Irony – category subjective, sometimes difficultly perceptible, “this such living and complex phenomenon, which cannot be driven in to the rigid diagram” Pivoev of 2000: 5. General lexical definitions of irony as aesthetical category – “concealed mockery”, “rhetorical trope”, “figure of speech” (witty language used to convey insults of scorn, of a trope) – do not give basis for its description in the texts of the different authors. A question about irony as lingual phenomenon is the object of experiment in the work of many linguists; in this case irony is considered either as paths, that is consisted in the contradiction between the literal and concealed sense or as the conceptual category, connected with the structure of entire artistic text and which makes possible for the author to implicitly transmit its relation to that depicted (S.I. Pokhodnya, E.M. Kaganovskaya, A.V. Sergienko and other). The special features of tekstoobrazuyushchey irony as the stylistics of decoding are described in the work of many foreign scientists. Thus, L. Perrayn notes that the word “irony” has values, which fall far outside the limits of the concept of the figures of speech, F. Bolen and P. Pavi reveal irony within the framework of the integral dramatic work and so forth Bolen 1973; Perrine 1993; Pavi of 1991. The variety of tekstoobrazuyushchey irony is inherent in even more antique theater so-called tragic irony (“irony of fate”), theoretically realized only in the new time: hero it is confident in itself and it does not know (in contrast to the spectator), that by their behavior they prepare its own loss. In the dictionary of English is fixed the concept “dramatic irony”: (theatre) irony that occurs when the meaning of the situation is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play. The large number of works is devoted to the study of the essence of irony as the varieties of comic. From studies of the last years it is possible to indicate the thesis T.F. Limarevoy, in which was examined irony and related to it mentalities as integral-concrete formation in his semantic and logic-axiological definition, boundaries and intercommunication between irony and satire, irony and joke, irony and sarcasm were established, was given the classification of ironic statements in English and Russian Limareva of 1997. The complex description of conceptual-lingual and functional ontology of irony as one of the modi of comic within the framework of existence person, and also typology of vocal strategies, which follows that speaking with the expression of ironic relation to the reality, is represented in a study “lingual portrait of the phenomenon of irony” Palkevich of 2001. Irony as the component of A.P. Chekhov’s idiostyle are dedicated work Yu. V. Kamenskoy. It is possible to isolate two large varieties of irony: irony as stylistic method (ironic mockery) and irony as the effect, produced to the reader (or spectator, since this type of irony frequently it is encountered in the dramatic works). This understanding of irony is represented in the work of S.I. Pokhodni Pokhodnya of 1989, where it is noted that irony as effect is characteristic precisely for the dramaturgical texts. On the scene contrast meanwhile that knows the spectator, and thereby, as thinks hero, it is represented most vividly. Should be again emphasized a difference between the irony-method and irony-effect: the traditional understanding of irony as method assumes the presence of certain mockery, while the irony-effect of this mockery in the majority of the cases it is deprived. S.I. Pokhodnya makes the attempt to demarcate these two types of irony: “Approach to irony as to the method of world view brought literary critics, and linguists to the need for the differentiation of two concepts: irony as means, technology, stylistic method and irony as result – ironic sense, created with a number of the raznourovnevykh means of language” Pokhodnya of 1989: 16. There are abroad sufficiently many works, dedicated to precisely tekstoobrazuyushchey irony. In the known and many times the published work of L. Perrayn “sound and sense” Perrine 1993, are said that the word “irony” has values, which fall far outside the limits of the concept of the figures of speech. Use in the statement of the word, opposite to the sense of statement, is the simplest form of vocal irony. Therefore vocal irony frequently is mixed up with the sarcasm and satire. Sarcasm is originally calculated for that in order to affect feelings, to cause pain. Not without reason name “sarcasm” derives from the Creek word, which indicates “to tear up flesh”. Term “satire” is more applicable to the written language, but not to the oral and the high aspirations usually are implied: the mockery of human stupidities and deficiencies for the purpose to alter man or, at least, to fence him from such defects. However, irony can serve for purposes of sarcasm or mockery, but it can and not serve. They confuse irony with the satire and sarcasm, because irony is frequently the tool of satire and sarcasm. But irony can be used not for purposes of mockery, but sarcasm and satire can exist, also, without irony. Although vocal irony always indicates the value, opposite to statement, it has many gradations, the only simplest forms of vocal irony having a value the completely opposite to statement. The more complex forms of irony can have simultaneously and opposite value, and the most usual value, the literal sense of statement, this co-existence can be manifested and be expressed differently. Further L. Perrayn notes that, as all vocal figures, irony can be incorrectly understood, the consequences of this incomprehension can be very serious. If irony is not understood or understood incorrectly, then this takes away the reader to completely different idea, and not to that, which wanted to transmit the author. For example, in the conversation we call man scoundrel, and this can have the most ruinous consequences. However, if we, for example, wink at the moment of this ironic expression, then irony will be understood correctly. Therefore it is important to use irony with the large skill, and the reader, in turn, must be always ready to perceive the most insignificant signs of irony. It is interesting that independently of that, to what extent is intelligible, obvious irony, always will be located people, which this irony will not understand. Irony causes admiration and it is most effective, when it thin, almost elusive. Irony establishes the special connection between the author and reader. If irony is too obvious, it can seem simply rough. With the effective use of irony to the primary meaning are added additional. Thus, we again are convinced of a difference between the irony-method and irony-effect, irony of explicit and hidden. Work F. Bolen “irony and self-knowledge in the creation of tragedy” Bolen 1973 is dedicated exactly to that type of irony, which is represented on the theatrical scene. In the present tragedy, in the opinion of the author, the person, who arrived at “the recognition” of situation, suffers, because everything could be formed better, but opportunities were lost through its own fault. The moment of recognition is the culmination of the play, when man converts from the state “of ignorance” to the state of tragic self-knowledge. Tragic irony increases during the play, and at the moment of culmination hero suffers no longer from the illusions, but from reality, i.e. occurs recognition. The sign of tragic hero – his limited knowledge, while the sign of tragic irony – contrast between “the ignorance” of hero and fact that the public knows. In the greatest tragedies the recognition itself, through which pass the heroes, suddenly changes entire value and all consequences of the actions, perfected by heroes, changes the sense pronounced words of the pronounced by them. Heroes occur at the place of the spectators and see that the fact that the spectators, already saw, then that it was earlier hidden after the shroud of irony and its own ignorance. But if tragic hero cannot understand irony of his overthrow, then there will not be tragedies in the contemporary understanding of this word. To the culmination moment of recognition irony is based on the ignorance of hero, on the truth, which to it to the specific moment is inaccessible. At the moment of self-knowledge the hero begins to understand this irony. Ignorance of hero, which creates the most tragic form of irony, ignorance of entire truth about itself. Tragic effect at this moment appears. Irony becomes the main element of tragedy, since it accompanies its victim in the world of illusions. Recognition and complete transformation of the situation, in which proved to be the victim, is the complete contrast of irony, which hides truth. This contrast meanwhile which seemed by reality, and thereby how reality it is in reality, and is created tragic effect.