[Abelson, Robert P. 1981. Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist 36(7): 715–729.10.1037/0003-066X.36.7.715]Search in Google Scholar
[Alexander, Richard J. 1997. Aspects of Verbal Humour in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.]Search in Google Scholar
[Andor, József. 1985. On the psychological relevance of frames. Quaderni di Semantica 6(2): 212–221.]Search in Google Scholar
[Andor, József. 2002. On the cohesion and coherence of animal jokes: A frame-semantic analysis of narrative structure. In Szilvia Csábi–Judit Zerkowitz (eds), Textual Secrets: The Message of the Medium, 90–101. Budapest: ELTE.]Search in Google Scholar
[Andor, József. 2014. Animal-related humor. In Salvatore Attardo (ed.), Encyclopedia of Humor Studies 1: 41–42. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications.]Search in Google Scholar
[Andor, József. 2018. Humor-sztereotípiák ausztrál állatviccekben [Humour stereotypes in Australian animal jokes]. In Attila L. Nemesi–Anna T. Litovkina–Zsuzsanna Barta–Péter Barta (eds), Humorstílusok és -stratégiák [Humour styles and strategies], 341–351. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.]Search in Google Scholar
[Attardo, Salvatore. 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Attardo, Salvatore. 2001. Humorous Texts: A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110887969]Search in Google Scholar
[Attardo, Salvatore. 2017. Humor and pragmatics. In Salvatore Attardo (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, 174–188. London–New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315731162-13]Search in Google Scholar
[Attardo, Salvatore–Jean-Charles Chabanne. 1992. Jokes as a text type. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 5(1/2): 165–176.10.1515/humr.1992.5.1-2.165]Search in Google Scholar
[Attardo, Salvatore–Victor Raskin. 1991. Script theory revis(it)ed: Joke similarity and joke representation model. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 4(3/4): 293–347.10.1515/humr.1991.4.3-4.293]Search in Google Scholar
[Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bezuidenhout, Anne. 2013. Perspective taking in conversation: A defense of speaker non-egocentricity. Journal of Pragmatics 48(1): 4–16.10.1016/j.pragma.2012.11.007]Search in Google Scholar
[Brock, Alexander. 2004. Analyzing scripts in humorous communication. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 17(4): 353–360.10.1515/humr.2004.17.4.353]Search in Google Scholar
[Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470754603]Search in Google Scholar
[Clark, Billy. 2013. Relevance Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Coulson, Seana. 2001. Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511551352]Search in Google Scholar
[Davies, Christie. 2011. Jokes and Targets. Bloomington (IN): Indiana University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dynel, Marta. 2009. Humorous Garden-Paths: A Pragmatic-Cognitive Study. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dynel, Marta. 2012. Garden paths, red lights and crossroads: On finding our way to understanding the cognitive mechanisms underlying jokes. Israeli Journal of Humor Research 1(1): 6–28.]Search in Google Scholar
[Forgács, Tamás. 2005. „Állati” szólások és közmondások [Animal sayings and proverbs]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.]Search in Google Scholar
[Goatly, Andrew. 2012. Meaning and Humour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791536]Search in Google Scholar
[Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole–Jerry L. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.10.1163/9789004368811_003]Search in Google Scholar
[Haase, Donald, ed. 2008. The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Folktales and Fairy Tales, Vol. 1–3. Westport (CT): Greenwood Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hancher, Michael. 1980. How to play games with words: Speech-act jokes. Journal of Literary Semantics 9(1): 20–29.10.1515/jlse.1980.9.1.20]Search in Google Scholar
[Hetzron, Robert. 1991. On the structure of punch lines. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 4(1): 61–108.10.1515/humr.1991.4.1.61]Search in Google Scholar
[Kianbakht, Sajjad. 2020. Towards a comprehensive theory of culturally constructed humour. European Journal of Humour Research 8(2): 1–24.10.7592/EJHR2020.8.2.Kianbakht]Search in Google Scholar
[Leech, Geoffrey N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.]Search in Google Scholar
[Leech, Geoffrey N. 2014. The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Martin, Rod A. 2007. The Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. Amsterdam: Elsevier.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mayol, Laia–Elena Castroviejo. 2013. How to cancel an implicature. Journal of Pragmatics 50(1): 84–104.10.1016/j.pragma.2013.02.002]Search in Google Scholar
[Mieder, Wolfgang. 1993. Howl Like a Wolf: Animal Proverbs. Shelburne (VT): The New England Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Morreall, John. 2004. Verbal humor without switching scripts and without non-bona fide communication. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 17(4): 393–400.10.1515/humr.2004.17.4.393]Search in Google Scholar
[Nemesi, Attila L. 2012. Two masters of playing with conversational maxims. In Anna T. Litovkina–Judith Sollosy–Péter Medgyes–Dorota Brzozowska (eds), Hungarian Humour, 13–30. Kraków: Tertium.]Search in Google Scholar
