A metalinguistic approach to deconstructing the concepts of ‘face’and ‘politeness’ in Chinese, English and Japanese (original) (raw)
Related papers
Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese
Journal of Pragmatics, 1988
This paper is a critical examination of the theory of linguistic politeness proposed by Brown and Le~inson (!978, |957). The paper focuses on the notion, fundamental to their theory, of 'face', and questions the unNer~tJty of the proposed constituents of "face" in the ligM of the Japanese hngcage and c~ture. Fir~t~ results from anthropolo~ca| studies on Japanese society are presented to illustrate the discrepancy between Brown and Levinson's assumption and the Japanese notion of "face'. ,%wmndly, Linguistic evidence is given that Brown and Levinson's theory provides wrong predictions for Japanese po|iteness phenomena. Examples are drawn from forrnulaic expressions, honorilies and the verbs of giving and receiving. One conclusion from these observations is that a universa~ theory of linguistic politeness must rake into account at a more fundamental level the cultura| variability in the constituents of 'face'. Observed linguistic behavior often deviates from models such as Grice's theory of conversation, in which the main purpose of conversation is assumed to be the maximally efficient exchange of information (1975:47). ~ Brown and ~.,~.dons had Levinson (1978, I987) found that such deviations from "model' ~i ..... ," a motivation-politeness-which ceuld be explained largely in rational terms, arid they proposed a demiled and comprehensive theory of politeness. In their theory, they postulate principles of politeness, and from those principles derive specific politeness strategies grouped into five categories, of which the two de~ribed at m,~.~: ~ .... *~" : ..... ,,.... ....... ~r study are the by now widely known redressive strategies of positive politeness and negative poiiteness. 2 One of the stated goals of Brown and Levinson's paper is their "hope to show that
The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research
Journal of Politeness Research (Vol.8, pp.111-134), 2012
The papers in this special issue on Chinese 'face' and im/politeness collectively raise very real challenges for the ways in which the now well-known distinction between first order and second order approaches is conceptualized and operationalized by face and politeness researchers. They highlight the difficulties we inevitably encounter when analyzing face and im/politeness across languages and cultures, in particular, those arising from (1) the use of English as a scientific metalanguage to describe concepts and practices in other languages and cultures, (2) the inherent ambiguity and conservatism of folk concepts such as face and politeness, and (3) the difficulties in teasing out face and im/politeness as important phenomena in their own right. In this paper it is suggested that these issues arise as a consequence of the relative paucity of critical discussion of the first-second order distinction by analysts. It is argued that the first-second order distinction needs to be more carefully deconstructed in regards to both its epistemological and ontological loci. It is suggested that equating first order approaches with an "emic" perspective and second order approaches with a "scientific" perspective masks a number of important distinctions that are too often glossed over by those who make claims to being either first or second order researchers. It is concluded that rather than treating the first-second order distinction as a simplistic dichotomy, it is much more productive to deploy the multiple loci of the first-second order distinction in clarifying the various focal points for analysis and theorization in face and politeness research.
Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research
Journal of Politeness Research, 2012
The papers in this special issue on Chinese face and (im)politeness collectively raise very real challenges for the ways in which the now well-known distinction between first order and second order approaches is conceptualised and operationalised by face and politeness researchers. They highlight the difficulties we inevitably encounter when analysing face and im/politeness across languages and cultures, in particular, those arising from (1) the use of English as a scientific metalanguage to describe concepts and practices in other languages and cultures, (2) the inherent ambiguity and conservatism of folk concepts such as face and politeness, and (3) the difficulties in teasing out face and im/politeness as important phenomena in their own right. In this paper it is suggested that these issues arise as a consequence of the relative paucity of critical discussion of the first-second order distinction by analysts. It is argued that the first-second order distinction needs to be more carefully deconstructed in regards to both its epistemological and ontological loci. It is suggested that equating first order approaches with an "emic" perspective and second order approaches with a "scientific" perspective masks a number of important distinctions that are too often glossed over by those who make claims to being either first or second order researchers. It is concluded that rather than treating the first-second order distinction as a simplistic dichotomy, it is much more productive to deploy the multiple loci of the first-second order distinction in clarifying the various focal points for analysis and theorisation in face and politeness research.
A Study of Linguistic Politeness in Japanese
This paper re-examines theories of linguistic politeness in Japanese, and holds that linguistic politeness is a very complicated issue influenced by multiple factors in different layers including general face wants of participants, the participants’ societal positions and social relationships, social norm that the interactants share, the interactants’ discernment or interpretation of the social rules, immediate context of the interaction, and possible strategies for the interactants to choose under the constrains of the other simultaneously functioning factors. Based on the data collected from recent Japanese TV dramas, this study maintains that, as a general principle, Brown and Levinson’s (1978, 1987) theory of face does apply to Japanese language and culture and forms the base of politeness. Similarly as in any other culture, facework in successful communication in Japanese is a result of choice by an interlocutor in accordance with normative polite practices. What makes linguistic politeness in Japanese unique is not that Japanese speakers need to act appropriately according to their social norm, but that their discernment (wakimae) and recognition of the social position and relationship (tachiba) of the participants, which form the second layer of the determining factors of politeness, make speakers of Japanese always attend to and try to fulfil the other participant’s face want including both positive and negative face, and, at the same time, maintain their own positive face but rarely claim their own negative face especially when an interactant has less power and in a lower social position in an interaction. The data also suggest a model of face-redressing strategies co-occurring with face threatening acts (FTA) in Japanese.
The Pragmatic Concept of Politeness and Face Work by Different Linguistic Scholars
2021
In this review article an attempt was made to deconstruct the pragmatic concept of politeness and face workfrom the perspectives of different linguistics authorities and their frameworks. In addition, it highlights how face work and politeness are related and function together in certain social contexts.The critical review convers various dimensions and concepts relevant to various aspects in the aforementioned frameworks. The review yielded concepts which could be used to find the expression of politeness and face work in different cultures and languages of the world.
English Linguistics (English Society of Japan) 33: 2 (2017) 511–543, 2017
This review paper focusses on how Leech’s (2014) General Strategy of Politeness and its sub-strategies (maxims) of pos-/neg-politeness work in the naturally occurring data of Japanese and English. The ultimate goal is to explore how people in conversation proceeds interactively by aligning themselves with each other in order to attain positive/negative politeness goals. Rather than looking at data pragmalinguistically in the sense of Leech (2014), we maintain the view that politeness phenomena are to be analyzed functionally and sequentially. After reviewing Leech’s most recent approaches, we propose that his (old) cost/benefit or (new) high/low value maxims of politeness principle may be applicable to natural data in some way, but need complete revision in terms of social and functional perspectives.