This document provides an introduction and background information for a study analyzing verbal irony between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth in Jane Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice. It discusses Austen's life and status as an author, as well as an overview of the plot of Pride and Prejudice. The study aims to contribute to the understanding of verbal irony through discourse analysis, adopting a two-tiered approach combining modified speech act theory and echoic allusions to examine ironic utterances between the protagonists.

1. Chapter 1 Introduction
Irony in its numerous manifestations has been studied throughout history beginning
with the ancient Greeks, and has been the subject of much debate among linguistic
scholars due to the difficulty of clarification. Irony is a conception uniquely known to
mankind, although even among human beings irony remains elusive, notably when taking
into account cultural and linguistic differences. Through this research we seek to
contribute to the understanding of verbal irony through analysis of discourse found in
literature. The analysis elucidates the purpose of verbal irony by illustrating its role in
character construction. This study centers on verbal irony between the protagonists Mr.
Darcy and Elizabeth within the novel Pride and Prejudice (1813)1
by renowned novelist
Jane Austen.
The remainder of this chapter provides background information for the novel in
addition to the purpose and significance of this study. Pride and Prejudice is well-known
for being a prime example of an ironical work in literature; in particular the novel was
chosen for its impact over the last two centuries, and the publication has marked its 200-
year anniversary. Verbal irony as the principal form of communication between the
novel’s two protagonists Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth further provides an ideal source of
data, as this research analyzes the significance of verbal irony in character construction.
To find a reliable method of analyzing verbal irony, in this study we adopt a two-
tiered approach pairing speaker intent with hearer uptake: first classifying speaker intent
via modified speech act theory and then further identifying hearer uptake with echoic
allusions of disagreement, neutral, and agreement groupings. Searle’s speech act theory
(2001b) [1979] is modified using Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act to
replace declarations in order to provide a more inclusive classification. Echoic theory’s
allusion (Wilson & Sperber, 2012) and a modified speech act theory are utilized in
combination for examining each ironical utterance for data collection. Speech act theory
elucidates the speaker’s intent and echoic allusions provide the site of infelicity within
each ironical utterance for the hearer’s uptake. Speaker intent is found in the illocutionary
act and hearer uptake intended by the speaker is located through the perlocutionary act
1
Pride and Prejudice was originally published in London by T. Egerton in 1813. This study uses a reprinted edition
from Penguin Classics based upon the first edition (Austen, 2003: xii).
1

2. meant to explicate the incongruity in the utterance. Using a modified speech act theory
and echoic allusions as the basis for interpretation, the ironical utterances are then subject
to further analysis according to incongruity and superiority theories. The verbal ironies
are analyzed through incongruity theory (e.g. Norrick, 2003) to stress their infelicity
through the dual layers of intended meaning and literal meaning. Superiority theory (e.g.
Morreall, 2009) successfully explains the characteristics inherent within verbal irony and
thus is useful for analyzing utterances.
1.1 The Author and the Novel
1.1.1 Jane Austen
Jane Austen has been analyzed repeatedly, both prior to and since her death (Litz,
1975; Husbands, 1954). Yet there is no consensus on her novels or her personality. The
only consensus that can be drawn is that she had a strong sense of humor and a critical
view of the world. She has been variously described within literature as a feminist, a
prude, a romantic, a conservative, and a radical (Brown, 1973; Downie, 2006; Bochman,
2005; Litz, 1975). The scope of this study cannot conjecture exactly who Austen was or
the underlying meaning of all her works; instead we focus on the elucidation of her
writing to inform subsequent discussion on her ironical characters Mr. Darcy and
Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice. Austen was born in 1775, one of seven children of a
village clergyman. In similar financial circumstances as so many of her heroines, Austen
was never to enjoy economic largesse despite her success (Newton, 1978; Bate, 1999:
546). Austen’s status in literature, in her lifetime and posthumously, is demonstrated by
the continual analysis of her literature and by the fact that all her works, especially Pride
and Prejudice, have been adapted, abridged, and rewritten often since the early 19th
century (Wright, 1975).
This status owes greater thanks to her ironically witty writing style than to her
subject matter centered on marriage. Robinson suggests that the literary style of an author
is defined as the way he or she does things, expression of personality, thoughts, and their
character, positing when analyzing authors their usage of certain language is what
provides clues of their style (1985: 233). Austen’s works have been romanticized and
historicized to display nostalgia for a green and pleasant England rich in tradition (Bate,
2

