Education, Language and Sociology Research ISSN 2690-3644 (Print) ISSN 2690-3652 (Online) Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr 40 Original Paper Laughter in Interpersonal Communication: When Laughter Conveys Disaffiliation Yumian Lin1 1 School of English Studies, Xi’an International Studies University, Xi’an, China Received: March 18, 2024 Accepted: April 11, 2024 Online Published: April 30, 2024 doi:10.22158/elsr.v5n2p40 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/elsr.v5n2p40 Abstract Laughter serves primarily as a social instrument, functioning as a social facilitator commonly observed in interpersonal interactions, and playing a crucial role in fostering and maintaining relationships. Affiliation and disaffiliation are interactive phenomena that are externally and measurably manifested, serving as pivotal components in the establishment of social bonds. Affiliation entails the overt demonstration of endorsement and concordance among interacting individuals, whereas disaffiliation within social relationships typically materializes through assessments, leading to disagreements and side-arguments. Laughter, when serving as a tool for strengthening social bonds between individuals, it not only signals affiliation but also disaffiliation among conversational partners. Through the method of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics, this article will specifically analyze the role of laughter as a means of conveying disaffiliation. Focusing on analyzing three specific functions of laughter to show disaffiliation, which encompass self-image preservation, face-saving, and transitioning from an embarrassing to a non-embarrassing context, the thesis will present three prototypical dialogues originating from diverse backgrounds as exemplars to elucidate the three functions. Keywords laughter, affiliation and disaffiliation, interpersonal communication, interactional linguistics 1. Introduction Laughter is universally presented in interpersonal communication and plays a crucial role in establishing and maintaining relationships. It helps to create a positive atmosphere, convey humor, and enhance emotional connections (Chen, 2016). Affiliation entails the public display of support and agreement between interacting parties, which is vital for sustaining social relationships. Laughter, as a social tool, can sometimes convey affiliation when people having conversations. However, laughter in dialogue not only reflects friendly attitudes and a sense of belonging in interpersonal interactions, but there exists the www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 41 Published by SCHOLINK INC. possibility when people try to express their disaffiliation with a topic through laughter as well. In light of the above circumstance, this article will specifically analyze the role of laughter as a means of conveying disaffiliation through conversation analysis and the perspective of interactional linguistics. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Philosophical View In history, philosophers have used laughter to comment on different types of humor and to theoretically analyze the motives of humans using humor. The three main historical theories of laughter are superiority, incongruity, and relief. Each theory provides a different view of the purpose of laughter. The first is called the superiority theory, which suggests that laughter is a means of competition between people and an expression of superiority. Laughter is considered an effective means of correcting or controlling unacceptable behavior. Thomas Hobbes formulated the superiority principle, viewing laughter as a result of winning in a perpetual struggle. Albert Rap expanded the superiority principle to include laughter towards loved ones and oneself. Some philosophers consider the superiority theory as a long-standing approach to understanding laughter (Hayakawa, 2003). The second is called the incongruity theory, which suggests that laughter arises from unexpected and absurd events. Both Kant and Schopenhauer believed that laughter originates from incongruity, but for different reasons. Incongruity plays a significant role in provoking laughter, which is often due to a sudden departure from the norm. Laughter resulting from incongruity depends on the emotions arising from unexpected situations (Malphurs, 2010). The third one is called relief theory, which suggests that laughter arises from the expression and release of emotions caused by stress. Freud modified the relief theory, considering laughter as a shift from releasing physical energy to excessive mental energy (Malphurs, 2010). 2.2 Sociological View Many scholars nowadays have explored the social functions of laughter, considering it to have existed prior to both humor and speech in humans (Provine, 2000). It is not only a psychological and biological phenomenon, but also fundamentally a social one. Coordinated with speech and other interactive activities, laughter is used by participants to manage social relationships and identities (Glenn, 2003). Laughter, as a social tool, can be regarded as a social lubricant. A study found out that laughter can increase social bonding and cooperation between strangers, leading to enhanced positive affect and reduced negative affect (Van Vugt et al., 2018). 