week 3 - politeness and face

Question 1

what are Leech’s politeness principles?

Answer 1

‘minimise (all things being equal) the expression of impolite beliefs;
maximise (all things being equal) the expression of polite beliefs’

Question 2

6 interpersonal maxims associated with Leech’s principles

Answer 2

• tact maxim
• Generosity maxim
• modesty maxim
• approbation maxim
• agreement maxim
• sympathy maxim

Question 3

why do we need the politeness principle?

Answer 3

• Leech sees the Politeness Principle as ‘rescuing’ Grice’s Co-operative Principle, in that it explains why speakers do not always observe Gricean maxims.
• The PP can also be seen as an inferential schema that hearers will draw upon to help them make sense of social interactions.

Question 4

tact maxim

Answer 4

Minimise the expression of beliefs which imply cost to other;
Maximise the expression of beliefs which imply benefit to other
… so a focus on the hearer
• Use minimisers to reduce the implied cost or onus on hearer:

e.g. Just pop upstairs and get me my phone

Hang on a second!

Question 5

The Generosity Maxim

Answer 5

Minimise the expression of benefit to self
Maximise the expression of cost to self
…… focus on the hearer
- Under-applying the Generosity Maxim will make a speaker appear mean
- Over-applying it may seem sarcastic

eg
You must come and have dinner with us, very soon

You sit there and let me do the dishes

Question 6

The Approbation Maxim

Answer 6

Minimise the expression of beliefs which express dispraise of other
Maximise the expression of beliefs which express approval of other
- Praise and approval

Fairly obviously, we prefer to praise others
that was a wonderful talk!

… and if we cannot do so, we employ various strategies to minimise our disapproval

• You’ve clearly put a lot of effort into this essay, but…

Question 7

The Modesty Maxim

Answer 7

Minimise the expression of praise of self;
Maximise the expression of dispraise of self

eg. That was very kind of you to put us up for the night

Question 8

The Agreement Maxim

Answer 8

Minimise the expression of disagreement between self and other;
Maximise the expression of agreement between self and other

eg. (Peter and Dean are at the photocopier)
Peter: it’s brilliant this machine isn’t it?
Dean: yes it has a mind of its own
Peter: that’s true, as well…

Question 9

The Sympathy Maxim

Answer 9

Minimise the expression of antipathy between self and other;
Maximise the expression of sympathy between self and other

• Congratulations and condolences

This maxim explains why congratulations and condolences are courteous speech acts, even though condolences express beliefs which are negative with regard to the hearer.

eg. I’m terribly sorry to hear that your cat got run over by a bus …
is slightly less polite than
I’m terribly sorry to hear about your cat

… as there’s no mention of the unfavourable event in the second example. It will be understood to be a condolence.

Question 10

what did Eelen say about the politeness principle?

Answer 10

Eelen, 2001
For Leech, the PP is assumed to be a psychological reality; it resides ‘in the heads of speakers’; a ‘commonsense’ concept; processes are automatized

Question 11

which factors would affect Leech’s politeness model?

Answer 11

Situational context will have an impact on politeness forms e.g. the greater the perceived imposition of a request, the more indirect it is likely to be. Also the more formal the situation, the greater tends to be the use of indirectness.

Social/interactional context is also relevant; the greater the social gap between participants, the more indirect forms are likely to be used.

Different cultures have different tendencies when it comes to politeness strategies.

Question 12

what is face

Answer 12

Face: …the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a particular social contact. Face is an image of self delineated in terms of approved social attributes – albeit an image that others may share as when a person makes a good showing for his profession or religion by making a good showing for himself

Question 13

speaker v hearer?

Answer 13

Speaker: expression
Hearer: impression

Question 14

what is The Dramaturgical Approach to Impression Management

Answer 14

• Goffman observed that we behave according to the situation we are in. He made the distinction between

• the front stage (public) settings; when we are keenly aware of the need to manage the impression of ourselves by ‘performing ’ for others when we interact, and
• the backstage (private) settings, when we can be less careful about impression management strategies

Question 15

Goffman’s Observations on Face Management measures:

Answer 15

Avoiding threats to face –
• defensive measures: including gracious withdrawals; keep ‘off-topic’; modesty; joviality.
• protective measures: including show respect; discretion; indirectness; preface potential threats.

Question 16

how to redress a social disequilibrium? (The corrective process)

Answer 16

• Goffman observed a structured interchange:
• Challenge – acknowledgement of the threat and that it must be repaired
• Offering – the offender (‘threatener’) has a chance to correct the disorder (face-loss) they’ve caused, through: downplaying the threat’s volition, intentionality or seriousness; explaining it to be unavoidable in current circumstances
• Acceptance – the person who had been face-threatened, accepts the offering
• Gratitude - the ‘threatener’ shows gratitude for being forgiven

Question 17

what did Brown and Levinson say about face?

Answer 17

‘Face is something that is emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced, and must be constantly attended to in interaction.

Normally everyone’s face depends on everyone else’s being maintained, and since people can be expected to defend their faces if threatened, and in defending their own to threaten others’ faces, it is in general in every participant’s best interest to maintain each other’s face’
(Brown & Levinson, 1978)

Question 18

positive face

Answer 18

the positive consistent self-image …
including the desire that this self image be appreciated and approved of; the want to be ratified, understood, approved of, liked or admired

Question 19

negative face

Answer 19

the want that our actions and thoughts are unimpeded; basic claims to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction. Freedom of action and freedom from imposition.

