This paper analyzes expressions that use the olfactory domain as a figurative source in the Bosnian language. Authentic texts retrieved from the Sketch Engine web application were used as the corpus for the study. The web corpus includes blogs, news portals, and other web pages that use olfactory expressions either in the main text or in the respective comment sections. Two basic smell expressions were found to have the greatest figurative potential and therefore examined in this study. The results of the two basic smell expressions indicate that they are mainly used figuratively with simile being the main focus. Another finding is that olfactory expressions are used for anticipatory purposes.

While insulting opponents is not something alien to politicians and political campaigns, Donald Trump has added a new dimension to it by making it almost a part of his daily routine. Moreover, his insults are often blatant and outright, rather than subtle and disguised, which sets a new tone to political discourse. The goal of this paper is to establish whether his insults are random rants meant to vent his anger and frustration with his critics and political adversaries, or rather a part of a calculated strategy aimed at political gain. The results of the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the corpus, which consists of 915 tweets published by Trump over a four-month period, and which was done within the methodological framework of the speech act theory and, in part, cognitive linguistics, show that Trump’s insults are not based on impulsivity and randomness. The results also suggest that, based on the way the illocutionary effect of insulting is achieved, his insults are realized in three distinct patterns: derogatory nicknaming, conventional and indirect insults. The recurring framing of political opponents by means of derogatory nickname-calling, by far the most common type of insults identified in this study, reveals a higher-level agenda on the addressor’s side. His intention is to methodically discredit the targets of his insults in the eyes of the third party, whose role and reaction in this type of political discourse become even more prominent than that of the insulted party.

Even though not all satire needs to be funny, it is the humorous element that makes it amusing. This paper attempts at explaining the humorous element along with the inner working of satire from a Cognitive Linguistic viewpoint. This paper proposes an integrated Cognitive-Linguistic approach to verbal and visual satire, and the humor ensuing therefrom. By employing Blending Theory and General Theory of Verbal Humor (GTVH), the aim is to structure a comprehensive ready-made model for future satire analysis. The present study analyses satire in the fake news TV format of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show, a highly potent resource of both verbal and visual type of satire and humor. The results of the study elicit three main features of the satirical discourse of the show – ridicule, visual input, and cultural reference. Besides having significance for satire research, the results of the paper also raise questions on the general understanding of language.

Abstract Satire has not been given the humorologists’ attention to an extent that would do justice to the amount of humor satire actually holds. Therefore, the intention of this paper is to shed light on satire as humorous discourse, with an emphasis on counterfactuals. Interestingly enough, counterfactuals oppose the actual state of affairs; rhetorically however, they show potential to reveal the truth. Political satire is an area of conflict between truth and falsehood which is exactly why this type of satire is discussed in this paper. Tools from Cognitive Linguistics – framing and blending – are utilized to show to what extent counterfactuals are actually false and how they essentially contribute to satire. Examples of political satire are selected from Comedy Central’s The Daily Show.