Cognitive Processing

, 10:1 | Cite as

GraPHIA: a computational model for identifying phonological jokes

Letter to the Editor

Abstract

Currently in humor research, there exists a dearth of computational models for humor perception. The existing theories are not quantifiable and efforts need to be made to quantify the models and incorporate neuropsychological findings in humor research. We propose a new computational model (GraPHIA) for perceiving phonological jokes or puns. GraPHIA consists of a semantic network and a phonological network where words are represented by nodes in both the networks. Novel features based on graph theoretical concepts are proposed and computed for the identification of homophonic jokes. The data set for evaluating the model consisted of homophonic puns, normal sentences, and ambiguous nonsense sentences. The classification results show that the feature values result in successful identification of phonological jokes and ambiguous nonsense sentences suggesting that the proposed model is a plausible model for humor perception. Further work is needed to extend the model for identification of other types of phonological jokes.

Keywords

Humor Puns Computational model Graph theory 

References

  1. Attardo S (1997) The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. Humor Int J Humor Res 10:395–420Google Scholar
  2. Attardo S, Raskin V (1994) Non-literalness and non-bona-fide in language: an approach to formal and computational treatments of humor. Pragm Cogn 2:31–69Google Scholar
  3. Binsted K (1996) Machine humor: an implemented model of puns Doctoral Dissertation. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  4. Deo N (1974) Graph theory with applications to engineering and computer science. Prentice-Hall, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  5. Goel V, Dolan RJ (2001) The functional anatomy of humor: segregating cognitive and affective components. Nat Neurosci 4:237–238. doi:10.1038/85076 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Katz B (1996) A neural invariant of humour. Proc Internatl Workshop Comp Humor University of Twente, Netherlands, pp 103–109Google Scholar
  7. McDonough CJ (2001) Mnemonic string generator: software to aid memory of random passwords. Technical Report. CERIAS, Purdue UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Moran JM, Wig GS, Adams RB Jr, Janata P, Kelley WM (2004) Neural correlates of humor detection and appreciation. Neuroimage 3:1055–1060. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mulder MP, Nijholt A (2002) Humour research: state of the art. Technical Report No. 02-34, University of Twente, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Nerlich B, Clarke D (2001) Ambiguities we live by: towards a pragmatics of polysemy. J Pragmatics 33:1–20. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00132-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Paulos J (1980) Mathematics and humor. University of Chicago Press, Pun of the day. http://www.punoftheday.com
  12. Ritchie G (1999) Developing the inconguity-resolution theory. Proc AISB ‘99 Symp creative language: humor and stories, Edinburgh, pp 78–85Google Scholar
  13. Ruch W, Attardo S, Raskin V (1993) Towards an empirical verification of the general theory of verbal humor. Humor Int J Humor Res 6:123–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shammi P, Stuss D (1999) Humor appreciation: a role of the right frontal lobe. Brain 122:657–666. doi:10.1093/brain/122.4.657 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Srinivasan N, Pariyadath V (2008) Dissecting the frog: computational approaches to humor perception. In: Srinivasa N, Gupta AK, Pandey J (eds) Advances in cognitive science, vol 1. Sage Publications, New Delhi, pp 199–215Google Scholar
  16. Stock O, Strapparava C (2002) Humorous agent for humorous acronyms: the HAHAcronym project. Humor Int J Humor Res 16:297–314. doi:10.1515/humr.2003.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Taylor J, Mazlack LJ (2004) Computationally recognizing wordplay in jokes. Proc Cog Sci Soc, Chicago, pp 1315–1320Google Scholar
  18. Vaid J, Hull R, Heredia R, Gerkens D, Martinez F (2003) Getting a joke: the time course of meaning activation in verbal humor. J Pragmatics 35:1431–1449. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00184-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Veatch TC (1998) A theory of humor. Humor Int J Humor Res 11:161–215Google Scholar
  20. Yokogawa T (2002) Japanese pun analyzer using pun articulation similarities. Proc IEEE Intern Conf Fuzzy Sys, Honolulu, USA, pp 1114–1119Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Behavioural and Cognitive SciencesUniversity of AllahabadAllahabadIndia

Personalised recommendations