Question 20

what is a FTA to Hearer’s Negative Face

Answer 20

An act that indicates the H’s future actions will be impeded/controlled:

Orders & requests: S wants H to do something, or stop doing something

Suggestions, advice, remindings: S indicates H ought to do something

Threats & warnings: an indication of sanctions to come
- Also, seemingly ‘pleasant’ acts that S will do for H actually put an onus on H to accept or reject them, and possibly incur a debt to S, i.e. offers and promises (the hearer is imposed as they have to reply)

Question 21

what is a FTA to Hearer’s Positive Face

Answer 21

An act that suggests the S doesn’t care for the H’s feelings:
Disapproval; criticism; ridicule; complaints, accusations; insults; and disagreements.
In short, S’s negative evaluation of H.

Other examples include:
expressions of violent emotion (S hates or is embarrassed by H)
taboo topics (S doesn’t value H’s values)

Question 22

what is a FTA to Speaker’s Face

Answer 22

• As S & H are co-operating to maintain face, any act that threatens S’s face, is also potentially threatening to H

Question 23

what is a Threat to Speakers negative face

Answer 23

• thanks: accept a debt, humbling
• excuses: S disagrees with H’s criticism of him/her
• accept an offer: accrue a debt and impose on H’s negative face
• respond to H’s faux pas: if he notices it, he/she may embarrass S; if he/she pretends not to, he discomfits him/herself

Question 24

what is a Threat to Speaker’s positive face

Answer 24

• apology
• accept a compliment
• loss of verbal or physical control
• admissions of guilt or responsibility

Question 25

Computing the weightiness of an FTA

Answer 25

Wx=D(S,H) + P(H,S) +Rx

W = weightiness
D = social distance
S = speaker
H = hearer
P = power
R = culturally-specific ranking of the imposition of the FTA

Question 26

what is FTA without redress

Answer 26

‘Bald on Record’ (BoR)
- When the situation demands that an individual speaks very directly and with no concessions for politeness whatsoever, e.g.
an emergency/major time constraint “Brake! Brake! For God’s sake hit the bloody brakes!”
- if the size of the FTA’s imposition is very small…Pass me that pen?

• OR a ‘FTA’ is favourable for H; e.g. an offer, where the more direct the offer, the more polite it is…Have a drink
• Where there is a large power differential between the interactants
• Or simply to be offensive!

Question 27

what is FTA with positive politeness

Answer 27

• When S orients to H’s positive face, appealing to their desire to be liked and approved of. The general line of positive politeness is that S likes/approves of H and that they share common desires.
  • B&L arrived at a list of 15 positive politeness strategies:
• attend to H’s wants, needs, interests exaggerate approval, sympathy with H
• intensify interest
• in-group identity markers
• Seek agreement
• avoid disagreement

Question 28

what is FTA with negative politeness

Answer 28

Negative politeness is oriented mainly toward partially satisfying (redressing) H’s basic want to maintain claims of territory and self-determination.
Negative politeness, thus, is essentially avoidance based, and realisations of negative politeness strategies consist in assurances that S recognises and respects H’s negative face and will not (or will only minimally) interfere with H’s freedom of action.

Question 29

examples of Negative Politeness Strategies

Answer 29

• apologise & seek forgiveness
• impersonalise S & H
• state the FTA as a general rule
• nominalise
• go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H
• be conventionally indirect
• question, hedge
• be pessimistic
• minimise the size of imposition to H
• give deference

Question 30

FTA with Off-Record Politeness

Answer 30

• Using a markedly indirect form that you hope the hearers infer correctly and produces the intended perlocutionary effect, but if S is challenged on it, it can be refuted.
• B&L’s example: “Damn, I’m out of cash, I forgot to go to the bank” may have the implicature of a request for a loan, but is so ambiguous that it might not be the first inference arrived at.

Question 31

what are some off record strategies?

Answer 31

• B&L see these strategies as being violations of Grice’s maxims:
• Violate Maxim of Relevance: give hints/clues
• Violate Maxim of Quantity: understate; overstate; use contradictions or tautologies; be ironic; metaphor; rhetorical Q’s.
• Violate Maxim of Manner: be ambiguous; be vague; over generalise, be incomplete.

Question 32

• Shortcomings of Brown and Levinson’s model of politeness:

Answer 32

• Not universal across cultures (despite claiming to be a universal)
• Accounts for the ‘model’ speaker and hearer
• Assumes that people have face that is to be protected
• Does not account for speakers who do not have a shared understanding of what is polite (e.g. intercultural differences)
• Does not account for those situations in which face-threat mitigation is not a priority (aggressive/rude behaviour)

Question 33

what did Watts suggest as an alternative view of politeness?

Answer 33

A Social Model of Politeness
Watts (2003) suggests an alternative view of politeness
• Instead of polite or impolite, think appropriate or inappropriate
• This depends on social norms of behaviour
• Conforming to the norms is seen as ‘politic behaviour’
• Watts describes face as “socially attributed”
• Face is therefore not a built in quality to be protected, saved, lost, etc.
• It is to be (as Goffman says) “claimed”
Face = social identity?
Face = situational identity?
Face = interpretation of actions by other people?