3. 1999). This focus on country life has led to Austen’s critics preeminently positing her as
bourgeois and focused on criticizing establishment through a “reproduction of aristocratic
culture,” yet this stereotype may have been wrongly assigned (Gilroy, Lynch, Park,
Rajan, & Tuite, 2002: 120). Analysis of Pride and Prejudice finds that Austen is still
writing about high society; for example, while the Bennets are not considered to be high
in social status by the likes of Lady Catherine de Bourgh, they are in fact more than
comfortably well off, as can be realized through an examination of the number of
servants that they employ (Downie, 2006: 70). Furthermore, Mr. Darcy and Mr. Bingley,
while lacking titles, are both rich by the standards of the day. This suggests that Austen
did not hold any disdain for economic wealth and independence, only the social
constraints which society placed upon its members.
Austen consistently attempts to provide her characters with a break from the
inflexible societal rules. For example, Elizabeth frequently defies social conventions by
mocking Mr. Darcy, intentionally using irony. This ironic view of feminist behavior and
how it could be displayed shows Austen’s skeptical views of her society (Brown, 1973:
331-332). This “sentimental novel” at the time was that any woman who had wronged in
society’s eyes should be removed from the story, usually through death brought on by her
shame (Johnson, 1989: 172). Austen, however, shows that young women who have come
to a bad decision but regret their mistakes should be allowed to be rehabilitated within
society, for example Elizabeth’s sympathy towards Miss Darcy’s near elopement with Mr.
Wickham.
Authors were mostly bound by the views of society; it was virtually outside of their
imaginative scope to write female protagonists who not only had a role in their own
destiny but impacted the lives of others. Nonetheless, Austen pushed past the bounds of
her own creativity and challenged societal constraints to provide enduring heroines with
the capability to control their own fates. Elizabeth as a female protagonist shows Austen’s
pride in her gender. Toolan remarks that few examples of “agentive” females appear in
literature until the approach of the 20th
century, from which we extrapolate Austen as
having been ahead of her time as seen by her use of a female protagonist able to affect
her own situation (1988: 246). Even later in the 19th
century, while heroines are found in
literature, many fail to be in charge of their fates to the same extent that Elizabeth is.
It is impossible for the author, and thus her characters, to remain immune from the
3

4. situation in which they live and thus their views of society will be portrayed within the
novel (Sullivan, 1991: 578). Feng notes that “narratives are one of the forms through
which a culture understands itself and its past” (2008: 187), therefore Austen’s
commentary on the cultural norms of her time attempt to view her culture from a
particular perspective. Donovan suggests that the rise and development of the novel as a
literary art form can in large part be attributed to female writers. The artistic quality of the
novel was enhanced by the “polyvocal” form (Donovan, 1991: 443), signifying polyvocal
as having many voices, and seen in female writers’ novels through their use of many
characters’ voices as opposed to male authors’ narrations from a male protagonist’s
perspective. This aspect is particularly observed in Pride and Prejudice’s depiction of
multiple characters through discourse. The female protagonist Elizabeth is portrayed as a
“studier of character,” (Austen, 2003: 42) illustrating the significance of Austen’s
polyvocal style to show the alternative perspectives of her characters.
1.1.2 Pride and Prejudice: Plot Overview
Pride and Prejudice is set in the world of Regency England and centers on the
fortunes of the five daughters of the Bennet family of Hertfordshire, particularly the two
eldest Jane and Elizabeth. Elizabeth takes the role of the female protagonist. With the
sisters’ introduction to a new single man of substantial means in the setting of
Netherfield, Mrs. Bennet resolves that the newcomer shall marry one of her daughters.
This plot point illustrates Austen’s articulation of her antecedent ironical statement, “It is
a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must
be in want of a wife” (Austen, 2003: 5). The new neighbor Mr. Bingley also brings with
him his sisters and good friend Mr. Darcy. Upon meeting at a ball hosted at Meryton, Mr.
Bingley is soon enamored by the eldest Miss Bennet, while Mr. Darcy ends the evening
snubbing Elizabeth, thus raising her ire. However, the machinations of Mrs. Bennet cause
the four to be drawn closer together, providing Mr. Darcy with the opportunity to revise
his opinions of Elizabeth.
Met with more enthusiasm by the ladies of the neighborhood is the billeting of a
regiment in the local town. Elizabeth particularly enjoys the company of Mr. Wickham,
who does not portray Mr. Darcy in the best light. Mr. Wickham’s testimony reinforces
Elizabeth’s assumptions about Mr. Darcy’s lack of moral character. Meanwhile, Elizabeth
4

