Irony and sur-enunciation Abstract: This paper revisits the notion of irony by explaining the nature of the double enunciative game with respect to the notions of commitment ("prise en charge" of a propositional content) and enunciative posture that interfere in the co-construction of conflicting points of view (POV). The paper explores the hypothesis according to which the ironic POV is, at first, subject to a feigned (often overplayed) "prise en charge" of an explicit POV (POV1), before the enunciator suggests his real POV (POV2), a more relevant POV than POV1 ─ formulation which is more accurate than the one limiting irony to antiphrasis. The ironist distances himself from his target in virtue of a feeling of superiority that justifies criticism or even more or less aggressive mockery, thus exonerating himself of the criticism. This is why the ironist's posture is a posture of over-enunciation. He pretends to think X (=POV1), but the unusual "mise-en-scène" of his formulation invites us to actually interpret X in the contrary or opposite way, meaning X' (=POV2), all this so that he can mock better those who claim X. The article draws up a state-of-the-art [1], presents a radical enunciative theoretical framework [2] and highlights the conflicting POV dynamics of the irony [3]. Then, it exposes the link between irony and the posture of sur-enunciation [4] and sets up, in the conclusion, some milestones for the articulation of irony and sur-enunciation, and humor and sub-enunciation, in respect to the notion of separation from the others than oneself ("les autres que soi") and from one's other selves ("les autres de soi") [5].
