Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2017
-
(2017): The Brown and Levinson theory revisited. A statistical analysis. In: Language Sciences 62, S. 66-75. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2017.03.006
Abstract: The Brown and Levinson (1987) theory posits that the combination of social distance, power ratio, and task imposition determine politeness weightiness perception regardless of the culture. In order to test the effects of culture, I conducted statistical analyses using subjects with American, East Asian, and Latin American cultural backgrounds. The results reveal that task imposition does not have a statistically significant impact on the speaker's determination of politeness weightiness in East Asia while it does in the US and Latin America. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2011
-
(2011): Culture-specific concepts of politeness. Indirectness and politeness in English, Hebrew and Korean requests. In: Intercultural Pragmatics 8 (3). DOI: 10.1515/iprg.2011.018
Abstract: Pragmatic clarity and politeness have been the two major factors in pragmatic competence rules since Grice (1975). Clarity and politeness have been claimed as complementary elements (Lakoff 1973) and politeness as the motivation for indirectness in requests (Searle 1975, 1979; Gordon and Lakoff 1975; Lakoff 1973, 1975, 1977, 1979, 1989, 1990; Leech 1983; Brown and Levinson 1978, 1987). However, highly indirect strategies, e. g., hints, may also be perceived as lacking in politeness because of a lack of concern for pragmatic clarity (Blum-Kulka 1987). In order to compare indirectness and politeness scales in Korean, Hebrew, and English and to re-examine the link between indirectness and politeness cross-culturally, this study uses the theoretical and methodological framework of Blum-Kulka (1987) and Blum-Kulka, House, and Kasper (1989). The study results show that neither non-conventional indirectness nor some strategies of conventional indirectness imply politeness in Korean and imply, in agreement with Yu (2002), that politeness is differently perceived cross-culturally. In particular, the results of the study show that the conventional indirect strategies such as Strong Hints, Mild Hints, and Suggestory Formulae in the nine request categories are not significantly correlated with politeness in Korean and that Performatives (Austin 1962) and Want Statements are perceived as direct but polite strategies in Korean. These results support that the degree and the concepts of politeness in Korean, Hebrew, and English are significantly different.
2010
-
(2010): Is there a need for a maxim of politeness?. In: Journal of Pragmatics 42 (5), S. 1266-1282. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.001
Abstract: In this article two arguments are given in support of a maxim of politeness. The first argument is that assuming a maxim is part of the best explanation of polite behaviour, considering the problems, which Brown and Levinson's theory and Fraser and Nolen's conversational contract theory have, and which a maxim-based theory does not have. The second argument is that the maxim of politeness is part of rational conversation among potentially aggressive parties. This leads to a new Gricean theory of politeness: the maxim of politeness is seen as an additional conversational maxim under the Cooperative Principle in rational conversations among potentially aggressive parties. The content of the maxim is then determined face-theoretically, incorporating some of Brown and Levinson's ideas into the Gricean theory. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2008
-
Bousfield, Derek; Locher, Miriam A. (Hg.) (2008): Impoliteness in language. Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice. Conference "Politeness: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Language and Culture". Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (Language, power and social process)
Abstract: The volume addresses the enormous imbalance that exists between academic interest in politeness phenomena when compared to impoliteness phenomena. Researchers working with Brown and Levinson's ([1978] 1987) seminal work on politeness rarely focused explicitly on impoliteness. As a result, only one aspect of facework/relational work has been studied in detail. Next to this research desideratum, politeness research is on the move again, with alternative conceptions of politeness to those of Brown and Levinson being further developed. In this volume researchers present, discuss and explore the concept of linguistic impoliteness, the crucial differences and interconnectedness between lay understandings of impoliteness and the academic concept within a theory of facework/relational work, as well as the exercise of power that is involved when impoliteness occurs. The authors offer solid discussions of the theoretical issues involved and draw on data from political interaction, interaction with legally constituted authorities, workplace interaction in the factory and the office, code-switching and Internet practices. The collection offers inspiration for research on impoliteness in many different research fields, such as (critical) discourse analysis, conversation analysis, pragmatics and stylistics, as well as linguistic approaches to studies in conflict and conflict resolution.
Keywords: Aufsatzsammlungen, Brown & Levinson, Disziplin, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, (Im)Politeness Research, Impoliteness, Interpersonal Relations, Kongress, Linguistik, Macht, Politeness (Linguistics), Power (Social sciences), Sammelband, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachverhalten, Überblick, Unhöflichkeit, Zweite Welle 2007
-
(2007): Relevance theory and politeness. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 3 (2), S. 269-294. DOI: 10.1515/PR.2007.012
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to open up for debate the question of whether Sperber and Wilson's (1995 [1986]) relevance theory can usefully inform politeness research. It is therefore designed to indicate some of the methodological implications for the study of politeness that would arise from an adoption of a relevance-theoretical framework. I begin by outlining some arguments posited by politeness theorists who have applied relevance theory and then provide a brief account of some of the key differences between the Gricean framework that informs Brown and Levinson (1987 [1978]) theory of politeness and the account of utterance interpretation offered by relevance theory. I conclude by suggesting some of the differences in focus that would result from the analysis of politeness from a relevance-theoretical perspective.
