Alle Publikationen
2017
-
(2017): Perception of (im)politeness and the underlying cultural conceptualisations. In: Pragmatics and Society 8 (2). DOI: 10.1075/ps.8.2.04sha
Abstract: The present study sets out to investigate the role of 'culture' as one of the many important factors that influence the evaluation of (im)politeness in Persian from a Cultural Linguistics perspective. The paper argues that Cultural Linguistics, and in particular the notion of cultural schema, has the potential to offer a robust analytical framework for the exploration of (im)polite use of language. We elaborate on this proposal by presenting examples of data from Persian in which speakers interpret impolite behaviour in light of a number of Persian cultural schemas. The study also offers a novel three-layered approach for the analysis of (im)politeness data that combines metadiscourse analysis with the ethnography of cultural conceptualisations, while highlighting the importance of the notion of 'heterogeneous distribution' of cultural conceptualisations, a pivotal theoretical concept in Cultural Linguistics which accounts for the variations in speakers' evaluation of (im)politeness.
2015
-
(2015): The landscape of impoliteness research. In: Journal of Politeness Research 11 (2), S. 329-354. DOI: 10.1515/pr-2015-0013
Abstract: This article attempts to give a state-of-the-art picture of impoliteness studies and to indicate a few prospective research directions to enrich them. It critically surveys a number of theoretical and methodological problems (impoliteness vs. rudeness; intention; sanctioned face-threat; and impoliteness strategies), as well as the paramount topics of investigation (such as disagreement; arguments; insults, taboo words; or sarcasm), and discourse domains in which impoliteness can be found. Importantly, this paper brings to focus a selection of notions central to impoliteness, albeit not yet widely recognized in the scholarship on impoliteness. These include: slurs; pejoratives; and a number of phenomena promoted by computer mediated communication (e.g., flaming or trolling).
-
(2015): Interpersonal pragmatics and its link to (im)politeness research. In: Journal of Pragmatics 86, S. 5-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.010
Abstract: In light of the fact that politeness research has been on the map since the 1970s, this paper revisits some of the more recent developments. The scope of analysis has been widened from face-maintaining and face-enhancing data to instances of conflictual and face-aggravating behaviour. There is an increase in discussions about appropriate methodological and theoretical approaches to politeness, and we see a tendency to creatively draw on approaches from other fields (such as identity construction research). These trends have made the field an especially vibrant one that is currently witnessing a struggle to (re)define its focus. Two connected issues (clarifying and refining the scope of our research questions and efforts of developing an interdisciplinary approach within interpersonal pragmatics) are particularly discussed in an endeavour to outline potential research paths. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
-
(2015): Verecundia, risa y decoro. Cicerón y el arte de insultar. In: Isegoría (53), S. 445-473. DOI: 10.3989/isegoria.2015.053.01