2.2.1 Affiliation and Disaffiliation Affiliation and disaffiliation are interactive phenomena that are externally and measurably produced, playing key roles in building social relationships. Affiliation involves the public display of support and agreement between interacting parties which have shared normative principles, i.e., social esteem and social sanction (Wang & Jiang, 2024). It could be produced through various means such as topic organization, collaborative storytelling, preference structures for agreement, and intimacy pursuits. Disaffiliation in social relationships tends to occur in the form of assessments, leading to disagreements www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 42 Published by SCHOLINK INC. and side-arguments. While it may lead to arguments on the one hand, on the other hand, it can also positively shift a conversation towards more direct and honest communication (Conroy, 1999). 2.2.2 Laughter in Conveying Affiliation From an acoustic perspective, laughter can convey affiliation through properties like pitch, voicing, and formants, signaling friendliness and non-threatening intentions. Affiliative laughter serves to maintain relationships and indicate benign intentions, distinct from spontaneous and rewarding laughter (Wood, 2017). In another perspective, laughter can express a sense of connection by demonstrating empathy and aligning with the preference of the preceding action. When laughter is responsive in interactions, it can indicate a bond with the person who elicited the laughter. Affiliative reactions entail mirroring the speaker’s viewpoint and aligning with their level of emotional cooperation, which make laughter effective in strengthening social relationships through communication (Clift, 2016). 2.2.3 Laughter in Conveying Disaffiliation However, on the other hand, laughter can also be used to convey disaffiliation. Laughter can convey disaffiliation by targeting a prior turn as laughable, showing a negative stance towards it. Disaffiliative laughter may come from a party other than the recipient of the laughable turn, indicating a complex interplay of affiliation and disaffiliation. In interactions, disaffiliative laughter can be used by one speaker to affiliate with another against a third party (Clift, 2016). Inevitably, people may possibly encounter some difficult interactional situations when one intends to express disaffiliation, and laughter and humour can be served as effective ways to manage the awkward circumstances. However, the ways that laughter and humour handle disaffiliation are quite different. Humor directly addresses the content of the disagreement by making comments that reframe the seriousness of the topic. It involves using wit, irony, or satire to bring attention to the disagreement while lightening the mood. In contrast, laughter does not engage directly with the content of the disagreement itself. Instead, it focuses on transforming the overall atmosphere or framing of the situation. Laughter serves as a mechanism to shift the perspective of the participants involved in the disagreement. It allows them to view the escalating tension as something amusing or less serious, thereby diffusing the conflict. Laughter acts as a safety valve in conversations where disagreements are escalating. It provides a release of tension and allows participants to step back from the seriousness of the disagreement, creating a moment of levity. Through laughter, participants can reframe the disagreement as something laughable rather than contentious, offering a way to navigate the conflict without directly addressing the contentious issues (Warner-Garcia, 2014). Building on the points above, this thesis will further elaborate on the function of laughter as a distinct and succinct method of expressing disaffiliation in everyday conversations, and provide a relevant classification and summary. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 43 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 3. Methodological Approaches The methodological approaches used in the present study are informed by conversation analysis and interactional linguistics. 3.1 Conversation Analysis Conversation analysis (CA) is a methodological approach used for studying naturally occurring spoken data. Different from other theories, CA focuses more on the analysis of communication closely related to daily life (Wang & Sun, 2023). It involves analyzing the structures, patterns, and processes of various social interactions, including everyday verbal and non-verbal practices (Elizabeth, 2020). Using the method of conversation analysis to explore the role of laughter in interpersonal communication can help to reveal the role of laughter in communication and situation regulation, as well as the application of laughter in communication transformation, proximity and storytelling. This approach can also help to understand the structure, patterns, and processes of laughter in different social interactions, as well as the function of laughter in everyday verbal and non-verbal practices. 3.2 Interactional Linguistics Interactional linguistics refers to the study of language use in social interaction, focusing on how language is used to create and maintain social relationships. It examines the structure and organization of conversational interaction, as well as the role of language in shaping social actions and relationships. This field often draws on methods from conversation analysis and discourse analysis to analyze spoken and written language in its social context. Interactional linguistics focuses on language structure and use in social interactions. Laughter is studied in interactional linguistics to understand its pragmatic or interpersonal functions in talk-in-interaction, which can be used to show appreciation, invite others to join in, or show disaffiliation in conversations (Chen, 2016). 