5. has been pursued by her cousin, Mr. Collins, who has the distinction of Mr. Bennet’s
good will being given to him. Elizabeth rejects his marriage proposal directly, upon
which he turns to Elizabeth’s good friend Charlotte Lucas who accepts Mr. Collins’
proposal.
Elizabeth leaves for a promised visit to the Collins’s only to discover Mr. Collins’
patroness is Mr. Darcy’s aunt, with whom Mr. Darcy is visiting. The proximity of Mr.
Darcy and Elizabeth leads to a marriage proposal from Mr. Darcy. Elizabeth ironically
informs him that he could not have proposed in any way which would have “tempted”
her to accept him (Austen, 2003: 188); particularly once she discovered that he was
responsible for meddling in the romance of Jane and Mr. Bingley. Mr. Darcy angrily
decides to notify Elizabeth through a letter of the perfidy of Mr. Wickham. Deciding this
information is best kept private Elizabeth leaves to tour the lakes with her aunt and uncle,
where she visits Pemberley, Mr. Darcy’s residence, and starts to notice her changing
opinion of Mr. Darcy. Unfortunately, the trip is cut short due to the news that the
youngest Bennet daughter, Lydia, has eloped with Mr. Wickham.
After a worrying time, Lydia returns to the Bennets married to Mr. Wickham. Lydia
inadvertently alerts Elizabeth that Mr. Darcy played a primary role in resolving the
scandalous affair, thus completing Elizabeth’s revision of her opinion regarding Mr.
Darcy’s character. The return to the neighborhood of both Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy
provides great excitement and ultimately marriage proposals for Jane and Elizabeth,
showing that pride and prejudice can be conquered on both sides to form a lasting bond,
leading to a happy marriage for Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth. The willfulness and feminism
of Elizabeth have made her easily relatable, even to modern readers, while Mr. Darcy has
become one of the greatest romantic heroes of all time (Wright, 1975). Through an
analysis of the linguistic features of the novel, this paper will attempt to understand more
about its enduring appeal.
1.1.3 Verbal Irony within Pride and Prejudice
Jane Austen has been referred to as “that expert ironist” and Pride and Prejudice is
recognized for its wryly ironic twist (Wilson & Sperber, 1992: 62). As a novel, Pride and
Prejudice presents a complex world in which characters stage a series of events that
convey a realistic approach to uniformity with the actual world in which it was created.
5