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/isegoria.2015.053.01 Abstract: Sobre la risa puede hablarse de muchas maneras; cabe, por ejemplo, una aproximación fisiológica, otra psicológica o una tercera sociológica, que los antiguos no desatendieron por completo, si bien Cicerón prefirió investigar sus posibilidades retóricas. A nadie se le oculta la relevancia de chanzas y chistes para disponer a la audiencia de manera favorable o para ridiculizar al adversario; tampoco que esta estrategia, a despecho de su efectividad y por la misma, puede sobrepasar los límites de lo aceptable o de lo provechoso. Cuestión tanto más grave cuanto que el orador puede y debe reírse de asuntos que, considerados en sí mismos, carecen de gracia. La retórica ciceroniana de la risa plantea y desemboca en una ética y una táctica del humor atenta al estudio y posible codificación de los principios rectores de tan poderoso recurso, que debe utilizarse de manera conveniente, adecuada y decorosa (pues de todas estas formas puede traducirse la palabra griega prépon y la latina decorum), lo cual presupone que no siempre es así y, por lo que interesa en estas páginas, que hay risas indebidas, próximas al vituperio, que pueden acarrear dificultades a quien las provoca, pues siempre es peligroso reírse de los poderosos. Cicerón, sin duda, era un individuo que insultaba mucho, con ingenio, gracia y en ocasiones con extraordinaria agresividad.~~~
-
(2015): Agency, accountability and evaluations of impoliteness. In: Journal of Politeness Research 11 (2), S. 207-238. DOI: 10.1515/pr-2015-0009
Abstract: It is now well recognized that the recipients' evaluations need to be given serious consideration when theorizing impoliteness. Yet despite the importance placed on evaluations by recipients, the role of the recipient in interaction has been reduced through theorizing within the field to the ascribing of (perceived) intentions or interpreting of (perceived) social norms and expectations. We suggest, in this paper, that this under-theorizes the role of the recipient vis-a-vis evaluations of impoliteness. Building on an account of (im)politeness as social practice (Haugh 2013b, 2015; Kadar and Haugh 2013), we argue that evaluations of impoliteness inevitably involve those recipients construing the speaker's action as a particular kind of social action, and holding them accountable for that particular kind of social action with respect to particular dimension(s) of the moral order (Haugh 2013a, 2015). The accountability of social action is underpinned, in part, by the presumed agency of participants. Agency involves the socially mediated capacity to act that is afforded through 1. knowing one has the ability to act, 2. knowing that these actions may affect others (and self), and 3. knowing that one will thus be held accountable for those actions (Ahearn 2001; Duranti 2004; Mitchell forthcoming). We argue that a focus on agency in theorizing impoliteness allows for the ways in which recipients do not just simply invoke social norms or (in some cases at least) perceived speaker intentions in evaluating talk or conduct as impolite, but may also exercise their own agency in construing the speaker's actions as a particular kind of action, and thus as offensive or not. It is concluded that the agency exercised by recipients with respect to the degree to which they hold speakers accountable for impolite or offensive stances needs to be examined more carefully in theorizing about (im) politeness more generally.
2013
-
(2013): Does It Matter Where You Read the News Story?. Interaction of Incivility and News Frames in the Political Blogosphere. In: Communication Research 41 (6), S. 809-827. DOI: 10.1177/0093650212449353
Abstract: The political blogosphere is replete with uncivil discussions and is apt to examine the influence of incivility on news frames. The present study brings in literature from incivility and framing effects and uses two experiments to examine the influence of incivility on news frames for democratic outcomes such as willingness to participate, online participation, openmindedness, and attitude certainty. Primary findings indicate the detrimental effects of incivility causing less openmindedness and more attitude certainty. At the same time, incivility causes more willingness to participate and online participation. More importantly, the findings demonstrate how incivility interacts with news frames. Implications for news framing effects in the social media landscape are discussed.