4. Data Analysis The upcoming analysis will examine the three specific functions of laughter to show disaffiliation. These functions encompass (1) self-image preservation, (2) face-saving, and (3) transitioning from an embarrassing to a non-embarrassing context. Self-image preservation involves mitigating an ongoing threat to one’s image during the interaction, while face-saving entails concealing a loss of face that has already transpired. Transitioning from an embarrassing to a non-embarrassing frame involves reinterpreting a potentially face-threatening action as humorous and benign. The following three examples illustrate the transcription produced by applying a conversational analysis transcription system to the previously collected audio recordings. This transcription system includes various symbols, such as “> <” indicating a sudden increase in the speaker’s speech rate; “< >” indicating a sudden decrease in the speaker’s speech rate; “:” indicating an elongation of the speaker’s intonation, with the number of colons corresponding to the duration of the elongation; “(0.2)” representing the length of pauses during the conversation in seconds; “=” denoting a continuous sentence without pauses or a lack of obvious pauses between turns; and “@” representing laughter. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 44 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 4.1 Self-image Preservation Example 1 demonstrates how the individual might utilize laughter to reduce threat to one’s self-image and change the perspective of the situation. This scenario involves two female roommates (Felicia and Harper) chatting in their dorm room. Felicia talks about a new lipstick shade she bought and describes her indecision in choosing the shade. She expresses extreme fondness for the lipstick and seeks a positive response from Harper, but Harper’s reaction is not enthusiastic. Example 1. 1 F: Wow: :look at this lipstick of mine(0.2) >so pretty< 2 (0.2) 3 H: What shade is it？ 4 F: (0.3)Let me check 5 H： =Mm-hmm 6 (0.8) 7 F: It’s “intoyou”::in shade EM20 8 (0.6) 9 H: Not bad 10 F: Rea:lly:>you have no ideaYou don’t know about it< 5 →A: @@Never heard of it, I usually don’t pay attention to these things 6 (0.5) 7 F: You are so health-conscious! It’s just a milk tea shop. 8 A: >Oh I see< I see:: @@Let’s go check it out later. Throughout the conversation, Flora expresses her desire to try “LELECHA” milk tea, but Angela’s lack of knowledge about milk tea creates a sense of unfamiliarity. It is important to note that Flora and Angela are newly acquainted friends, knowing very little about each other and aiming to make a good impression. Milk tea is a popular topic among young people, and Angela’s limited knowledge about it is quite uncommon. In front of a new friend, this can be seen as a loss of face, and Angela uses laughter later in the conversation to alleviate the brief awkwardness between them, a way of concealing her temporary loss of face. 4.3 Transitioning from an Embarrassing to a Non-embarrassing Context Example 3 demonstrates how people use laughter to transform a rather serious and awkward situation into a less embarrassing one in specific circumstances. This scenario involves a couple, Magic and Flora, taking photos of each other while walking in the park. Flora sees a beautiful spot and asks Magic to take a picture for her. However, due to Magic’s limited photography skills, he fails to capture a satisfactory photo, leading to Flora’s dissatisfaction and a serious argument. To ease the tense atmosphere, Magic uses laughter to console Flora. Example 3 1 F: Let me see how you took the photos. 2 M: Well, how does it look? 3 F: It’s not right! How could you make me look so ::ug:ly like this? 4 M: I think it looks pretty good, doesn’t it? 5 F: What’s good about it? Look at how you made me look like I weigh 150 pounds. 6 →M: @@It’s okay, sweetheart. Let me take a few more for you, okay? 7 (0.4) 8 M: @@Please, pretty please. 9 F: I can’t believe you (0.3) I’ll give you one more chance! This conversation takes place between a very close couple, and due to Magic’s limited photography skills, it leads to some conflict between the two. When Flora expresses her dissatisfaction with the photos, it creates a serious and awkward situation, potentially leading to an argument. However, Magic uses laughter to indicate his disaffiliation with the situation, attempting to make the serious scene less intense. Later, Flora agreeing to give him another chance to take photos reflects the success of his approach---to switch from an embarrassing to a non-embarrassing situation. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 46 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 5. Results The above three dialogic excerpts serve as typical examples of three different ways in which laughter is used as a means of expressing disaffiliation, drawn from everyday conversations and analyzed through the research methods of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics. In dialogues, despite the speakers’ intention to convey their dissent towards a specific event or object, the incorporation of laughter serves to not only ameliorate the overall conversational ambiance but also functions as a social lubricant, strengthening the pre-existing social bonds among the interlocutors. The utilization of laughter in such contexts not only softens the expression of disagreement but also fosters a sense of camaraderie and mutual understanding, contributing to the maintenance and enhancement of interpersonal relationships. The use of laughter in these dialogues exemplifies its role in (1) self-image preservation, (2) face-saving, (3) transitioning from an embarrassing to a non-embarrassing context of the speakers. In the first dialogue, the speaker aimed to uphold a genuine image in front of her friend. Although