6. Irony, specifically verbal irony, is employed throughout the novel by Austen. According
to Liu (1997), a writer’s style is carried out through the linguistic features of a text.
Verbal irony as a linguistic feature is the major characteristic of Pride and Prejudice,
illustrating Austen’s unique writing style. Austen is able to make known the deeper
complexities present within relationships through the verbal ironies existent between
Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy (see section 2.4 for further discussion on verbal irony).
Before examining Pride and Prejudice in depth as an ironical work, we first seek to
define verbal irony and consider the differences between ironic and ironical. Irony
presents itself in different ways, and recognizing the difference between the concepts of
ironic and ironical is essential to the understanding of this research. Ironic is referred to
as the “the irony of fate” or “practical irony” and is used to describe an event that occurs
in which the outcome reveals a coincidence that unintentionally makes a victim out of
someone (Hutchens, 1960: 357). Ironical, on the other hand, describes one who intends to
show something ironic is occurring, and an ironist is the ironical figure who induces the
irony that takes place (Muecke, 1980 [1969]: 42). From Muecke’s understanding, “we
call Jane Austen an ironist not simply because of her frequent recourse to irony but also
because she frequently presents ironic situations” (Muecke, 1980 [1969]: 44). Verbal
irony, which Muecke refers to as ironical (1980 [1969]: 44), is a trope that relates an
utterance’s figurative meaning to its literal meaning as even the opposite of its literal
meaning, or as an understatement or overstatement meant to strengthen or weaken the
speaker’s literal meaning (Wilson, 2006: 1723).
Muecke described the ironist as one “who presents or evokes, or puts us in the way
of seeing such a confrontation” (1980 [1969]: 42), in regard to a double-layered
opposition such as that created by Elizabeth. Duality in meaning occurs when any given
utterance suggests a figurative meaning that belies its literal understanding (Wright,
1969: 324). In claiming that Mr. Darcy “is all politeness” Elizabeth alludes to the
opposition in her literal meaning, for she intends to mean that Mr. Darcy is impolite
(Austen, 2003: 27). She also intentionally alludes to her inability to be “tempted”
(Austen, 2003: 188) to accept his marriage proposal when “tempted” in the utterance
creates a duality referring back to when Elizabeth was slighted by Mr. Darcy for her
insufficient appearance that could not “tempt” him to dance with her (Austen, 2003: 13).
For Elizabeth, duality is the contrast between her praise and encouragement of the
6

7. predicament of women with disagreement masked in her words but harbored in her heart.
In the examples under the analytical focus, one finds appreciation for the artfully tacit
exchanges between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy that employ verbal irony, which conceals
accusation and disapprobation.
The progress of the relationship between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy is gradually
established in their characterization, specifically through verbal irony, which acts
rhetorically to convince the reader that there are dualities existing in their discourse. The
character’s utterances spoken to each other show two contrasting layers; often their
discourse infers something that does not faithfully describe their true feelings. The dual
language juxtaposing literal and figurative meanings constructs each character and
reflects an opposition between the story world’s expectation of socially adequate
behaviors and some contrary notion within the ironist, which upsets the accepted social
schemata. In this novel, the verbal ironies latent within interactions involving Elizabeth
and Mr. Darcy reveal their true characters.
Wilson and Sperber cite a prime example of verbal irony from Mr. Darcy in Pride
and Prejudice which they characterize as an understanding of echoic irony where, they
state, “indeed, it seems to accord with the intuitions of that expert ironist Jane Austen,
who has Mr. Darcy say to that other expert ironist Elizabeth Bennet: ‘. . . you find great
enjoyment in occasionally professing opinions which . . . are not your own’” (Wilson &
Sperber, 1992: 62) (see section 2.4.2 for further discussion on echoic theory). This
particular example of verbal irony also accords with Hutchens’ concept of the “rhetorical
ironist” as one who uses words, which by seeming to assert the opposite actually
reinforces the ironist’s intended meaning (1960: 354). Austen regularly uses these
rhetorically ironical utterances in conversations between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth.
Austen uses verbal irony to convey her opinion of society and share her notions of
its failings and limitations, such as the lack of opportunities for women. Austen also uses
ironical utterances within the narration of the novel in order to expand the detail within
the plot. Often cited as an exemplary case of irony is Austen’s first statement of the novel
that “it is a truth universally acknowledged that a young man in possession of a good
fortune must be in want of a wife” (Austen qtd. in Donovan, 1991: 455; Austen qtd. in
Newman, 1983: 696). In fact, this statement has a dual layer of meaning: even the men
with fortune seem to want a wife; instead it is the women who, relying on a spouse for
7

