POLITENESS

THE POLITENESS PRINCIPLE

Besides cooperation, most interactions are governed by politeness, that is to say by what is considered a “polite social behaviour”

within a certain culture.

The Politeness Principle is a series of maxims, which Geoffrey Leech has proposed as a way of explaining how politeness operates in conversational exchanges.

LEECH’S MAXIMS

?Leech defines politeness as a type of behaviour that allows the participants to engage in a social interaction in an atmosphere of relative harmony. In stating his maxims Leech uses his own terms for two kinds of illocutionary acts. He calls representatives “assertives”, and calls directives“impositives”.

?Each maxim is accompanied by a sub-maxim, which is of less importance. They all support the idea that negative politeness (avoidance of discord) is more important than positive politeness (seeking concord).

?Not all of 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 at the same time. Often one maxim is on the forefront of the utterance, while a second maxim is implied.

FACE AND POLITENESS STRATEGIES

?“Face”(as in “lose face”) refers to a speaker's sense of social identity. Any speech act may impose on this sense, and be therefore face threatening.

?Speakers have strategies for lessening the threat.

?Positive politeness means being complimentary and gracious to the addressee (but if this is overdone, the speaker may alienate the other party). Negative politeness is found in the various ways of mitigating an imposition.

?Negative politeness can take the form of:

?Hedging: Er, could you, er, perhaps, close the, um , window?

?Pessimism: I don't suppose you could close the window, could you?

?Indicating deference: Excuse me, sir, would you mind if I asked you to close the window?

?Apologizing: I'm terribly sorry to disturb you, but could you close the window?

?Impersonalizing: The management requires all windows to be closed.

LEECH’S MAXIMS IN DETAIL

?Tact maxim (in directives [or impositives] and commissives): minimize cost to other; [maximize benefit to other]

?Generosity maxim (in directives and commissives): minimize benefit to self; [maximize cost to self]

?Approbation maxim (in expressives and representatives [assertives]): minimize dispraise of other; [maximize praise of other]

?Modesty maxim (in expressives and representatives): minimize praise of self; [maximize dispraise of self]

?Agreement maxim (in representatives): minimize disagreement between self and other; [maximize agreement between self and other]

?Sympathy maxim (in representatives): minimize antipathy between self and other; [maximize sympathy between self and other] BROWN AND LEVINSON’S THEORY

?Perhaps the most thorough treatment of the concept of politeness is that of Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson, which was first published in 1978 and then reissued, with a long introduction, in 1987. In their model, politeness is defined as redressive action taken to counter-balance the disruptive effect of face-threatening acts (FTAs).

?In their theory, communication is seen as potentially dangerous and antagonistic.

?The basic notion of their model is “face”. This is defined as “the public self-image that every member of society wants to claim for himself”. In their framework, face consists of two related aspects.

?One is negative face, or the rights to territories, freedom of action and freedom from imp osition - wanting your actions not to be constrained or inhibited by others.

?The other is positive face, the positive consistent self-image that people have and their desire to be appreciated and approved of by at least some other people.

?The rational actions people take to preserve both kinds of face, for themselves and the people they interact with, add up to politeness.

Brown and Levinson also argue that in human communication, either spoken or written, people tend to maintain one another's face continuously.

?In everyday conversation, we adapt our utterances to different situations. Among friends we take liberties or say things that would seem discourteous among strangers.

?In both situations we try to avoid making the hearer embarrassed or uncomfortable.

?Face-threatening acts (FTAs) are acts that infringe on the hearers' need to maintain his/her self-esteem, and be respected.

?Politeness strategies are developed for the main purpose of dealing with these FTAs.

?Suppose I see a crate of beer in my neighbour's house. Being thirsty, I might say:

?I want some beer.

?Is it OK for me to have a beer?

?Would it be possible for me to have a beer?

?It's so hot. It makes you really thirsty.

?Brown and Levinson sum up human politeness behaviour in four strategies: bald on record, negative politeness, positive politeness, and off-record-indirect strategy.

?The bald on-record strategy does nothing to minimize threats to the hearer's “face” (I want some beer)

?The positive politeness strategy shows you recognize that your hearer has a face to be respected. It also confirms that the relationship is friendly and expresses group reciprocity. (Is it ok for me to have a beer?)