-
(2007): The discursive challenge to politeness research. An interactional alternative. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 3 (2). DOI: 10.1515/PR.2007.013
Abstract: The discursive approach to politeness represents one of the most coherent challenges to the dominance of Brown and Levinson's politeness theory to date, and indeed to the continuing viability of the field of politeness research itself. However, while the discursive approach advocates the displacement of politeness as the focus of research, upon closer examination of the epistemological and ontological assumptions underlying this approach, a number of inconsistencies arise. In particular, the issue of how researchers can identify instances of (im)politeness without imposing the analysts' understandings comes to the fore. In this paper it is suggested that a theory of (im)politeness needs to examine more carefully how (im-) politeness is interactionally achieved through the evaluations of self and other (or their respective groups) that emerge in the sequential unfolding of interaction. This entails the analyst looking for evidence in the interaction that such (im)politeness evaluations have been made by the participants, either through explicit comments made by participants in the course of the interaction (less commonly), or through the reciprocation of concern evident in the adjacent placement of expressions of concern relevant to the norms invoked in that particular interaction (more commonly). In this way, the development of a theory of (im)politeness, within a broader theory of facework or interpersonal communication can remain a focal point for the field of politeness research.
2005
-
(2005): Politeness Theory and Relational Work. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 1 (1), S. 9-33. DOI: 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9
Abstract: In this paper we briefly revisit politeness research influenced by Brown and Levinson's (1987) politeness theory. We argue that this research tradition does not deal with politeness but with the mitigation of face-threatening acts (FTAs) in general. In our understanding, politeness cannot just be equated with FTA-mitigation because politeness is a discursive concept. This means that what is polite (or impolite) should not be predicted by analysts. Instead, researchers should focus on the discursive struggle in which interactants engage. This reduces politeness to a much smaller part of facework than was assumed until the present, and it allows for interpretations that consider behavior to be merely appropriate and neither polite nor impolite. We propose that relational work, the “work” individuals invest in negotiating relationships with others, which includes impolite as well as polite or merely appropriate behavior, is a useful concept to help investigate the discursive struggle over politeness. We demonstrate this in close readings of five examples from naturally occurring interactions.
Keywords: Brown & Levinson, Disziplin, Erwartungen, Favoriten, frames, FTA Face Threatening Acts, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Höflichkeitsforschung der zweiten Welle, (Im)Politeness Research, Lebensstil, Linguistik, Modelle/Theorien, Observablen/Kriterien für sozial angemessenes Verhalten und dessen Bewertung, Politeness Theory and Relational Work, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Status / biologische Marker, Zweite Welle 2001
-
(2001): Self-politeness. A proposal. In: Journal of Pragmatics 33 (1), S. 87-106. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00124-1
Abstract: Research in linguistic politeness in the past two decades has been fruitful but incomplete: it has focused exclusively on other-oriented politeness while no attention has been paid to the fact that speakers' need to save their own face also has a bearing on their linguistic behavior. In this paper, I build a model of self-politeness within the framework of Brown and Levinson's (1987) theory. This model includes a set of superstrategies, each of which has its output strategies. I will also discuss factors that influence speakers' choices of strategies and illustrate these strategies with examples. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
1999
-
(1999): Politeness phenomena in England and Greece. A cross-cultural perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Oxford linguistics)
Abstract: Politeness is crucial to successful communication and is consequently of great interest to those who study language in its social context. This book presents the first application of Brown and Levinson's ground-breaking theoretical work in a full-length comparative case study. Maria Sifianou draws her data from a variety of sources, including literature (particularly drama) questionnaires, and personal observation. She attempts to discover the principles underlying social interaction in both intracultural and intercultural contexts, and discusses the extent to which the concept of politeness is common to different cultures. She argues that politeness is conceptualized differently and thus manifested differently in the two societies under study: Greeks tend to use more 'positive' politeness devices than the English, who prefer more 'negative' devices. Positive politeness is more closely related to friendliness, negative politeness to formality. Dr Sifianou's analysis illustrates and supports the general claim that, despite popular stereotypes, there can be no objective verification for the view that one nation is more polite than another.