8. material needs, are in want of a husband (Donovan, 1991: 455). This statement also
contains considerable implicit criticism at the society who would make such a statement,
when it is clearly untrue.
Austen’s ironical narration is often aimed at the follies of society as a whole,
although it is the failings of human nature that cause people to act in certain ways. Take
for example, upon Meryton society learning of Mr. Wickham’s accusations against Mr.
Darcy “everybody was pleased to think how much they had always disliked Mr. Darcy
before they knew anything of the matter” (Austen qtd. in Zimmermann, 1968: 68).
Austen uses this ironical narration to comically expose the hypocrisies existent in society
(Shaw, 1975: 282). Furthermore, Austen’s ironical narration illustrates Elizabeth’s
judgment of Charlotte Lucas for marrying Mr. Collins for material reasons. However,
Elizabeth considers Mr. Wickham’s pursuit of Mary King, who has just inherited 10,000
pounds, justified although it is for the same reasons (Austen, 2003: 123, 151). This
demonstrates how the same actions, conducted by men and women, are viewed in
different ways by society.
This mockery further reveals the ironies existent in the plot. Brown suggests that the
conclusion of Jane Austen’s works, including Pride and Prejudice, are basically “parodic
in structure and theme,” and thus designed to display the ironies existent within Austen’s
novels (1969: 1582). Downie cites as example the fact that the reader is told at the end of
Pride and Prejudice that the Gardiners are most welcome guests at Pemberley (2006: 72).
The irony in this situation can be found as they were Elizabeth’s inferior connections that
Mr. Darcy cited as being a barrier to his wishing to marry Elizabeth (Austen, 2003: 188).
Brown states that Austen’s comic conclusions are used as “an ironic vehicle for final
judgments on the individual and his society” (1969: 1587). This study further gives the
example of the conclusion of Pride and Prejudice, which finds the heroine Elizabeth has
succeeded in altering Mr. Darcy’s prejudiced views against her lower position in society.
Austen’s portrayal of her characters abounds with verbal irony, and as Gubar notes
“Austen repeatedly uses imagination or wit or irony as an attribute that defines the
assertive independence, the spirited willfulness of females” (1975: 254). Thus,
Elizabeth’s wit and ironical utterances display her character. Elizabeth’s growing self-
awareness of her pride and unfounded prejudices are generally exposed within the novel
through ironical utterances. For example, to Jane’s insistence that Elizabeth cannot really
8

9. love Mr. Darcy, Elizabeth uses ironical understatement when she replies “perhaps I didn’t
always love him as well as I do now” (Austen, 2003: 353). This is clearly ironical when
one compares it to her earlier strong feelings of dislike for Mr. Darcy.
As evidenced in the examples above, the verbal irony within Pride and Prejudice is
predominantly exemplary. Austen employed irony in the novel with a purpose—to
satirize her society in order to express her criticism. The verbal irony is primarily found
in the conversations between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth throughout the duration of the
novel to support their characterization. Discourse analysis has shown through
examination the broad strokes of the ways in which verbal irony can be portrayed in
Pride and Prejudice.
1.2 Rationale, Significance and Scope of this Study
The rationale for analyzing Pride and Prejudice in this study is that the novel is, and
specifically its endearing characters Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy are, distinguished, with
verbal irony depicting their characters. Many readers are familiar with Austen’s work and
the plot of Pride and Prejudice, but the readership may not be familiar with the way
Austen employs verbal irony to present the characterization of Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth
within the novel. Thus, the study aims to provide a framework for analyzing verbal irony
to illustrate how her characters’ identities are constructed.
This study provides a lens for analysis by constructively articulating a paradigm by
which this goal can be accomplished, using a developed theoretical framework which
utilizes performative speech acts to depict characterization, first theorized by Butler
(2002) [1990]. Echoic groupings, an original approach of analysis for echoic theory
proposed by this research, show correlation with performative speech acts, therefore
echoic groupings depict characterization. Our major argument in this research is the logic
of the relationship between performative speech acts, characterization, and echoic
groupings. The three steps of the relationship are as follows:
Step 1. Performative speech acts depict characterization.
(Butler’s performative speech act)
Step 2. Performative speech acts have a correlation with echoic groupings.
(Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test results)
9