?The negative politeness strategy recognizes the hearer's face. but it also admits that you are in some way imposing on him/her. (I don't want to bother you but, would it be possible for me to have a beer?)

?Off-record indirect strategies take some of the pressure off. You are trying to avoid the direct FTA of asking for a beer. You would rather it be offered to you once your hearer sees that you want one. (I’t so hot, it makes you really thirsty)

?Other examples from Brown and Levinson's politeness strategies

?Bald on-record

?Emergency: Help!

?Task oriented: Give me those!

?Request: Put your jacket away.

?Alerting: Turn your lights on! (while driving)

?Positive Politeness

?Attend to the hearer: You must be hungry, it's a long time since breakfast. How about some lunch?

?Avoid disagreement: A: What is she, small? B: Yes, yes, she's small, smallish, um, not really small but certainly not very big. ?Assume agreement: So when are you coming to see us?

?Hedge opinion: You really should sort of try harder.

?Negative Politeness

?Be indirect: I'm looking for a pen.

?Request forgiveness: You must forgive me but.... Could I borrow your pen?

?Minimize imposition: I just wanted to ask you if I could use your pen.

?Pluralize the person responsible: We forgot to tell you that you needed to buy your plane ticket by yesterday.

?Off-record (indirect)

?Give hints: It's a bit cold in here.

?Be vague: Perhaps someone should open the window.

?Be sarcastic, or joking: Yeah, it’s really hot here.

A Contrastive Study of Politeness in English and Chinese Culture

A Contrastive Study of Politeness in English and Chinese Culture Abstract: Different languages and cultures of a country have different kinds of expression of polite. A deep understanding of the differences between Chinese and English politeness principle and its origin, which is helpful for cross-cultural communication and improving the ability to cross-cultural communicate. In this paper, it is begin with the different culture background of polite; discusses the origin of politeness; analyzes the reasons for these differences, and summarizes the differences in English and Chinese culture. Learning the different usages of English and Chinese polite is aims at pointing out that people can put the politeness into right usage only if people understand correctly about the usage of the politeness principle in different cultures; only in this way, we can avoid some mistakes, misunderstanding or even conflicts; thus, we can promote the cross-cultural communication going effectively and to be in the best condition. Key words: polite, different culture, use, communication 1. Introduction Probably, in subconscious mind, everyone may have strong desire for other people's respect and admiration. As a result, politeness appeared. As one of the basic criterions of communicative activities, politeness is a tool to maintain harmonious interpersonal relationship and it is an important symbol of human civilization. Due to the cultural differences, different nationalities have different understandings of politeness, and the polite principles they followed are greatly different, too. These factors, such as language courtesy, value orientation and mode of thinking are closely linked. It is necessary for people to know clearly about the differences of politeness principles in cross-cultural communication. If we understand the differences between English and Chinese culture and get the understanding of the target language culture. Then we are able to avoid pragmatic failure caused by the cultural differences during the cross-cultural communication; ultimately, we can avoid unnecessary conflicts and

Politeness in Pragmatics

Politeness 1.Definition In pragmatics, when we talk of “politeness”, we do not refer to the social rules of behavior such as letting people go first through a door. It refers to the choices made in language use, the linguistic expression that give people space and show a friendly attitude to them. If one wants to save face and be appreciated in return, it is important to be seen to show a friendly attitude. Aim: the importance of politeness in determining how we structure and interpret utterances. Politeness is a linguistic universal: 1)Linguistic politeness exists in all languages. 2)Politeness considerations regulate every human speaker’s verbal behavior in social interation. 2. Politeness principle and maxims According to Leech, the most important factors in politeness are the cost and benefit conveyed by the speech act and the degree of freedom of choice by the hearer. The more benefit conveyed in the speaker’s proposition, the more polite the speech, and otherwise, more impolite. a.Peel these potatoes. b.Hand me the newspaper. c.Sit down. d.Look at that. e.Enjoy your holiday. f.Have another sandwich. a→f: The benefit for the hearer increases, thus the increasing politeness. f→a: The cost for the hearer increases, thus the decreasing politeness. The degree of freedom of choice is determined by the indirectness of speech: the more indirect the speaker’s discourse, the smaller the size of imposition; the more freedom the speaker has in the choice of imposed act , the more polite the speech. Example: a.Answer the phone. b.I want you to answer the phone. c.Will you answer the phone? d.Can you answer the phone? e.Would you mind answering the phone? f.Could you possibly answer the phone? a→f: The more indirect, the smaller the imposition, and the more freedom in refusal by the hearer, thus the more polite the speech. Otherwise, the lower degree of politeness. The higher the cost of the directed act, the more likely it is for the speaker to use an indirect form. Can you pass the salt? (more polite)

