003). Which came first, the chicken or the egg? A foul metaphor for teaching. Radical Pedagogy, 5(2), 205–212.
• Giles, H., & Oxford, G. S. (1970). Towards a multidimensional theory of laughter causation and its social implications. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 23, 97–105. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1310697480/
• Goatly, A. (2012). Meaning and Humour. Cambridge: CUP.
• Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633.
• Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teachers’ use of humour in classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39, 354–364.
• Hashem, M. B. (1994). Play and humour in the college classroom: Using play as a teaching technique in interpersonal communication classes. Paper presented at the Central States Communication Association, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
• Highet, G. (1950). The Art of Teaching. New York: Random House.
• Hill, D. (1988). Humour in the Classroom: A Handbook for Teachers. Springfield.
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 191–222).
• Jefferson, G. (2004). A note on laughter in ‘male–female’ interaction. Discourse Studies, 6(1), 117–133.
• Kaplan, R. M., & Pascoe, G. C. (1977). Humorous lectures and humorous examples: Some effects upon comprehension and retention. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 69(1), 61.
• Kasai, M. (1998). Humour in Japanese EFL classrooms. JALT Journal, 20(1), 44–60.
• Kher, N., Molstad, S., & Donahue, R. (1999). Using humour in the college classroom to enhance teaching effectiveness in “dread courses.” College Student Journal, 33(3), 400–406.
• Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.
• Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.
• Lee, Y. H. (2006). Humor in British and American sitcoms: A pragmatic analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4(1), 71–83.
• Lin, Y. C. (2010). Language play in Taiwanese EFL classrooms. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 7(1), 1–33.
• Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126–141.
• Lynch, O. H. (2002). Humour and classroom climate. College Teaching, 50(4), 125–128.
• Mak, B., & White, C. (1996). Evaluating the effectiveness of humour in college lectures. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 24(3), 221–232.
• McGhee, P. E. (1979). Humour: Its origin and development. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
• McGhee, P. E. (1996). Understanding and promoting the development of children’s humour. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
• Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Nash, W. (1985). The language of humour: Style and technique in comic discourse. London: Longman.
• Nesi, H. (2012). Laughter in university lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 79–89.
• Partington, A. (2006). The linguistics of laughter: A corpus-assisted study of laughter-talk. Routledge.
• Provine, R. R. (2000). Laughter: A scientific investigation. Viking.
• Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanisms of humour. Reidel Publishing Company.
• Ruch, W. (1998). The sense of humour: Explorations of a personality characteristic. Mouton de Gruyter.
• Schmitz, J. R. (2002). Humour as a pedagogical tool in foreign language and translation courses. Humour, 15(1), 89–113.
• Shade, R. A. (1996). License to laugh: Humour in the classroom. Greenwood Publishing Group.
• Shatz, M. A., & LoSchiavo, F. M. (2005). Learning through laughter: Use of humour in the teaching of psychology. Journal of Psychological Inquiry, 10(2), 42–45.
• Smith, S. M., & Klein, R. (1986). The effects of humour on memory for non-humorous material. Motivation and Emotion, 10(4), 353–363.
• Tannen, D. (1984). Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends. Oxford University Press.
• Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge University Press.
• Wanzer, M. B., & Frymier, A. B. (1999). The relationship between student perceptions of instructor humour and students’ reports of learning. Communication Education, 48(1), 48–62.
• Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A. B., & Irwin, J. (2010). An explanation of the relationship between instructor humour and student learning: Instructional humour processing theory. Communication Education, 59(1), 1–18.
• Ziv, A. (1988). Teaching and learning with humour: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57(1), 5–15.
• Ziv, A. (1983). The influence of humorous atmosphere on divergent thinking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(1), 68–75.
• Ziv, A. (1984). Personality and sense of humour. Springer Publishing Company.