Keywords: doppelter Treffer, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Impoliteness, Informations- & Kommunikationstechnik, Intellektualtechnik, Kogn. Architektur, Literatur/Zeitschriften/Medien, Mensch-Technik-Relationen (MTR), news, News framing, news-frame, Realtechnik, Situationsbedingter Kontext, social media, Soziale Angemessenheit, soziale Medien, Sprachgebrauch, Technik, Verwendung von grober Sprache/incivility -
(2013): Introduction. Face, identity and im/politeness. Looking backward, moving forward: From Goffman to practice theory. In: Journal of Politeness Research 9 (1), S. 1-33. DOI: 10.1515/pr-2013-0001
Abstract: The field of linguistic politeness has of late experienced a renewed interest in conceptualizations of one of its core concepts, face. Since the publication of Brown and Levinson’s formative paper in 1978 and the subsequent application of its tenets, politeness scholars, mainly Asian and non-Anglo, have raised concerns regarding the suitability of Brown and Levinson’s conceptualization of face to their respective cultures (Wierzbicka 1985; Matsumoto 1988; Ide 1989; Gu 1990; Nwoye 1992; Mao 1994). Different options were put forth to solve what was seen by many as a fundamental flaw of the model, from culture-specific reconceptualizations (Sifianou 1992; Strecker 1993; Bravo 1999) to elaborations (O’Driscoll 1996; Terkourafi 2008) or simplifications (Bousfield 2008). Some (Bargiela-Chiappini 2003; Locher and Watts 2005), have argued for a return to the Goffmanian essence of face. Yet, others, Arundale (2006, 2009, 2010), have posited new approaches to face inspired by more current models of communication based on the dyad and on social constructionist premises or have come up with discursive accounts of face (O’Driscoll 2011, Sifianou 2011). Furthermore, there seems to be a consensus that to come to grips with an understanding of face, it has to be studied on its own right, aside from politeness (Bargiela Chiappini and Haugh 2009; Haugh and Bargiela-Chiappini 2010). This renewed interest in face has coincided with the advent, albeit with some delay, of the discursive turn within politeness scholarship. The discursive turn refers to the strong trend that emerged toward the end of the 20th century to reconfigure the subject as something socio-cultural and socio-historical: an unfinished product of discourse (Benwell and Stokoe 2006). Its impact on im/politeness scholarship has been manifold. Among the many effects, it has had important repercussions for the relationship between face and identity, the focus of this special issue.
-
(2013): Small stories and identities analysis as a framework for the study of im/politeness-in-interaction. In: Journal of Politeness Research 9 (1), S. 55-74. DOI: 10.1515/pr-2013-0003
Abstract: Although (socio)linguistic studies of im/politeness and identities present many parallels in their disciplinary trajectories, not least the shift toward interactional approaches, there is still scope and need for bringing the two traditions together and fruitfully exploring their intersections in method and analysis. In this paper, I put forth a proposal for studying im/politeness-in-interaction on the basis of small stories as a framework for narrative and identity analysis. My analysis shows how focusing on the stories' ways of telling, sites, and tellers and drawing on the concept of positioning sheds light on the tellers' management of particular im/politeness norms in the uses of and behavior in new media sites. I show how im/politeness and identities construction are interwoven in such cases.
2012
-
(2012): Appropriate behaviour across varieties of English. In: Journal of Pragmatics 44 (9), S. 1022-1037. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.015 Abstract: Corpus evidence is presented which suggests that from a first-order perspective ‘appropriateness’ and ‘inappropriateness’ are more salient notions than ‘politeness’ and ‘impoliteness’ or ‘rudeness’. It is then argued that norms of appropriate verbal behaviour in a community can be established empirically by employing experimental methods. Production questionnaire data may not reflect what participants would actually say in real life, but reveal what guides their expectations, perception and performance in a given social situation. It is shown that small talk between strangers at a party is governed by diverging norms in different national varieties of English, viz. American English, Irish English and English English. It is further shown that gender and age differences exist within a national variety and that norms of appropriate verbal behaviour seem to be subject to age-grading.
Keywords: Alter, Approriateness, Disziplin, English English, Experimental data, Gender, Gender and age variation, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Im/politeness, Impoliteness, Inappropriateness, Irish English and American English, Kultur, Kulturdifferenz, Kulturelle Normen, kulturrelativ, kulturspezifisch, Kulturspezifizität, Kulturtheorie, Linguistik, Politeness, Small talk, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Unangemessenheit, Unhöflichkeit, Variational pragmatics -
(2012): “It's rude to VP”. The cultural semantics of rudeness. In: Journal of Pragmatics 44 (9), S. 1051-1062. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.002
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.002 Abstract: Over recent years, linguists have given an increasing amount of attention to impoliteness studies (Bousfield, 2008; Culpeper et al., 2003; Kienpointner, 1997; Meier, 1995a,b; Mills, 2009). Oddly however, little attention has yet been paid to the semantics of the English word rude. Lacking precise translation equivalents in many languages, rude is a keyword revealing much about socially accepted ways of behaving in Anglo society (Wierzbicka, 1997; cf. Fox, 2004). In Australian English, as in English generally, it is the primary ethno-descriptor in the domain of “impoliteness”. This paper provides a detailed lexical semantic analysis of rude in the productive formula It's rude to VP, and also in the fixed expression rude word. The semantic explications are framed in the simple universal primes of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) (Goddard and Wierzbicka, 2002; Peeters, 2006; Wierzbicka, 1996). The argumentation is supported by data on Australian English collected from Google searches.