1996
-
(1996): Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. In: Journal of Pragmatics 25 (3), S. 349-367. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3
Abstract: Politeness theories have focussed on how communicative strategies are employed to promote or maintain social harmony in interaction. On the other hand, little work has been done on communicative strategies with the opposite orientation, that of attacking one's interlocutor and causing disharmony. In this paper, I consider the notions of inherent and mock impoliteness, and discuss contextual factors associated with impoliteness. In particular, I attempt to build an impoliteness framework which is parallel but opposite to Brown and Levinson's (1987) theory of politeness. Finally, I demonstrate that in some contexts - specifically that of army training and literary drama - impoliteness behaviour is not a marginal activity, and that we need an appropriate descriptive framework in order to account for it.
1994
-
(1994): Beyond politeness theory. ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. In: Journal of Pragmatics 21 (5), S. 451-486. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)90025-6
Abstract: After reviewing Brown and Levinson's face-saving model of politeness in light of Goffman's original discussion of face, and tracing the origin of this concept back to Chinese, the essay analyzes in detail the Chinese concept of face (that is, mianzi and lian), pointing out its interactional differences from Brown and Levinson's negative and positive face. The essay further examines an intrinsic link between face and politeness (limao) in Chinese, and draws upon studies of Japanese interaction and its underlying concept of face. The essay argues that Brown and Levinson's claim to provide a universally valid model of face is empirically inadequate; the dynamics of Chinese face call for an alternative, and more flexible framework. It is therefore suggested that a relative face orientation construct be posited to address cultural variations in notions of face and to identify two competing forces shaping our interactional behaviors: the ideal social identity and the ideal individual autonomy.. The essay finally analyzes two Chinese discourse activities-a pre-dinner invitation and a post-dinner offer-focusing on the complexity of Chinese face, and discussing its persistent, mutually shared, orientation toward an ideal social identity.
1991
-
(1991): Verbal, prosodic, and kinesic emotive contrasts in speech. In: Journal of Pragmatics 15 (6), S. 521-549. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(91)90110-J
Abstract: The signaling of logical relations between, and emotive reactions to, subjects in face-to-face speech are complexly interrelated processes, making it sometimes difficult to fully distinguish what people say from how they say it. Emotive communication, an aspect of the latter (style, rhetoric, speech strategy), may be viewed, following Stankiewicz (1964), as the culturally learned, cognitively mediated use of nonpropositional signals to express feelings, manage impressions, and reach goals in speech. The paper introduces some pragmatically relevant American English verbal, vocal, and kinesic emotive contrasts, e.g., shifts of verbal explicitness, verbal value-ladenness, verbal intensity, vocal emphasis, intonation, gaze, facial expression, body posture and so on, and discusses their functions in speech as signals of (un)assertiveness, (non)affiliation, and (un)involvement. Methodological and theoretical questions raised by the nondiscrete, gradient, ‘more/less’ nature of emotive contrasts are discussed, and some conventional cross-modal emotive strategies in American English are explained. The paper is at once an introduction to basic problems in the study of emotive communication, and an invitation to a synthesis of cognitive and emotive standpoints in pragmatic research on face-to-face speech.
Keywords: Ausdruck von (Nicht-)Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl, Betonung, Blick / Gaze, Brown & Levinson, Disziplin, Emotive Kommunikation, Erste Welle, Favoriten, FTA Face Threatening Acts, Gestik/Mimik, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Höflichkeitsforschung der ersten Welle, (Im)Politeness Research, Klarheit/Eindeutigkeit der Ausdrucksweise, Körperhaltung, Linguistik, Modelle/Theorien, Politeness, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Sprechmelodie/Prosody, Supportive Facework, Übermitteln von Gefühlen/Emotionen, Wortbedeutung 1990
-
(1990): Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. In: Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2), S. 237-257. DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(90)90082-O
Abstract: This paper presents an account of politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. The modern conception of politeness as well as its historical origin are discussed. A critical comparison is made between western notions of face and politeness and their Chinese counterparts. Four politeness maxims are formulated and illustrated. The relation between politeness on the one hand, and language and conversation on the other, is also discussed.
1989
-
(1989): Formal forms and discernment. Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. In: Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 8 (2-3), S. 223-248. DOI: 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223
Abstract: Brown and Levinson (1878, 1987) proposed principles of language usage according to politeness, which they claim to be universal. Their principles are supported by evidence from three languages of different origins. However, the universality of the principles is questionable from the perspective of language and usage which are distinctly relevant to linguistic politeness in Japanese. The neglected linguistic aspect is the choice of 'formal linguistic forms' among varieties with different degrees of formality. The neglected aspect of usage is 'discernment': the speaker's use of polite expressions according to social conventions rather than interactional strategy. This paper claims that a comprehensive framework for universals of linguistic politeness will have to incorporate these aspects outside of their scope. Finally, the justification of the comprehensive framework is discussed in terms of Weber's typology of actions and Habermas' theory of communicative action.
