JCERJournal of Contemporary Educational Research2208-84662208-8474Bio-Byword Scientific Publishing Pty. Ltd.10.26689/jcer.v10i5.15092ArticleSynergistic Construction of Expectational Stance and Multimodal Evaluative Meaning: A Linguistics Case Study of the Opus Pon tu pensamiento en míhttps://artdesignp.com/journal/JCER/10/5/10.26689/jcer.v10i5.15092DangBin20261052026-06-12In both everyday talk and artistic storytelling, speakers rarely put their attitudes or evaluations into words in any direct way. Bringing together ideas from expectancy expectation-basedsociopragmatics, and evaluative meaning research, the study builds a three-part model: Expectation Monitoring, then Cross-Modal Signal Coordination, and finally Stance Emergence. What emerges is that irony, a classic case of an expectational stance strategy, does subtle interpersonal work in the film. Rather than fraying social bonds, it tightens closeness, protects face, and stirs empathy. It acts as a bonding agent instead of a disruptor. The paper also draws attention to the multimodal evaluative meaning set out by Bin Dang [1]. In that view, evaluative meaning is not a fixed property parked in one channel but forms piece by piece in time, through cross-channel evaluative tension and synergy. This insight turns out to be important for grasping how stance actually materializes in multimodal settings. Fresh experimental work backs up this cross-modal predictive framework: gestural discourse markers can raise discourse-level expectations even without words [2], and iconic co-speech gestures are actively recruited to predict what is coming next, a pattern confirmed by both behavioral and electrophysiological measures [3]. Meanwhile, computational studies show that expectancy violation itself, treated as a “surprise” signal, works as an efficient device for steering communication, matching the performance of more complex Theory of Mind approaches without demanding heavy mentalizing [4].

Dang B, 2026, Constructing Evaluative Meaning Across Modes: A Case Study of Pon tu pensamiento en mí. Advances in Humanities Research, 13(4): 45–63.

Scholman M, Laparle S, 2025, Can Gestures Speak Louder Than Words? The Effect of Gestural Discourse Markers on Discourse Expectations. Discourse Processes, 62(6–7): 457–478.

ter Bekke M, Drijvers L, Holler J, 2025, Co-Speech Hand Gestures Are Used to Predict Upcoming Meaning. Psychological Science, 36(4): 237–248.

Klomberg B, Schakel M, Spronck M, 2025, Expectation Violations as an Effective Alternative to Complex Mentalizing in Novel Communication. iScience, 28(7): 112795.

Grice HP, 1975, Logic and Conversation. In Cole P, Morgan JL, (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York, 41–58.

Floyd S, Jouravlev O, Poliak M, et al., 2025, Three Distinct Components of Pragmatic Language Use: Social Conventions, Intonation, and World Knowledge-Based Causal Reasoning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(50): e2424400122.

Rohde H, Kehler A, 2014, Anticipatory Looks Reveal Expectations About Discourse Relations. Cognition, 133(3): 667–691.

Sotto A, (Director), 1995, Pon tu pensamiento en mí [Film], Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematográficos (ICAIC) / Tabasco Films S.A.

Prieto P, Esteve-Gibert N, Shattuck-Hufnagel S, 2025, Towards a Novel Conceptualization of Prosody that Accounts for Spoken and Visual Signals. Gesture, 2025.

Zellers M, 2026, Multimodal Cues to Anticipation in Conversation, Research seminar, Stockholm University.

Haugh M, Kádár DZ, Terkourafi M, 2021, Gesture and Prosody in Multimodal Communication. In Haugh M, Kádár DZ, Terkourafi M, (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 400–425.

Attardo S, Eisterhold J, Hay J, et al., 2003, Multimodal Markers of Irony and Sarcasm. International Journal of Humor Research, 16: 243–260.

Smith CA, 2022, The Multimodal Realisations of the Trope of Verbal Irony through the Lens of the Pragmeme of Insolence: A Study of Four Scenes from Buffy the Vampire Slayer S05. Paper presented at Multimodal Tropes in Contemporary Discourse, Université Lyon 3 Jean Moulin.

Yana E, Elena K, 2023, Gestures vs. Prosodic Structure in Laboratory Ironic Speech. In Speech and Computer, Springer, 112–125.

Dews S, Kaplan J, Winner E, 1995, Why Not Say It Directly? The Social Functions of Irony. Discourse Processes, 19(3): 347–367.

Jorgensen J, 1996, The Functions of Sarcastic Irony in Speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(5): 613–634.

Lee J, 2020, Practising Irony as a Speaker’s Discourse Strategy for Increasing Social Intimacy, and Relevance. Journal of English Language and Literature, 66(4): 103–124.

Nikabadze M, 2024, The Socio-Pragmatic Function of Irony on Social Media: Using Examples from Johan Deckman’s Art Pictures on Instagram. Proceedings of Tbilisi State University, 9: 13–22.

Mękarska K, Witek M, 2022, Irony as a Speech Action. Journal of Pragmatics, 190: 76–90.

Yue S, Song S, Cheng X, et al., 2024, Do Large Language Models Understand Conversational Implicature? A Case Study with a Chinese Sitcom. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2404.19509.

Dang, B. (2026). Expectation resonance in affirmative irony: A multimodal analysis of verbal humor in Cecilia. Scientific and Social Research, 8(2), 45– 62. https://ojs.bbwpublisher.com/index.php/ssr/article/view/14918/13052

Dang, B. (2026). Joyful wit on screen: Uncovering playful humour in Cecilia for Spanish heritage language learning. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 10(1), 22–38. https://ojs.bbwpublisher.com/index.php/JCER/article/view/14755