2011
-
(2011): Understanding Historical (Im)Politeness. In: Journal of Historical Pragmatics 12 (1-2), S. 255-282. DOI: 10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.11bax
Abstract: This paper is intended as an overall template of the evolution of (im)politeness. It elucidates how (linguistic) rapport management originated and developed over time, and tries to come to grips with (some of) the sociocultural factors behind such changes. Taking its point of departure in human prehistory (Section 1), the paper argues that, contrary to received wisdom, politeness and impoliteness are not two sides of the same coin (Section 2), and it discusses the dissimilar evolutionary antecedents of politeness and impoliteness (Sections 3 and 4). The paper then maps out three broad-scale diachronic trends regarding the conveyance of interpersonal distance, ipso facto the marking out of socio-proxemic interactional space; namely, (a) from performative to verbal, (b) from self-display to other-concern and (c) from collectivity-oriented to individual-oriented (Section 5).
Keywords: collectivity-oriented vs. individual-oriented politeness, Disziplin, Favoriten, Genese, Geschichte, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, (Im)Politeness Research, Impoliteness, Linguistik, performative vs. verbal politeness, Politeness and impoliteness as fundamentally diferrent principles, Politeness as expression of concern, Proxemik, socio-proxemic, Soziale Angemessenheit, Überblick -
(2011): From Politeness1 to Politeness2. Tracking norms of im/politeness across time and space. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 7 (2). DOI: 10.1515/jplr.2011.009
Abstract: Increasing attention to the distinction between first- and second-order im/politeness has led to considerable soul-searching among theorists regarding which of the two should form the basis of a theory of im/politeness. In this article, I take an alternative path: I build on norms of Politeness1, as attested in influential texts laying out Politeness1 norms in different parts of the world from antiquity to this day, to extract from them the core elements of a theory of Politeness2. By affording us with some glimpses into the diachronic intertwining of Politeness1 and Politeness2, this analysis helps explain why it has been so difficult to keep these two notions apart in previous research. At the same time, it suggests some possible ways forward. Specifically, this survey reveals two overarching themes regarding the role of politeness (and, by implication, impoliteness) in these cultures. The first concerns the social regulatory role of Politeness1 norms, while the second concerns the relationship of Politeness1 norms with an underlying morality. I propose that these two elements should be placed at the heart of an empirically grounded theory of Politeness2.
-
(2011): Understanding Historical (Im)Politeness. In: Journal of Historical Pragmatics 12 (1-2), S. 104-132. DOI: 10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.05wat
Abstract: The central argument of this paper is that "politeness", when looked at not as a theoretical term but as a lexeme in the English language, has a relatively unstable set of cognitive concepts for which it prompts when used. The first-order notion of "politeness" developed by Watts, Ide and Ehlich (1992a), Watts (2003, 2005) and Locher (2004) entails the need for a very different form of theorisation from the rationalist/objectivist approach presented in Brown and Levinson (119781 1987). The only way to develop such a new "theory" of first-order "politeness" is to take positively and negatively evaluated linguistic expressions referring to the general area of "politeness" (polite, polished, refined, well-mannered, standoffish, etc.) to prompt for the socio-cognitive construction of a range of meanings that do not always correspond to one another or even overlap, i.e. to develop a socio-cognitive constructionist approach to emergent social practice. In terms of looking at "politeness" from a historical point of view, it is obviously difficult if not impossible to reconstruct the forms of emergent social practice, but English writings during the early eighteenth century are replete with references to terms such as polite, polished, affected, politeness, etc. The close study of how such terms are used reveals that what was understood by them was very different from what politeness researchers of today understand by "politeness", and such differences can only be accounted for by positing a relativist model that can account for variability and change.