10. Therefore:
Step 3. Echoic groupings demonstrate characterization.
This study provides a way to view verbal irony through a modification to Searle’s
(2001b) [1979] speech act theory by incorporating a new classification of speech act,
performative, to replace declarations. The significance of this study is not only to help the
reader understand how verbal irony is recognized, but also the effectiveness of verbal
irony to the plot of the novel in that it aids in characterization. Modification of speech act
theory allows for a more inclusive analysis of characterization that is unaccounted for by
Searle’s speech act theory due to the limitations of the declaration classification. The role
of verbal irony in characterization is revealed through modified speech act theory and
echoic theory, with an additional combination of the incongruity and superiority theories
to complete its elucidation.
The hypothesis that echoic allusions depict characterization when utterances are
comprised of disagreement, neutral, and agreement groupings is examined through the
analytical framework. The significance of our contribution is that it validates the
evaluation of Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization that concurrently identifies
major phases within the plot. Instead of dividing the novel into volumes, as Austen
situated the story, the plot is better displayed through the three phases of echoic grouping
dominance (disagreement dominant phase, neutral dominant phase, agreement dominant
phase). The disagreement dominant phase shows Mr. Darcy’s and Elizabeth’s opposing
views of society, and their verbal ironies are more critical. The neutral dominant phase
illustrates Mr. Darcy’s and Elizabeth’s attempts to display their individualities through
bantering, using a lighter tone of irony to show their increasing ease with each other
through civility. The agreement dominant phase is comprised of Mr. Darcy’s and
Elizabeth’s light-hearted banter, taking on a playful tone as they tease each other in a
display of their love, which reveals the two characters’ emotions to be in accord.
Due to time and space constraints, this study has a clearly-defined scope. Irony in
and of itself is a general category from which data can be drawn, and this research will be
conducted on verbal irony found within the conversations between Mr. Darcy and
Elizabeth of Pride and Prejudice. By placing limitations on the scope we avoid
unrealistic expectations of data analysis in addition to providing an in-depth study.
10

11. 1.3 Objectives and Research Questions
The objective is to provide those studying the role verbal irony plays in language
with a perspective on how it expresses its figurative intentions. The study attempts this
through analysis of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Inspection of the literature on
Pride and Prejudice shows that readers are too quick to accept the novel at face value.
Cursory examination shows humor and irony provide context illustrating the skill of
Austen’s rhetoric. Further research exhibits linguistic analysis pays little attention to what
purpose figurative language fulfills within discourse analysis.
This study seeks to contribute to understanding the purpose of figurative language
through the analysis of verbal irony. Verbal irony abounds in Pride and Prejudice and as
this paper will discuss, the ironical utterances between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy in their
conversations intend to portray characterization. This study purports performative speech
acts depict Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s characterization through the use of verbal irony to
echo their perspectives on issues such as social norms, class and gender roles. Verbal
irony has a purpose, which is to convey Elizabeth’s and Mr. Darcy’s views through
performativity to construct their ironical identities. It is our goal in this study to show that
the verbal irony in the novel is of greater importance than the dialogues and the plot, and
even today, 200 years post-publication, produces Austen’s intentional effect showing her
ironical characters. Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization is represented through the
opinions and views they echo. The reader will not be able to appreciate character and plot
developments without properly comprehending the use of verbal irony in regard to the
three echoic grouping dominance phases (disagreement dominant, neutral dominant,
agreement dominant) in the execution of characterization.
This study posits and analyzes the following research questions in order to achieve
those objectives of discovering:
1. What purpose does speaker intent and hearer uptake in verbal irony serve?
2. How does Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s characterization occur in the novel?
3. How does verbal irony pragmatically function in characterization?
4. What is the essential link between characterization and verbal irony?
In order to answer these questions above, a research methodology focused on
11