A critical overview of Politeness theory

Z E S Z Y T Y N A U K O W E UNIWERSYTETU RZESZOWSKIEGO SERIA FILOLOGICZNA ZESZYT 25/2005 STUDIA ANGLICA RESOVIENSIA 3 Marta PIKOR-NIEDZIA?EK A CRITICAL OVERVIEW OF POLITENESS THEORIES IN DISCOURSE ANALYSIS The scope of politeness – different approaches towards the politeness phenomena There is little agreement among researchers in the field about what, exactly, constitutes politeness and the domain of related research. Watts (1992) distinguishes between social politeness and interpersonal politeness– tact. Both types of politeness – social and interpersonal– are culturally acquired, and interrelated in speech. Social politeness is rooted in people’s need for smoothly organized interaction with other members of their group. Tact is rooted in people’s need to maintain face, in their fear of losing it, and in their reluctance to deprive others of it (Goffman 1967). The difference between tact and social politeness is that whereas the function of social politeness is essentially to coordinate social interaction – to regulate the mechanical exchange of roles and activities – the function of tact is quite different: namely to preserve face and regulate interpersonal relationships. In fact, it is probably not social politeness that enables people to avoid most everyday interpersonal conflicts, but tact. Linguistic politeness, in turn, is based on interpersonal politeness.Watts (1989) uses the term politic verbal behaviour to cover various realizations of linguistic politeness in language usage. It is very difficult to draw the distinction between linguistic and non-linguistic politeness as there is a clear interrelation between them. The social norm view This approach assumes that each society has a particular set of social norms consisting of more or less explicit rules that prescribe a certain behaviour, a state 105

VI. 礼貌原则Politeness Principle

VI. Leech’s Politeness Principle Contents I. The Theoretical Background II. The Politeness Principle & its Maxims III. Interpretation of the Politeness Principle IV. Violation of CP out of Politeness V. Humor Created by Flouting PP Maxims VI. Comprehensive Floutings of CP and PP Maxims VII.Pragmatic Analysis of Deliberate Misinterpretation Reading: Leech, G. N. Principles of Pragmatics [M]. London: Longman. 1983. I. The Theoretical Background Politeness Principle (PP for short) was proposed by Leech in 1983. Leech:The Gricean framework itself cannot give a sufficient explanation of the following questions: ?Why do people so often convey their meaning indirectly? ?Why do people deliberately violate the CP maxims? Therefore, Leech (1983) puts forward his Politeness Principle to rescue the CP from the serious trouble it is in: Cooperative Principle can not explain the dilemma that people fail to fulfill Cooperative Principle while at the same time observing it. (Leech, 1983: 80) II. The Politeness Principle & its Maxims Generally speaking, Politeness Principle can be stated in such a way: Other things being equal, minimize the expression of impolite beliefs and maximize the expression of polite beliefs. (Leech, 1983: 80) Centering on the relationship between self and other, Leech analyzes politeness by the use of maxims and proposes six maxims of Politeness Principle: (1) Tact maxim: (得体准则) A. Minimize cost to other

POLITENESS

29/01/50
Politeness Planner for a Psychiatric Disorder Classification System
Shailesh Pandey1 Yogesh Raj2
POLITENESS
Politeness: Politeness:- Marked by or showing consideration for others, and observance of accepted social usage Politeness can be used as a strategy for getting cooperation [Roman et. al., 2004] have shown that Politeness is one et. al. 2004] of the most likely elements to be summarized, and thus they have a high communicative function
1Research Engineer 2Chief Research Officer
Center for Research in Social Defense Technology Nepal Engineering College
1
APPROACHES TO POLITENESS Strategic Approach
Brown & Levinson Concept of Face
OUR APPROACH
Knowledge Based Approach
V. Escandell-Vidal EscandellConcept of Cognitive Frame
We attempt to demonstrate that a computational model of politeness can be constructed that uses cognitive approach for utterance interpretation and at the same time, benefits from the strategic approach developed by [Brown & Levinson], among others
2
3
PSYCHIATRIC DISORDER CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM DESIGN
[Shishir Bashyal, 2005] had developed an ANN 2005] based Psychiatric Disorder Classification System
35 Signs and Symptoms Yes/No Questions and Degrees of Symptoms 4 Types of Psychiatric Disorders viz. Schizophrenia, Mania, Depression, Alcohol Dependence Syndrome (ADS)
4
5
1