2010
-
(2010): “You Have No Idea What You are Talking About!. ” From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 6 (1). DOI: 10.1515/jplr.2010.004
Abstract: This paper reports on an ongoing project in the area of intentional impoliteness as perceived by the participants and as marked in discourse in the asynchronous Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) context. We focus on occurrences of “impolite talk” and examine the context bound nature of communicative strategies adopted by the interactants in order to deliberately do impoliteness. We also analyze how impoliteness is lexicalized in relation to the inherent characteristics of the CMC context. Specifically, this paper draws on a sample of data from two Communities of Practice (CofP): Greek students and professional academics. 200 posts were collected from interactions where dispute occurred. Special attention is paid to the use of spelling and punctuation and one interactional discourse particle, namely [re] (untranslatable), in unmitigated confrontational disagreement that breaches the norms of unmarked behaviour in the two CofPs. Our preliminary findings show that (im)politeness is firmly embedded in the micro (discourse) and macro (social) context. The impoliteness strategies employed by the interactants indicate different judgements of what constitutes marked behaviour and are contingent on factors such as the overall purpose of communication, the co-constructed norms of the forum, the relationship between participants and the dynamic group identities which the interactants call upon in any given situation.
Keywords: Art des Kommunikationsmediums, breach of social interaction, computervermittelte Kommunikation, Disziplin, doppelter Treffer, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Impolite Talk, Impoliteness, Informations- & Kommunikationstechnik, Linguistik, Mediationstheorie, Mensch-Technik-Relationen (MTR), online-communities, online-Foren, Online-Kommunikation, Philosophie, Politeness, Realtechnik, Situationsbedingter Kontext, social media, Soziale Angemessenheit, Sprachgebrauch, Technik, Technikbezug, Technikphilosophie -
(2010): Conventionalised impoliteness formulae. In: Journal of Pragmatics 42 (12), S. 3232-3245. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.007
Abstract: This paper makes a contribution to the study of impoliteness. More particularly, it explores conventionalised impoliteness formulae and their basis. It taps into debates about whether impoliteness (or politeness, for that matter) can be inherent in expressions, and argues that there is a sense in which it can. An important foundation for this paper is Terkourafi's (e.g. 2001, 2002) work on formulaic politeness expressions. However, it argues that Terkourafi's strong focus on the frequency of people's direct experience of linguistic expressions in specific contexts, whilst appropriate for politeness, does not entirely suit an account of conventionalised impoliteness formulae. Indirect experience of impoliteness, especially via metadiscourse, does much to shape what counts as impolite and thus what may be conventionalised as impolite. Such impoliteness metadiscourse is driven not only by the salience of impoliteness, but by the social dynamics of impoliteness itself. Finally, this paper proposes two methods for identifying conventionalised impoliteness formulae (one being akin to Terkourafi's method), and offers a preliminary list of such formulae in English. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
-
(2010): Introduction. The status-quo and quo vadis of impoliteness research. In: Intercultural Pragmatics 7 (4), S. 535-559. DOI: 10.1515/iprg.2010.025
Abstract: The collection of papers included in this special issue seeks to contribute to the burgeoning field of impoliteness research, and to do so in a fashion that helps avoid replicating some of the common problems experienced traditionally by politeness scholars, namely, paucity of models, lack of interdisciplinary inquisitiveness and Anglo-centeredness. It also responds to the call for impoliteness to be theorized in its own right, not merely as the reverse of politeness, but also in relationship with politeness (cf. Xie et al 2005). Thus, as politeness strategies have been found to carry different values in different cultures (Pizziconi 2007), the realization and interpretation of impoliteness in different language and culture groups presents itself as a useful starting point to come to grips with conceptualizations of impoliteness.
