Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2016
-
(2016): Being Politically Impolite. Extending Politeness Theory to Adversarial Political Discourse. In: Discourse & Society 12 (4), S. 451-472. DOI: 10.1177/0957926501012004003
Abstract: This article attempts to extend politeness theory beyond informal situations to adversarial political discourse, using Prime Minister's Question Time in the British Parliament as data. Viewing the House of Commons as a 'community of practice' (Lave and Wenger, 1991) provides a way of exploring concepts of politeness and impoliteness against a set of member expectations. The article argues three main propositions: (1) that much of the discourse of Prime Minister's Question Time is composed of intentional and explicitly face-threatening (or face-enhancing) acts and that these can be analysed in terms of both propositional and interactional levels: (2) that negative politeness features co-exist with the performance of intentional threats to the hearer's positive face and that these can only be understood and interpreted in relationship to Parliament as an Institution and the wider political context; and (3) that systematic impoliteness is not only sanctioned but rewarded in accordance with the expectations of Members of the House by an adversarial and confrontational political process.
2015
-
Locher, Miriam A.; Bolander, Brook; Höhn, Nicole (Hg.) (2015): Relational work in Facebook and discussion boards/fora. International Pragmatics Association
Abstract: This paper functions as the introduction to the special issue on ‘relational work in Facebook and discussion boards’. We position our research endeavors within interpersonal pragmatics (see Locher and Graham 2010), by reviewing literature on politeness, impoliteness and relational work in the context of computer-mediated communication. Foregrounding the relational aspect of language, we are particularly interested in establishing the connections between politeness, face and linguistic identity construction. We then position the four papers that form this special issue within this field of research. Two papers contribute to the study of relational work on discussion boards (Kleinke and Boes; Haugh, Chang and Kádár) and two deal with practices on Facebook (Theodoropoulou; Bolander and Locher).
-
(2015) : INTRODUCING RELATIONAL WORK IN FACEBOOK AND DISCUSSION BOARDS In: Locher, Miriam A.; Bolander, Brook; Höhn, Nicole (Hg.): Relational work in Facebook and discussion boards/fora, S. 1-21
Abstract: This paper functions as the introduction to the special issue on ‘relational work in Facebook and discussion boards’. We position our research endeavors within interpersonal pragmatics (see Locher and Graham 2010), by reviewing literature on politeness, impoliteness and relational work in the context of computer-mediated communication. Foregrounding the relational aspect of language, we are particularly interested in establishing the connections between politeness, face and linguistic identity construction. We then position the four papers that form this special issue within this field of research. Two papers contribute to the study of relational work on discussion boards (Kleinke and Boes; Haugh, Chang and Kádár) and two deal with practices on Facebook (Theodoropoulou; Bolander and Locher).
2009
-
(2009): Hume and the Question of Good Manners. In: Estetika: The Central European Journal of Aesthetics 46 (1), S. 29-48
Abstract: The question of manners is important in David Hume's examination of human nature primarily because of the weight he assigns to the so-called 'social virtues'. Man is, for Hume, a being that naturally tends to form societies, and the study of human nature is, after all, the study of human sociability, which finds its expression in manners. The present paper shows Hume as a participant in the seventeenth and eighteenth-century discussion about the concept of politeness, a concept which oscillated between the domain of manners and morals and the domain of art. The examination of Hume's ideal of polite manners illustrates the way his classicist taste pervaded the appreciation both of works of art and of social comportment.
2008
-
(2008) : Reflections on impoliteness, relational work and power In: Bousfield, Derek; Locher, Miriam A. (Hg.): Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice: Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (Language, power and social process), S. 17-44
Abstract: Conclusion: This paper had the minimal aim of raising pertinent issues for future research. I shall briefly conclude this chapter with a list of those issues: One's understanding of the role of the speaker and hearer in communication is crucial. I would argue against privileging either of them. Metalinguistic labels such as "over-politeness" need full investigation, deploying, for example, the corpus linguistic techniques that characterise modern lexicography. Intentionality is a site of controversy in (im)politeness studies, as elsewhere in linguistics, though it is often poorly understood. My view is that it is an important part of communication, and a crucial part of impoliteness. An understanding of norms, in all their complexity, is a key to understanding much of (im)politeness. I think the distinction between experiential norms and social norms is particularly useful. Power connects with impoliteness in a number of different ways, including both the performance/perception of impoliteness in language and the broader context within which it is performed/perception. Researching impoliteness constitutes a considerable methodological challenge. This paper gives a glimpse of one corpus-related methodology.
Keywords: Disziplin, Favoriten, Frame, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Höflichkeitsforschung der zweiten Welle, (Im)Politeness Research, Intentionalität, Linguistik, Macht, Modelle/Theorien, Politeness Theory and Relational Work, Rolle von Sprecher und Hörer, Soziale Angemessenheit, Soziale Normen, Sprachgebrauch, Zweite Welle -
(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): 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 -
(2005) : Linguistic politeness research. Quo vadis? In: Watts, Richard J.; Sachiko, Ide; Ehlich, Konrad (Hg.): Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice: 2. rev. and expanded ed. / with a new introd. by Richard J. Watts: Berlin u.a.: Mouton de Gruyter, S. xi-xlvii
2003
-
(2003): Politeness. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press (Key topics in sociolinguistics). Online verfügbar unter http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184
Abstract: Using a wide range of data from real-life speech situations, this new introduction to politeness breaks away from the limitations of current models and argues that the proper object of study in politeness theory must be commonsense notions of what politeness and impoliteness are
Keywords: Disziplin, Etiquette, Favoriten, Forms of address, frames, FTA Face Threatening Acts, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Höflichkeitsforschung, Höflichkeitsforschung der zweiten Welle, (Im)Politeness Research, Klassiker, Lebensstil, Linguistik, Modelle/Theorien, Politeness Theory and Relational Work, Sociolinguistics, Soziale Angemessenheit, Soziolinguistik, Sprache, Sprachgebrauch, Status / biologische Marker, Zweite Welle
- <<
- <
- 1