The Use of Humour in EFL Classrooms: Comparative Conversational Analysis Case Study

Abstract

Utilising a sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach, the current case study investigates the characteristics and frequency of the usage of verbal humour that positively or negatively affects the Saudi English as a Foreign Language (EFL) tertiary-level students across two different English language proficiency levels. The participants included 42 EFL teachers and 138 male EFL students from the English Language Institute (ELI) in King Abdulaziz University. The students were enrolled in the beginners (E101) and intermediate (E104) English language proficiency levels. The mixed-methods approach was implemented using audio and video recordings and a questionnaire as the data collection instruments. The findings stated the four main characteristics of both positive and negative verbal humours in Saudi EFL classrooms. These findings revealed that humour was more frequently used at the intermediate than at the beginner level, and that the most effective forms of humour at both levels involved language play, irony, jokes, and self-defeating humour. Suggestions, recommendations, pedagogical implications have also been presented.

University Students’ Preferable Types of Teacher Humor in English Classes

“…Norrick (2003) indicated that it is difficult to identify the differences amongst many teacher humor styles since it is often faded into each utterance in a conversation. These types have been named irony, teasing, banter, language play, jokes, riddles, and other forms (Fadel & Al-Bargi, 2018).…”

“…Irony refers to the employment of implicit or ambiguous speeches or utterances that have double meanings (Fadel & Al-Bargi, 2018). Sarcasm, a subtype of irony, is more likely to be used for aggressive purposes in speech or to harm the sentiments of its target than other simple kinds of irony.…”

“…Banter, as a term, is employed to specify the synopses where teasing happens back and forth, appearing in a verbal match-up (Goatly, 2012). The foremost aim of banter is to build a social bond through acceptance-friendship maneuverings; nevertheless, it becomes worthless when the beneficiary does not acknowledge (Fadel & Al-Bargi, 2018).…”

“…(G; Male; Non-English Major Student; M=3.21) Technau (2017) said the banter mentioned above is a risk-taking behavior. Banter might become worthless when the beneficiary does not acknowledge the hidden good meanings (Fadel & Al-Bargi, 2018).…”

Editorial: humour in contrast across languages and cultures

“…While this may appear obvious, studying the acquisition of verbal humour is less straightforward, and to date there has been less research on children's humour from a linguistic point of view than from a psychological and psychoanalytical perspective or with an experimental approach (for an overview, see Del Ré et al this issue). In L2 research, most previous studies have looked at the understanding of humour and at its close link to proficiency (Bell 2009;Fadel & Al-Bargi 2018), and while humour expression in sign languages has been looked at extensively (see Vincent-Durroux this issue), less is known about humour expression in deaf people who use an oral language. Although the researchers in this issue all employ different methodologies, and study quite distinct groups of participants, the studies all share a contrastive approach across languagescultures, and work with naturally occurring conversational data.…”