UNIT 4 – Politeness in Pragmatics

Politeness in pragmatics
The Politeness Principle
The concept of face. Positive, negative, face-saving
Negative and positive politeness
Politeness maxims
Intercultural pragmatics: Politeness in English and other cultures

Main approaches to politeness

Lakoff (1973), Leech (1983) Linguist, Brown and Levinson (1987) combine linguistic with anthropological studies
All three draw on speech act theory and conversational implicatures.

Politeness

The social-cultural model posits that “each society has a particular set of social norms consisting of more or less explicit rules that prescribe a certain behavior, a state of affairs, or a way of thinking in context. A positive evaluation (politeness) arises when an action is in congruence with the norm, a negative evaluation (impoliteness = rudeness) when action is to the contrary” (Fraser 1990: 220).
50+ politeness strategies
(Leech, Brown and Levinson)

The Politeness Principle

Leech argues that a Politeness Principles should complement the Cooperative Principle.
In pragmatics politeness is NOT ONLY concerned with social protocol, such as not interrupting other people’s conversations, or holding doors open for others: linguistic politeness attempts to prevent hearers from losing face (Sp. apariencia, dignidad, prestigio) by embarrassing or offending them.
That is: make the hearer feel comfortable.

Goffman (1972: 44) claimed that

Underneath their differences in culture, people everywhere are the same… [in the sense that one] is taught to be perceptive to have feelings attached to self and a self-expressed though face, to have pride, honor, and dignity, to have considerateness, to have tact and a certain amount of poise.
Desire to achieve a position of approbation in the social group to which they belong.

Chinese mianzi

Inevitable aspect of interpersonal encounters, connections, and relationships.
‘people, despite their various cultural backgrounds, are believed to possess self-image/value and want their self-image/value to be appreciate and respected by other members of the community’ (Zhu 2003: 316)

Lian versus mianzi

‘respect of the group for a mean with a good moral reputation… it represents the confidence of society in the integrity of ego’s moral character, the loss of which make it impossible for him to function properly within the community’ (Hu 1944: 45).
‘stands for the king of prestige… [of] a reputation achieved through getting on in life, through success an ostentation… for this king of recognition ego is dependent at all time on his external environment’ (Hu 1944: 45).

The Concept of Face: Positive, negative, face-saving

Based on Goffman’s sociological approach to communication. Goffman developed his theory drawing of the English concept of “losing face”, to be embarrassed or humiliated, and “saving face”, to prevent situations where people lose respect for the speaker.

Face is “the positive social value a person effectively claims” (Goffman 1967: 5) for himself or herself.
Face is “the public self-image that every member of a society wants to claim for himself” (Brown and Levinson 1987)

Dynamism

Goffman stressed that face was:

On loan from society.
Liable to be withdrawn if an individual conducts him/herself in a way that is unworthy of it.
Realized solely in social interaction.

Lakoff (1973)’s maxims

Don’t impose.
Give options.
Make you receiver feel good.

Universal?

‘the mutual knowledge of [a person’s] public self-image or face, and the social necessity to orient oneself to it in interaction, are universal’ (Brown and Levinson 1987: 62).
‘while face itself is universal, features important to it in any particular culture may not be general across them all’ (Ho, 1976: 881 – 2)

Positive vs negative face

Positive face is the need to be desirable, ratified, understood, approved, or liked by others (Culpeper et al.). The need for enhancement of positive self-image (Brown and Levinson)
Negative face is the desire to be unimpeded by others (Culpeper et al.) The need for freedom of action and freedom of imposition (Brown and Levinson)
Classical example:
A friend needs to get to the airport and asks for a ride (Goffman 1967)
What do you do?
You say yes: Positive face, as you try to be liked.
You say no: You defend your negative face, that is, your desire to be left alone.

Face-threatening acts (FTAs)

If something we say might make the hearer lose face (Sp. quedar mal, desprestigiarse). This includes orders, criticisms, insults, and it is called a face-threatening act.
Example: if you are studying and you are disturbed by a workman’s noise with a hammer, you can either complain by saying: ‘Stop that infernal racket – I’m traying to study!’ (face-threatening act), or ‘Are you going to be much longer?’.