(完整版)Politenessprinciple

In 1967, H. P. Grice, American philosopher and linguist, proposed the Cooperative Principle (abbrev. CP) in William James lecture delivered at Harvard University. He thought that in order to make the conversation go on, we should obey some basic principles, especially “Cooperative Principle”. This new theory brings about a great development in the concept of conversational implicature, and has been attached great attention to in the linguistic circle. Some critics set such high value upon the notion that they regard it as a breakthrough in pragmatics. However, Geoffrey N. Leech, the famous British linguist, considered that “the CP in itself is not sufficient to explain ‘(1) why people are often so indirect in conveying what they mean; and (2) what is the relation between sense and force when non-declarative types of sentences are being considered.’”[3] In 1983, Leech proposed Politeness Principle (abbrev. PP) so as to rescue the CP from serious trouble. Leech believes the main reason that why people violate Cooperative Principle intently is the consideration of politeness. the cooperative principle describes how people interact with one another. As phrased by Paul Grice, who introduced it, it states, "Make your contribution such as it is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged." Though phrased as a prescriptive command, the principle is intended as a description of how people normally behave in conversation. The cooperative principle can be divided into four maxims, called the Gricean maxims, Maxim of Quality Be Truthful ?Do not say what you believe to be false ?Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence. Maxim of Quantity Quantity of Information ?Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange). ?Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.

Politeness(礼貌)英语作文

Politeness In the old times, our country was called state of ceremonies. Chinese civilization was famous all over the world in old days.From childhood, we were told to be politely by parents and teachers. Politeness includes lots of behaviors. In short, everyone should and show respect and friendship to others. In a polite society, people will feel happy in public places where lots of strangers there. However, nowadays, our society exists so many uncivilized behaviors. Someone will drop litter; someone will speak loudly in public; Someone will scramble seats with old people in the bus; Someone will be a jumper; Someone will smoke in a room which is full of people. Think about it, what’s your feeling when you are influenced by these kinds of people who behave in the way regardless of other people’s life. We want to go out to have fun, but what we get is only pain. We suffer the pain of such public life, and will be afraid to go out. Then, imagine such a society, the ground is neat and clean, the air is fresh, people in the public speak not that loud, the queue is in good order, the old ones are adequately respected, etc. Without a doubt, people who live in such surroundings will gladly to communicate with strangers, and help each other. Everywhere is filled with the atmosphere of kind. People will enjoy happiness in public, and will likely to go out. We should pick up good manners and take every effort to make our public life better. The happy life needs everyone’s effort. Before doing something, we should consider whether we will disturb others. We should prepare to help people in trouble all the time and be kind to everyone we meet. Just as an old saying “Respect a man, he will do the more”, everyone should remember this.

雅思口语Part One思路解析：Politeness 礼貌、礼节.doc

雅思口语Part One思路解析：Politeness 礼貌、礼节 谈到礼貌，也是雅思雅思考官常考的雅思口语P1话题之一。下面大家来跟着一起来看看如何解析这些问题。 Who teaches you to be polite? 是谁教会你讲礼貌的？ It was my parents who taught me how to be polite. When I was a child I was often told to say hello to someone who is either my friend or a friend of my parents’. 打小时候起爸爸妈妈就教我如何讲礼貌。在我是个孩子的时候，父母就教导我遇到朋友或者是父母的朋友一定要打招呼。 How do Chinese people show politeness? 中国人都怎么去讲礼貌？是否得举个例子？你得准备准备 Describe a polite person you met Chinese people often show their polite by saying something that is not really related to the topic. Like ‘Hi, Did you eat yer?’ is not a way to really ask if you have had your meal but a way to express one’s concert or simply show one’s politeness. 中国有时候讲礼貌的时候说的话往往并非字面上的意思，例如‘你吃了吗’并非是要问你是否吃过饭了，而且一种出于礼节性上的问候/关心。 What rules of politeness change in China? 自中国，礼节性问题有没有发生改变？ To my knowledge, there aren’t many rules of politeness that have been changed. China is a very traditional country with rich history, what we behave is always related to the principles originated from the wise men in the old times like Confucious. So, we mostly feel comfortable passing those rules of politeness to our ancestors and nothing changed so significantly. 在我看来，中国的礼节并没有发生变化。中国是一个历史悠久的传统国家。我们的一言一行都是和古时候的圣人例如孔子的思想法则离不开的。我们传承给下一代的时候，并不会觉得多么的不适应。所以，几乎也没发生什么巨大的改变。这里我们还可能谈到家庭，谈到父母，我们也可以说说我们优秀的父母的故事》》》Describe someone who is a good parent.