12. articulating how verbal irony is utilized in character depiction must be employed. More
specifically, this research seeks to answer how those ironical utterances found in
character construction can be interpreted. This study attempts to answer these questions
using discourse analysis of Pride and Prejudice, focusing on the exchanges between the
novel’s protagonists Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy.
1.4 Structure of the Dissertation
Chapter 1 introduces the basis for this study, positing the specific research questions
the paper aims to answer through discourse analysis. The significance of the research is
that it provides a useful method for classifying verbal irony into the modified speech act
taxonomy. Verbal irony is included through a modification to Searle’s (2001b) [1979]
speech act classifications using Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act. The first
chapter also provides a brief introduction to the novel and author, to explain how the use
of verbal irony is pervasive throughout the novel and was employed by Austen to achieve
her ends. The ironical significance is relevant to understanding the character
developments of both Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, the two protagonists. The key notations
(refer to section 1.5 for key notations) explain any ambiguous terms or certain
abbreviations used within this research.
Chapter 2 provides the main components related to this research: firstly, a broad
overview of discourse analysis and conversational analysis, followed by a thorough
review of speech act theory’s connection to verbal irony. Secondly, it provides a focused
examination of verbal irony, including an explanation of figurative language. The chapter
also discusses the echoic theory of verbal irony, which is imperative to this study.
Humorology also falls under this section (see section 2.4.3 for humorology theories) on
verbal irony, and includes relief theory, incongruity theory, and superiority theory, which
incorporates the banter principle, and these last two major theories provide explication to
further aid in the interpretation of verbal irony. Following there is clarification for the
functions of verbal irony. Finally, in Chapter 2 we discuss the previous research on verbal
irony, including an evaluation of the theories and studies conducted by scholars with
special attention paid to verbal irony within Pride and Prejudice.
In Chapter 3 the theoretical framework formulated for the analysis is introduced.
12

13. Verbal irony will be clearly defined for the framework of this study. The analytical
framework introduces a modified speech act classification based on Searle’s (2001b)
[1979] speech act theory to incorporate Butler’s (2002) [1990] performative speech act
into the taxonomy to replace declarations. Declarations are insufficient to include a more
extensive classification of speech acts with little or no extralinguistic institutional
authority to back them up. Performative speech acts, a more inclusive classification of
speech act, allow speech acts lacking institutional authoritative support to exist depicting
characterization. Echoic groupings of verbal irony as our original contribution to echoic
theory is also further explicated. Incongruity theory explains the echoic allusion,
highlighting the duality inherent within, which provides a locale for irony. Superiority
theory, which incorporates the banter principle, enhances understanding in explaining the
intricacy of verbal irony that takes place in characterization. The logical connections
between the theories as a basis for classifying verbal irony are discussed for the analytical
framework. The hypotheses and the methods used to test them are also included in
Chapter 3.
Chapter 4 comprises the data collection methods and explains how the relevant data
will be analyzed in order to prove the posited theories this study puts forth for
explanatory power in the study of verbal irony and characterization. Chapter 4 also
includes the methodology used to analyze the speech acts, offering rationale for
classifying the speech acts according to the modified speech act taxonomy to identify
speaker intent and verifying the ironical utterances through echoic allusions which
provide the location of irony intended by the speaker for the hearer’s uptake. Searle’s
(2001b) [1979] and Austin’s (2002) [1962] felicity conditions from speech act theory
indicate the location of irony. To incorporate hearer uptake into the verification of verbal
irony, echoic theory’s allusion (Wilson & Sperber, 2012) allows for objective
classification of ironies. The classification section (refer to section 4.1.1 for method of
classification) provides examples to illustrate the ironical speech acts classifications
found within Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s conversations. In the data section (for the data,
see section 4.2), Table 4.1 displays the data set of the 157 ironical speech acts, and the
graphs show the frequency of each classification of modified speech acts throughout the
course of the novel; the study has a focus on the ironical speech acts (Figure 4.7) to
determine the three phases of characterization shown in Figure 5.1 (disagreement
13