Face-saving acts

A face-threatening act can be mitigated by a face-saving act.
Brown and Levinson propose five strategies:
Bald on record (face-threatening act)
Positive politeness (face saving act)
Negative politeness (face saving act)
Off-record (face saving act)
Withhold the FTA (face saving act)

Bold on record

On record, you could say something like:
Stop smoking! (face-threatening act)
Could you put your cigarette out? (face saving act)
A formulation like ‘Stop smoking!’ is called going bald on record because it involves a direct order and no mitigating devices. It is usually a very threatening form of communication.
Not all imperatives are face-threatening:
Have some more wine.
Make yourself at home.

Negative and positive politeness

Positive politeness

Positive politeness respects the other person’s positive face, i.e., the need for the in-group solidarity, to feel one is liked and counts for something in other people’s eyes.
(involvement)
Positive politeness arises when an action is accordance with the norms of a given society (Fraser 1990: 22).
A request involving positive politeness might contain a pre-sequence as a solidarity strategy, like
I understand your problems and I realize that now is the only time to get the job done, but…
A common positive politeness strategy is to compliment someone on a particular ability before making a request or suggestion.

Negative politeness

Negative politeness shows consideration for the addressee’s negative face, i.e., the need not to feel imposed on.
(independence)
Addressing the workman by saying:
Are you going to be much longer?
Shows negative politeness because it tries not to trample on his dignity and obstruct his work, and it leaves him ground for options in his response, ranging from anything like Mind your business! to I shan’t be long, and I’ll try to be as quiet as possible.
A typical negative politeness strategy is to use a modal verb:
Could you…?, I wonder if I might…?, etc.

Positive versus negative politeness (Brown and Levinson)

Positive politeness strategies:
- Exaggerate interest, approval.
- Seek agreement in small talk.
- Avoid disagreement.
- Joke.
- Offer, promise.
- Be optimistic.
- Use inclusive pronouns “we” …
Negative politeness (it does not mean you are impolite!!)
- Be conventionally indirect.
- Question, hedge.
- Minimize imposition.
- Apologize.
- Impersonalize.
- Be pessimistic.
- Give deference…

Examples

I kind of want Florin to win the race, since I bet on him Hedging, negative.
Sorry bother you… Apologizing, negative.
It took me forever to finish this Exaggerate, positive.
I don’t think you want to do this Being pessimistic, negative.
I really like the way you have done this Compliment, positive.
It’s generally done this way Impersonalize, negative.
Could you possibly come tomorrow? Question, negative.
You’ll be great, you’ll see Optimistic, positive.
It’s small thing I need you to do Minimize, negative.
You and I have the same problems Seek agreement in small talk, positive.
We’re feeling rotten, aren’t we? Inclusive we, positive.
We regret to inform you that your article does not meet the standards Impersonalize, negative.
A: She must be small B: Well, smallish… Avoid disagreement, positive.

Off record vs On record requests

If you make a request off record, you merely hint at what you hope to achieve.
E.g., Someone is smoking in the room:
“It’s getting a bit stuffy in here.”

You can also show it non-verbally (coughing, opening the window, etc.)

It is related to indirect speech acts.

Withhold the FTA

The speaker refrains from performing the FTA.

All these strategies are related to the needs of the hearer.

Is it related to the hearer or the listener? Explain the following utterance: “It’s getting a bit stuffy in here”.

It is related to the hearer.

It is an indirect speech act, using off record, which helps the listener save face, be it gives the listener options: open the window, stop smoking…

The maxims of politeness (Leech 1983)

Leech believes that Grice’s maxims need to be complemented with politeness maxims.
Based on the premise: Minimize the expression of impolite beliefs, maximize the expression of polite beliefs.
They try to avoid discord and seek concord.
Three scales:
Cost-benefit scale
Optionality scale
Indirectness scale
Politeness as a type of behavior that allows the participants to engage in a social interaction in an atmosphere or relative harmony.
Each maxim is accompanied by a sub-maxim, which is of less importance.
Not all the maxims are equally important. For instance, tact influences what we say more powerfully than does generosity, while approbation is more important than modesty.
Speakers may adhere to more than one maxim of politeness art the same time. Often one maxim is on the forefront of the utterance, while a second maxims is implied.

Tact maxim: a) Minimize cost to other / b) Maximize benefit to other.

Could I say something?
Could you lend me your car? Versus You must lend me your car.

Generosity maxim: a) Minimize benefit to self / b) Maximize cost to self.

You must have a drink with us.
Why don’t you have another biscuit?

Approbation maxim: a) Minimize dispraise of other / b) Maximize praise of other.

Yes, I’ve seen your new shoes. Very original.
I have enjoyed your lecture.

Modesty maxim: a) Minimize praise of self / b) Maximize dispraise of self.

I’m so silly, I didn’t quite get that.
I’ve had very good teachers.

Agreement maxim: a) Minimize disagreement between self and other / b) Maximize agreement between self and other.

Perhaps we can meet before lunch?
That’s a good idea, but…

Sympathy maxim: a) Minimize antipathy between self and other / b) Maximize sympathy between self and other.

I am so sorry for your loss.
It is a pity she won’t be coming back.

Tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement, sympathy

Mike: Their singing was wonderful.
Annie: Yes, it was, wasn’t it?

Annie is trying to maximize agreement between her and Mike.

Mike: Your singing was wonderful!
Annie: Yes, it was, wasn’t it?

Annie has breached/violated modesty, in response to Mike’s approbation, to show her agreement.

Mike: I’m really grateful.
Annie: Don’t mention it.

Annie shows tact by minimizing cost to Mike.

Mike: I’m really grateful.
Annie: And so you should be. I helped a lot.

Annie has breached/violated both tact and modesty by claiming cost and merit.

I brought this large gift for you.

Little tact and modesty.

Politeness Principles

Maxims may be weighted differently in different cultures (Leech 1983a:150). For example, the Tact Maxim might be a strong feature of some British cultures, Modesty of some Japanese cultures, and Generosity of some Mediterranean cultures.

Examples

Won’t you sit down?

Tact: The speaker uses indirect utterance to be more polite and minimizing cost to the hearer. This utterance implies that sitting down is benefit to the hearer.

“You must come and dinner with us”.

Generosity: The speaker implies that cost of the utterance is to himself, and the utterance implies that benefit is for the hearer.

A: “The performance was great!”
B: “Yes, wasn’t it!”

Approbation: utterance that minimizes praise of other.

“Please accept this small gift for your achievement”.

Modesty maxim because the speaker maximizes dispraise of himself.

A: “English is a difficult language to learn”:
B: “True, but the grammar is quite easy”.

Agreement: B’s answer minimize his disagreement using partial agreement, “true, but…”.

Leech’s examples

They are delicious, you’re cuisine is so good! Approbation
A: Could I help myself to a bit of sherry? B: Of course you can! Tact/generosity
Como on! Sit down and have a nice cup of coffee. Generosity and tact
I’m so dumb, I don’t even know it. Modesty
A: I really like your dress. B: Oh, it’s just something I picked at the sales. Modesty.
A: It’s beautiful. B: Yes. Absolutely gorgeous. Agreement
How is your mother? I do hope she’s feeling much better Sympathy
A: You’re so clever. B: Gee, it’s so nice of you to say that. Modesty

Intercultural pragmatics: Politeness in English and other cultures

Maxims may be weighted differently in different cultures.

The tact maxim might be a strong feature of some British cultures. Modesty of some Japanese cultures

Generosity of some Mediterranean cultures.

Hickey concluded that, whereas English speakers use more negative politeness (apologizing for intruding or for making a request, etc.), Spanish people tend to show more positive politeness (complimenting, expressing admiration, etc.), which English speakers, especially British ones, find insincere and even embarrassing.

Politeness in different cultures

In the West, students are praised in front of other students, but in other cultures this is face-threatening.

In China, students may praise their teachers, but not in the West.