The English Reserve and Politeness

The English Reserve and Politeness It seems to many people that the British are extremely polite and difficult to make friends with. Hopefully the following passage will help you to have a better understanding of the British character. To other Europeans, the best known quality of the British is "reserve". A reserved person is one who does not talk very much to strangers, does not show much emotion, and seldom gets excited. It is difficult to get to know a reserved person; he never tells you anything about himself, and you may work with him for years without ever knowing where he lives, how many children he has, and what his interests are. English people tend to be like that. If they are making a journey by bus, they will do their best to find an empty seat; if by train, an empty compartment. If they have to share the compartment with a stranger, they may travel many miles without starting a conversation. If a conversation does start, personal questions like "How old are you?" or even "What is your name?" are not easily asked. Questions like "Where did you buy your watch?" or "What is your salary?" are almost impossible. Similarly, conversation in Britain is in general quiet and restrained and loud speech is considered ill-bred. This unwillingness to communicate with others is an unfortunate quality in some ways, since it tends to give the impression of coldness, and it is true that the English (except perhaps in the North) are not noted for their generosity and hospitality. On the other hand, they are perfectly human behind their barrier of reserve, and may be quite pleased when a friendly stranger or foreigner succeeds for a time in breaking the barrier down. Closely related to English reserve is English modesty. Within their hearts, the English are perhaps no less conceited than anybody else, but in their relations with others they value at least a show of modesty. Self-praise is felt to be ill-bred. If a person is, let us say, very good at tennis, and someone asks him if he is a good player, he will seldom reply "Yes," because people will think him conceited. He will probably give an answer like, "I'm not bad," or "Well, I'm very keen on tennis." This self-deprecation is typically English, and, mixed with their reserve, it often produces a sort of general air of indifference which appears to foreigners difficult to understand and even irritating.

politeness and appropriateness

Abstract This paper attempts to advance that the Appropriateness Principle (AP) other than the Cooperative Principle (CP) and the Politeness Principle (PP) should be established as the first-order principle in the actual use of language. First a goal-directed view of communication is adopted to explain the significance of pragmatic rules in the realization of language potential. Then one of the pragmatic rules, Leech‘s PP and his understanding of politeness are explored to show th at they fail to motivate language production in quite a few cases. Leech‘s understanding is too general to include situational, social, and cultural constraints in his framework. These constraints should not be ignored in order to realize the goal of appropriateness for effective communication. Finally, AP is interpreted from the viewpoint of cognition and outlined in terms of its variables. Preface In 1994,I was admitted as a student of correspondence course for BA degree to Anhui Normal University, where I was first acquainted with and indulged in linguistics through lecture notes compiled by Professor Ouyang Junlin. Since 1997 when I entered Anhui University for MA degree, I have been receiving unfailingly academic and moral support from Professor Zhu Yue, who has led me into the field of mysterious but charming linguistics, and has helped me lay a solid foundation and enhanced more enthusiasm for my future research work. The dissertation owes its present form to Professor Zhu for his detailed and critical comments. No small thanks are also due to Professors Hong Zeng-liu, Zhou Fang-zhu, Chen Zhen-fa, He Gong-jie, Hua Quan-kun, and Zhang Zu-wu from Anhui University, Dr. Heimbeck from USA, Dr. Stewart from Australian, without whose patience and encouragement I could not have finished the three-year study successfully. Chapter One Goal-directed View of Communication Communication as a function of language arouses much discussion. So far as the nature of communication is concerned, there are various views: a form of social interaction, the exchange of information between at least two individuals through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols,