本論文試圖設計一套讀者如何理解（強納生•史威夫特的）《一個謙遜提議》為諷刺文的認知過程。此認知過程包含兩個步驟：（A）推論出作者是諷刺的，（B）推論出作者意圖諷刺某真人。本論文分三部分來處理（A）與（B）。 第一部分（第2至5章）處理（A），而（A）又可細分為：（a）判斷《謙遜提議》似乎為錯，（b）推論出作者意圖它為錯，（c）推論出作者意圖讀者發現它為錯。然而，（a）阻礙了（b）與接下來的（c），因為《謙遜提議》在讀者眼中是似乎為錯，而非應該為錯。因此，讀者有困難去最終詮釋《謙遜提議》為一諷刺文。然而，當讀者閱畢《謙遜提議》後若能感到極度被娛樂（feels extremely amused），他將比較容易有（b）與（c）的反應，因為他會推論出作者在開玩笑。 第二部分（第6至7章）試圖設計一個娛樂（amusement）的認知理論與一個幽默（humor）的認知理論。我定義「娛樂」為一種情緒，成因是一個人在認知上評價「幽默」為愉悅的。而我定義「幽默」基本上是對失諧（incongruity）的反應。幽默可以是：（1）知覺到失諧；（2）知覺到失諧，並解困之；或（3）知覺到失諧，並求甚解地解困之。 第三部分（第8章）則處理由（A）到（B）的認知過程。讀者於此階段理解到《謙遜提議》裡的虛構第一人稱是一個隱喻，隱喻對象為某個針對愛爾蘭問題提出殘暴荒謬解決辦法的真實權貴。 終其此論文，我試圖拆解作者的《謙遜提議》（為一諷刺文），並藉由讀者的各種可能詮釋（《謙遜提議》是一個好計畫、偽善謊言等等）來重組之。有時，作者已死，而其身分不可辨認。於論文結論，我將運用此（對《謙遜提議》的）詮釋不穩定性，來解釋針對2004年台灣319（槍擊）案反應的意見分歧。 / This thesis aims to design a cognitive process of how the reader comprehends Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” as a satire. This cognitive process includes two steps: (A) to infer that the author is satirical, (B) to infer that the author intends to satirize some real person. This thesis is cut into three parts to tackle (A) and (B). The first part (Chapters 2-5) is on (A), and (A) is subdivided into: (a) to judge that AMP1 seems to be false, (b) to infer that the author intends it to be false, (c) to infer that the author intends the reader to find it false. However, (a) impedes (b) and the sequential (c), because AMP is seemingly false, not normatively false, in the eyes of the reader. The reader thus has the difficulty to eventually interpret AMP as a satire. However, when the reader feels extremely amused after reading AMP, he will more easily fulfill (b) and (c), because he will infer that the author is joking. The second part (Chapters 6-7) aims to design a cognitive theory of amusement and that of humor. I define amusement as an emotion, caused by the cognitive appraisal of the humor as pleasant. And I define humor as basically a reaction to incongruity. Humor can be: (1) the perception of incongruity, (2) the perception of incongruity and its resolution, or (3) the perception of incongruity and its resolution with comprehension. The third part (Chapter 8) is on the cognitive process from (A) to (B). The reader in this stage comprehends that the fictional speaker in AMP is a metaphor of some bigwig in reality who proposes an outrageous solution to the Irish problems. Throughout this thesis, I try to demolish the author’s AMP (that it is a satire) and restructure it with the reader’s interpretations (that AMP is a good plan, a hypocritical lie, etc.). Sometimes, the author is dead and his identity is unrecognizable. At the end, I will apply this interpretative instability (to AMP) to the dissension over the Taiwan 319 (gunshot) incident in 2004. ------------ 1 Herein Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” will be referred to as AMP.