-
(2010): Impoliteness in Germany. Intercultural encounters in everyday and institutional talk. In: Intercultural Pragmatics 7 (4), S. 561-595. DOI: 10.1515/iprg.2010.026
Abstract: In this paper, I first look at how the notions of "politeness" and "impoliteness" have been discussed in the literature including my own ideas of relating universal levels of impoliteness to culture and language-specific levels. Given this framework and my earlier postulation of a set of dimensions along which German speakers were found to prefer expressions that are more direct than indirect, more explicit than implicit, and generally more content-oriented than addressee-oriented, I provide several examples of German speakers interacting with members of other cultures in everyday talk and academic advising sessions. In interpreting the results of the analyses of these interactions, I attempt to relate them to the concept of impoliteness, to German speakers' communicative preferences and to the distinction between an emic and an etic perspective.
2009
-
(2009): Impoliteness and identity in the American news media. The “Culture Wars”. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 5 (2). DOI: 10.1515/JPLR.2009.014
Abstract: This paper argues that identity theory can be a useful analytical tool for the scholar of relational work (Locher and Watts 2005). By focusing oil current news interviews broadcast in the USA, it shows how impoliteness is inextricably linked to the (co) construction of the identity of the hosts, the guests and the audience of an emergent "new" news genre; news as confrontation (Garces-Conejos Blitvich 2007, forthcoming). Impoliteness is defined as a negative identity practice (Bucholtz 1999) used by the hosts to position themselves within their own community of practice. Applying Anton and Peterson's (2003) model of subject positions, an alternative definition is proposed that posits that impoliteness - and confrontation - may ensue when there is a mismatch between self asserted subject positions, i. e., the positions we temporarily choose to assume, and other asserted subject positions, i. e., the positions that others impose on us. By challenging our self asserted subject positions, the view of the world that comes along with them is questioned as well. Impoliteness is also used to forge the collective identity of one of the factions, here identified with the target audience of shows included in the study, currently waging the "Culture Wars". This metaphor has long been used to claim that political conflict within the USA is due to a conflict between "traditional" and "progressive" values.
2008
-
(2008): Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam u.a.: Benjamins
Abstract: This study concerns the nature of impoliteness in face-to-face spoken interaction. For more than three decades many pragmatic and sociolinguistic studies of interaction have considered politeness to be one central explanatory concept governing and underpinning face-to-face interaction. Politeness' "evil twin" impoliteness has been largely neglected until only very recently. This book, the first of its kind on the subject, considers the role that impoliteness has to play by drawing extracts from a range of discourse types (car parking disputes, army and police training, police-public interactions and kitchen discourse). The study considers the triggering of impoliteness; explores the dynamic progression of impolite exchanges, and examines the way in which such exchanges come to some form of resolution. 'Face' and the linguistic sophistication and manipulation of discoursally expected norms to cause, or deflect impoliteness is also explored, as is the dynamic and sometimes hotly contested nature of an individual's socio-discoursal role.
-
(2008): Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company
Abstract: This study concerns the nature of impoliteness in face-to-face spoken interaction. For more than three decades many pragmatic and sociolinguistic studies of interaction have considered politeness to be one central explanatory concept governing and underpinning face-to-face interaction. Politeness' "evil twin" impoliteness has been largely neglected until only very recently. This book, the first of its kind on the subject, considers the role that impoliteness has to play by drawing extracts from a range of discourse types (car parking disputes, army and police training, police-public interactions and kitchen discourse). The study considers the triggering of impoliteness; explores the dynamic progression of impolite exchanges, and examines the way in which such exchanges come to some form of resolution. 'Face' and the linguistic sophistication and manipulation of discoursally expected norms to cause, or deflect impoliteness is also explored, as is the dynamic and sometimes hotly contested nature of an individual's socio-discoursal role.
