International journal

Speech Genres

ISSN 2311-0759 (Online)
ISSN 2311-0740 (Print)

For citation:

Ermakova O. P. Intensifiers and deintensification in ironic contexts. Speech Genres, 2016, no. 1(13), pp. 137-141. DOI: 10.18500/2311-0740-2016-1-13-137-141

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).
Full text:
(downloads: 347)
Article type: 

Intensifiers and deintensification in ironic contexts

Ermakova Olga Pavlovna, Kaluga State University named after K.E.Tsiolkovski

The article discusses the role of intensifiers and deintensification (the minimised degree sign) in ironic contexts. Pre-analyzes the characteristics of both groups of words, identify their co-occurrence differences, the productivity and dopolnyaet intensifiers and unproductive of deintensification. It is noted that these two types of words used in ironic contexts, «serve» irony in different ways: intensifiers, as a rule, are not mandatory (they «do not work» for irony themselves, they only reinforce the ironic sense, but not mandatory, and may even be omitted), while deintensification, on the contrary, play an active role in ironic combinations: they often embody the irony, and their omission returns the meaning to the literal. A particular issue raised in the article is the dependence of the ironic values on the form of collocations, syntactic function and modality of the utterance. Thus, the shape of comparative and unreal modality of statements are equally opposed to irony. Obviously, the fact that the one and the other denies the conversion actually a sign of how the subject peculiar and ironical approval of its inherence is the essence of irony in such statements.


1. Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. Irony as a clue. Irony. Archive Diary Literary translations. Ed. M. Głowiński. Gdańsk, 2002, ss. 109–145.

2. Wittgenstein L. Filosofskiye issledovaniya [Philosophical Investigations]. Filosofskiye raboty [Philosophical Works]. Vol. 1. Moscow, 1994, pp. 75–319.

3. Arutyunova N. D. Problema chisla [The problem of number]. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Kvantitativnyy aspekt yazyka [Logical analysis of language. Quantitative aspects of language]. Moscow, 2005, pp. 5–20.

4. Wolf E. M. Funktsional'naya semantika otsenki [Functional evaluation semantics]. Moscow, 1985. 228 p.

5. Krzhizhkova E. Kolichestvennaya determinatsiya prilagatel'nykh v russkom yazyke (leksiko-sintaksicheskiy analiz) [Quantitative determination of adjectives in Russian language (lexical and syntactic analysis)]. Sintaksis i norma [Syntax and norm]. Moscow, 1974, pp. 122–145.

6. Ermakova O. P. Perekhod kachestva v kolichestvo (o prirode intensifikatorov) [Transition in the number of quality (the nature of intensifiers)]. Logicheskiy analiz yazyka. Kvantitativnyy aspekt yazyka [Logical analysis of language. Quantitative aspects of language]. Moscow, 2005, pp. 272–280.

7. Ermakova O. P. Yavlyayetsya li ironiya rechevym zhanrom? (yeshche raz o nekotorykh osobennostyakh ironii) [Is irony a speech genre? (Once again, about some features of irony)]. Zhanry rechi [Speech genres]. 2014, no. 1–2 (9–10), pp. 74–80.