-
(1989): Politeness and conversational universals – observations from Japanese. In: Multilingua - Journal of Cross-Cultural and Interlanguage Communication 8 (2-3), S. 207-222. DOI: 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.207
Abstract: Principles of conversation as postulated by Grice (1975), and the politeness theory proposed by Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) are both presented as universal. Observations of politeness phenomena in Japanese, especially in the use of honorifics, cast such doubt on the explanatory power of these two theories for non- Western languages that it is not clear how, short of major revision, they can be considered as giving an adequate account of conversation and linguistic politeness. In Japanese, for example, social context plays a much larger role than is assumed in their theories. The discrepancy between the theories and practice in Japanese seems to be rooted in the variability across cultures in the expectation of the quantity and type of Information that should be conveyed in linguistic communication and in the variability of the motivations underlying the manifestation of politeness.
1987
-
(1987): The dark side of politeness: a pragmatic analysis of non-cooperative communication. Canterbury: Canterbury UP
Abstract: I examine the Brown and Levinson (1978) model of politeness. On the assumption that a model of face attention must involve impolite as well as polite interactive behaviour, I construct an analogous model to deal with what I term Face Attack Acts. I show that an extension of a politeness model in this way reveals serious flaws in some hypotheses central to Brown and Levinson's work. I apply the principles of Relevance Theory (Sperber and Wilson 1986) to the extended model, and show how the theory can offer an explanatory account of face attention, on a continuum from polite to impolite. Relevance Theory makes predictions about the interpretation of utterances in context, which explain how the face-oriented aspect of interaction is recovered by hearers. I show that Relevance Theory provides a motivated way of linking utterances with facts about power asymmetries and group-membership which are seen to be recoverable by the interpretive process. I apply the resulting face-attention model of utterance interpretation to examples of the use of language to encode power and communicate assumptions about social behaviour and status. In terms of previous accounts of utterance interpretation, particularly Grice's Cooperative Principle and maxims, the account of face attention which incorporates Relevance Theory has greater explanatory power. In practical terms, this application of Relevance Theory is shown to be illuminating in raising the assumptions underlying non-cooperative communication to a conscious level, at which their validity can be sustained.
1985
-
(1985): Politeness Revisited. Cross-Modal Supportive Strategies. In: IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 23 (1-4), S. 281-300. DOI: 10.1515/iral.1985.23.1-4.281
Abstract: Der vorliegende Aufsatz präsentiert einen alternativen Ansatz zur traditionellen, normorientierten linguistischen Analyse von Höflichkeit. Drei emotive Dimensionen des Sprechens werden als wichtige Parameter des Höflichkeitsphänomens erörtert: Selbstsicherheit, positive und negative Emotionen sowie deren Intensität. Bei dyadischer Interaktion werden diese Dimensionen durch aufeinander bezogene verbale, prosodische und kinesische Signale übermittelt. Die wesentliche emotive Aufgabe des Sprechers, der interpersonelles Mißverständnis vermeiden will, ist, nach unserer Meinung, nicht, höflich im traditionellen Sinne zu sein, sondern unterstützend im Hinblick auf die Bedürfnisse des Partners nach persönlicher Autonomie und Anerkennung. Dies geschieht durch die Übermittlung entsprechender multimodaler Signale.
Keywords: Brown & Levinson, Disziplin, Emotionaler Zustand, Erste Welle, Favoriten, FTA Face Threatening Acts, Gestik/Mimik, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Höflichkeitsforschung der ersten Welle, (Im)Politeness Research, Intensität der Emotionen, Linguistik, Modelle/Theorien, Selbstsicherheit, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Sprechmelodie/Prosody, Supportive Facework 1978
-
(1978) : Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena In: Goody, Esther N.: Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction: 1. Aufl.: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, S. 56-289
Abstract: This study is about the principles for constructing polite speech. We describe and account for some remarkable parallelisms in the linguistic construction of utterances with which people express themselves in different languges and cultures. A motive for these parallels is isolated - politeness, broadly defined to include both polite friendliness and polite formality - and a universal model is constructed outlining the abstract principles underlying polite usages. This is based on the detailed study of three unrelated languages and cultures: the Tamil of south India, the Tzeltal spoken by Mayan Indians in Chiapas, Mexico, and the English of the USA and England, supplemented by examples from other cultures. Of general interest is the point that underneaath the apparent diversity of polite behaviour in different societies lie some general pan-human principles of social interaction, and the model of politenss provides a tool for analysing the quality of social relations in any society.
Keywords: Brown & Levinson, Disziplin, Erste Welle, Face-Saving View, Favoriten, FTA Face Threatening Acts, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, (Im)Politeness Research, Kultur, Linguistik, Macht, Modelle/Theorien, Observablen/Kriterien für sozial angemessenes Verhalten und dessen Bewertung, Situationsbedingter Kontext, Soziale Angemessenheit, Soziale Distanz, Sozialer Raum / Kultureller Kontext, Sprachgebrauch, Status / biologische Marker
- <<
- <
- 1