[Nemesi, Attila L. 2015. Levels and types of breaking the maxims: A neo-Gricean account of humor. Intercultural Pragmatics 12(2): 249–276.10.1515/ip-2015-0012]Search in Google Scholar
[Nemesi, Attila L. 2016. Beszédaktusviccek [Speech-act jokes]. In Judit Boda-Ujlaky–Zsuzsanna Barta–Anna T. Litovkina–Péter Barta (eds), A humor nagyítón keresztül [Humour through a Magnifying Glass], 148–162. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.]Search in Google Scholar
[Nemesi, Attila L. 2019. Releváns-e a humor a relevanciaelméletben? [Is humor relevant to relevance theory?] Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 6(1): 1–31. http://www.jeny.szte.hu/jeny-2019-nemesial (Last accessed: 24 April 2020)10.14232/jeny.2019.1.1]Search in Google Scholar
[Németh T., Enikő. 2015. The role of perspectives in various forms of language use. Semiotica 203: 53–78.10.1515/sem-2014-0072]Search in Google Scholar
[Norrick, Neal R. 1986. A frame-theoretical analysis of verbal humor: Bisociation as schema conflict. Semiotica 60(3/4): 225–245.10.1515/semi.1986.60.3-4.225]Search in Google Scholar
[Norrick, Neal R. 1993. Conversational Joking: Humor in Everyday Talk. Bloomington (IN): Indiana University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Oring, Elliott. 2019. Oppositions, overlaps, and ontologies: The general theory of verbal humor revisited. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 32(2): 151–170.10.1515/humor-2018-0066]Search in Google Scholar
[Piskorska, Agnieszka. 2005. Can we have a recipe for humour in relevance theory? In Piotr Cap (ed.), Pragmatics Today, 245–253. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.]Search in Google Scholar
[Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-6472-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Raskin, Victor. 2017. Script-based semantic and ontological semantic theories of humor. In Salvatore Attardo (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, 109–125. London–New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315731162-9]Search in Google Scholar
[Raskin, Victor–Christian F. Hempelmann–Julia M. Taylor. 2009. How to understand and assess a theory: The evolution of the SSTH into the GTVH and now into the OSTH. Journal of Literary Theory 3(2): 285–311.10.1515/JLT.2009.016]Search in Google Scholar
[Ritchie, Graeme. 2004. The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203406953]Search in Google Scholar
[Ritchie, Graeme. 2006. Reinterpretation and viewpoints. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research 19(3): 251–270.10.1515/HUMOR.2006.014]Search in Google Scholar
[Ross, Alison. 1998. The Language of Humour. London–New York: Routledge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schank, Roger C.–Robert P. Abelson. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Searle, John R. 1965. What is a speech act? In Max Black (ed.), Philosophy in America, 221–239. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.]Search in Google Scholar
[Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173438]Search in Google Scholar
[Sperber, Dan–Deirdre Wilson. 1995 [1986]: Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.]Search in Google Scholar
[Szirmai, Éva–Szergej Tóth–Edit Újvári (eds). 2018. Állati jelek, képek és terek I–II [Animal signs, images and spaces, Vol. 1–2]. Szeged: Szegedi Egyetemi Kiadó– Juhász Gyula Felsőoktatási Kiadó.]Search in Google Scholar
[T. Litovkina, Anna. 2016a. “Do You Serve Lawyers and Politicians Here?” Stereotyped Lawyers and Politicians in American Jokes and Anti-Proverbs. Komárno (Komárom): Univerzita J. Selyeho (Selye János Egyetem).]Search in Google Scholar
[T. Litovkina, Anna. 2016b. The lawyer as animal in American lawyer jokes. European Journal of Humour Research 4(1): 3–13.10.7592/EJHR2016.4.1.tlitovkina]Search in Google Scholar
[Tátrai, Szilárd. 2011. Bevezetés a pragmatikába. Funkcionális kognitív megközelítés [An Introduction to Pragmatics: A Functional Cognitive Approach]. Budapest: Tinta Kiadó.]Search in Google Scholar
[Tátrai, Szilárd. 2015. Context-dependent vantage points in literary narratives: A functional cognitive approach. Semiotica 203: 9–37.10.1515/sem-2014-0076]Search in Google Scholar
[Tomasello, Michael. 1999. The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674044371]Search in Google Scholar
[Verschueren, Jef. 1999. Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.]Search in Google Scholar
[Werness, Hope B. 2003. The Continuum Encyclopedia of Animal Symbolism in Art. New York: Continuum.]Search in Google Scholar
[Yamaguchi, Haruhiko. 1988. How to pull strings with words: Deceptive violations in the garden-path joke. Journal of Pragmatics 12(3): 323–337.10.1016/0378-2166(88)90036-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Yus, Francisco. 2003. Humor and the search for relevance. Journal of Pragmatics 35(9): 1295–1331.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00179-0]Search in Google Scholar
[Yus, Francisco. 2013. Analyzing jokes with the Intersecting Circles Model of humorous communication. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 9(1): 3–24.10.1515/lpp-2013-0002]Search in Google Scholar
[Yus, Francisco. 2016. Humour and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/thr.4]Search in Google Scholar
[Zuo, Baiyao. 2020. Why does humor fail or occur unexpectedly? – An account of humor within an extended relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 160: 1–13.10.1016/j.pragma.2020.02.006]Search in Google Scholar