she disagreed with her friend, she still used laughter to demonstrate support for her friend’s perspective, showcasing her response to the threat of her own image being compromised. The second dialogue unfolded within the interaction of two recently acquainted strangers. To create a positive impression, one of the conversational participants employed laughter as a means to alleviate the embarrassment stemming from her lack of familiarity with the milk tea brand mentioned by the new acquaintance. In this scenario, laughter functioned as a tool to preserve the speaker’s dignity and thus try to conceal the loss of face. Moving to the third dialogue involving a romantic couple, the male partner utilized laughter to navigate the embarrassment arising from his inability to capture flattering photographs of his girlfriend, effectively transforming the embarrassing situation between them into a non-embarrassing one. 6. Discussion Laughter is primarily a social tool, which can be served as a social lubricant and is commonly found in interpersonal communication and plays a vital role in the creation and upkeep of relationships. It can indicate not only affiliation but also disaffiliation between the speakers, with the common goal of reinforcing the social connection between individuals. The above analysis illustrates the functions laughter have to express disaffiliation while try to keep the maintenance of social relationships. The three functions of laughter for indicating disaffiliation the thesis has mentioned include self-image preservation, face-saving and transition from embarrassing to non-embarrassing situations. The analysis of the dialogues and the results shows that when an individual needs to express disagreement with another’s views due to differences in values, lifestyles, aesthetics, etc., while still maintaining a certain social image and relationship, laughter can serve as a tool to facilitate the progression of the entire process. In this context, laughter can be viewed as a strategy employed to compensate the emotions of others when they do not receive the anticipated level of affiliation, and thus achieve the goal of maintaining social relationships while expressing one’s own views. The research discussed in the article sheds light on the importance of further exploring the role of laughter in interpersonal communication. Despite the limited www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/elsr Education, Language and Sociology Research Vol. 5, No. 2, 2024 47 Published by SCHOLINK INC. number of studies, the article does not exhaustively outline the various functions of laughter in conveying disaffiliation. Instead, it concentrates on how laughter serves as a tool to ease tension in social interactions, striving to preserve or strengthen social bonds without delving deeper into potential negative consequences of using laughter to express disaffiliation. Future research is encouraged to build upon the findings of this article and previous studies, aiming to draw more specific conclusions that thoroughly elucidate both the constructive and detrimental impacts of laughter in conveying disaffiliation. Reference Chen, L. C. L. (2016). Laughter, smiling and their pragmatic/interpersonal functions: An interactional linguistic account. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 42(2), 135-168. Clift, R. (2016). Don’t make me laugh: Responsive laughter in (dis) affiliation. Journal of Pragmatics, 100, 73-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.01.012 Conroy, T. M. (1999). “I don’t want to burst your bubble”: Affiliation and disaffiliation in a joint accounting by affiliated pair partners. Human Studies, 22(2), 339-359. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005452904364 Glenn, P. (2003). Laughter in interaction (Vol. 18). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519888 Hayakawa, H. (2003). The meaningless laugh: Laughter in Japanese communication. Malphurs, R. A. (2010). “People Did Sometimes Stick Things in my Underwear” The Function of Laughter at the US Supreme Court. People, 10(2). Provine, R. (2000). Laughter: A Scientific Investigation. New York: Viking. Van Vugt, M., Hardy, C., Stow, J., & Dunbar, R. (2014). Laughter as social lubricant: A biosocial hypothesis about the pro-social functions of laughter and humor. Retrieved September, 24, 2018. Wang, X., & Sun, X. (2023). A Bibliometric Study on Chinese Discourse (1994-2021). Critical Arts, 37(3), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/02560046.2023.2229908 Wang, X., & Jiang, R. (2024). Reconstruing the image of Shan Gui: A multimodal translation from poetry to painting. Babel. https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00380.wan Warner-Garcia, S. (2014). Laughing when nothing’s funny: The pragmatic use of coping laughter in the negotiation of conversational disagreement. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA), 24(1), 157-180. https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.24.1.07war Wood, A., Martin, J., & Niedenthal, P. (2017). Towards a social functional account of laughter: Acoustic features convey reward, affiliation, and dominance. PloS one, 12(8), e0183811. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183811 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.01.012 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005452904364 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519888 https://doi.org/10.1080/02560046.2023.2229908 https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00380.wan https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.24.1.07war https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183811