-
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 -
(2008): Impoliteness in Language. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.KG
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.
-
(2008): Rudeness, conceptual blending theory and relational work. In: Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 4 (2), S. 289-317. DOI: 10.1515/JPLR.2008.014
Abstract: The present article takes a discursive approach to the topic of impoliteness, in which conceptualizations of impoliteness are construed in the process of real-time interaction. The term “discursive” refers neither to a conversational analytic approach to interaction nor to one which is derived from principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. It rests rather on lay members' ongoing interpretations of what constitutes inappropriate forms of behaviour rather than on a theoretical concept that we choose to label “impoliteness”. The article makes a case for rejecting the term “impoliteness” itself on two grounds: (a) that this term would only make it the mirror opposite of whatever is taken to be “politeness”, and (b) that lay members, if they comment on inappropriate behaviour at all, are more likely to use terms such as rude, offensive, or aggressive than impolite. If we wish to tease out evidence of such imputations in the absence of lexical items indexing behaviour from instantiations of oral interaction, we need to apply the insights of cognitive blending theory and to adapt that theory in such a way that it can account for differential conceptualizations of behaviour as inappropriate or not. In this sense, the article is intended as a contribution towards the wider theory of relational work which has emerged recently from politeness research
2007
-
(2007): Disagreeing to agree. Conflict, (im)politeness and identity in a computer-mediated community. In: Journal of Pragmatics 39 (4), S. 742-759. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017 Abstract: Recent research on politeness has attempted to re-examine the seminal work of Brown and Levinson (1987) and refine the framework to be more applicable to a wider variety of circumstances (Watts, 2003; Spencer-Oatey, 2005). Although, as Locher (2004) notes, there have been several empirical studies building on Brown and Levinson's (1987) framework of politeness, there are relatively few studies which explore the dynamics of these newer models in empirical research. This empirical study addresses this gap by exploring how expectations of (im)politeness are negotiated within an e-mail community. Examination of the communicative practices indicate that, in this e-community, the norms for interaction within the community of practice (Eckert and McConnell-Ginet, 1999; Lavé and Wenger, 1991; Holmes and Meyerhoff, 1999) merge with the norms of (polite) interaction within the computer medium to create a unique set of expectations for what constitutes polite behavior in a computer-mediated setting. Deviation from these norms frequently results in conflict, but the (active) negotiation of norms of politeness in this community of practice, or C of P (through conflict) give group members an opportunity to (re)negotiate the group identity.
Keywords: Art des Kommunikationsmediums, Brown and Levinson's model, e-Konversationsnormen, Gruppenidentität, Gruppenverhalten, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Identität, Identitätsstiftung, Im/politeness, Impoliteness, Konflikt, Konfrontation, Linguistik, Politeness, Situationsbedingter Kontext, Soziale Angemessenheit -
(2007): Identity, face and (im)politeness. In: Journal of Pragmatics 39 (4), S. 635-638. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.003
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.003 Abstract: Face and (im)politeness are widely discussed and debated in the pragmatics literature. This special issue, which has developed out of a symposium presented at the 7th International Pragmatics Conference at Riva del Garda, Italy in 2005, aims to enrich our understanding of these concepts by examining them from the perspective of identity. The first three papers consider the conceptual insights that different (sub-)disciplines can offer for our understanding of face, (im)politeness and the management of rapport. They draw on work in social psychology on identity, and take a cognitive pragmatic perspective to deconstruct relevant emic concepts/lexemes. The next four papers present discourse-based research on the topic. They examine different types of identities, including role identities (e.g. leaders and mentors), national identities (e.g. Turkish and British), ethnic identities (e.g. Pakeha and Maori), community identities (e.g. Cyber-parish member), as well as individual identities, and analyse how these identities impact upon the (mis)management of face and rapport.