14. dominant, neutral dominant, agreement dominant). This chapter also explains the
statistical test of the data using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences)
software to show if a significant correlation exists between ironical performative speech
acts and echoic groupings. The Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit statistical test
results of the 157 ironical speech acts are provided (refer to section 4.3 for test results),
revealing a correlation between ironical performative speech acts and echoic groupings
with disagreement, neutral or agreement echoic allusions found within each utterance
specifically for the hearer’s uptake (intended by the speaker). The statistical test results
conclude the hypothesis that echoic groupings portray characterization is supported.
Chapter 5 provides the data analysis to address character construction by analyzing
ironical utterances through echoic groupings. The analysis proves our argument using the
data collected as evidence to support a focus on the 81 ironical performative speech acts
depicting characterization through phases of echoic grouping dominance. The three
echoic groupings have concurrently been designated into three phases according to the
novel’s plot through the echoic grouping dominance: disagreement, neutral, and
agreement (see Figure 5.1). Found within each phase is an idiosyncratic premise on
which the characterization is based, and the analysis is structured according to the
conversational themes within each premise. This analysis includes all ironical
performative speech acts within Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth’s conversations alongside other
adjacent utterances necessary to explicate and elucidate the interpretation of Mr. Darcy
and Elizabeth’s characterization. Echoic groupings (refer to section 3.1.2 for an
explanation of echoic groupings) are the original contribution of this study to echoic
theory to highlight the prominence of verbal irony in characterization. Searle’s (2001b)
[1979] and Austin’s (2002) [1962] felicity conditions found in speech act theory and
echoic allusions as keys to denoting verbal irony are the foundation of the data analysis,
in addition to a combination of incongruity theory and superiority theory as an expedient
premise to reveal and construe verbal irony presented in characterization. Incongruity
theory lends greater explanatory power for the duality inherent in verbal irony through its
perlocutionary act for the hearer’s uptake. Superiority theory further elucidates the
speaker’s dissociative attitude. Included in the analysis is how Elizabeth’s feminist views
impact Mr. Darcy’s moral character in the novel.
Chapter 6 provides the major findings of the research wherein the research
14

15. questions are addressed. We illuminate the key discoveries of the data analysis and how
these findings provide a contribution to the fields of linguistics and literature. We contend
the special contribution herein to discourse analysis of character construction within
verbal irony is the two-tiered method of pairing speaker intent with hearer uptake in light
of the findings of the data analysis. Finally, this chapter addresses possible limitations to
our research and offers perspectives to improve future research related to this study.
1.5 Key Notations
It is necessary to be aware of the abbreviated expressions in order to interpret the
representations of the key concepts and data in this study. For example, borrowing from
Searle, the following discussion will sometimes abbreviate speaker as the S and hearer as
the H. Furthermore, the five classifications under the modified speech act taxonomy this
study proposes will also be abbreviated as ASR for assertive, DIR as directive, EXP
meaning expressive, COM as commissive, and PER meaning performative. The numbers
following these abbreviations also have significance; the number before the period
indicates chapter and the number after indicates an assigned number given to that
utterance according to its particular classification. Take PER03.02 for example: PER
means the utterance is performative, “03” indicates it is found in Chapter 3 of the novel,
and “02” signifies the utterance is the second of this classification found within the
chapter. Using the above representations will allow the reader better guidance within this
paper.
Regarding the Pearson’s Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test, the results include the
following values: the Chi-square value, which shows the difference in the expected count
as calculated by the program and the actual count of utterances found within each echoic
grouping. Note that we will shorten the name to Pearson’s Chi-squared test throughout
the paper. The value df means degrees of freedom, which shows the number of rows and
columns being analyzed. In our study, df will always be two as we are testing the possible
correlation between one speech act and echoic groupings (disagreement, neutral, and
agreement). The Asymp. Sig. refers to asymptotic significance, meaning we test the data
based on the assumption that it will be distributed in a particular order; however,
asymptotic significance is only an approximation and thus we have calculated the exact
15

16. significance due to our smaller sample size. A significance level reaching 0.05 or less is
necessary to determine dependence of two variables (Mehta & Patel, 2010: 1-7).
16