Politeness Theory

1. Politeness Theory

2. Back to Grice’s CP • A: We’ll all miss Robin Harr and Bob, won’t we? B: Well, we’ll all miss Robin Harr.

3. Leech (1983) defines POLITENESS as forms of behavior which are aimed at the establishment and maintenance of comity, i.e., the ability of participants in a social-communicative interaction to engage in interaction at an atmosphere of relative harmony.

4. Leech’s Politeness Principle Minimize (other things being equal) the expression of impolite beliefs and Maximize (other things being equal) the expression of polite beliefs.

5. tact generosity approbation modesty agreement sympathy The 6 maxims of Leech’s PP vs vs

6. Leech’s Politeness Principle • Tact Maxim(in impositives/directives and commissives) a. Minimize cost to other b. Maximize benefit to other • Generosity Maxim(in impositives/directives and commissives) a. Minimize benefit to self b. Maximize cost to self

7. Examples • Maxims of tact and generosity Take a seat. /Have a banana. Wait a second. Could you sharpen these pencils, please. (less polite) Could these pencils be sharpened, please. (more polite) ----------------------------------------------- I can offer you my car if you need it. You can offer me your car because I need it I can drop you in town if you like. You can drop me in town.

8. Gu Yueguo (1990)’s revision: • The Tact Maxim (in impositives) (i) At the motivational level (a) Minimize cost to other (including content- and manner-regulating senses) (ii) At the conversational level (a) Maximize benefit received • The Generosity Maxim (in commissives) (i) At the motivational level (a) Maximize benefit to other (including content- and manner-regulating senses) (ii) At the conversational level (a) Minimize cost to self

9. Politeness scale: Cost – benefit(have to do with content-regualting) • Have another sandwich. • Enjoy your holiday. • Look at that. • Sit down. • Hand me the newspaper. • Peel these potatoes. benefit to h cost to h

10. Politeness scale: Directness/optionality(have to do with manner-regualting) • Could you possibly answer the phone? • Would you mind answering the phone? • Can you answer the phone? • Will you answer the phone? • I want you to answer the phone. • Answer the phone. indirect direct

11. Approbation Maxim(in expressives and assertives) a. Minimize dispraise of other b. Maximize praise of other • Maxim of modesty(in expressives and assertives) a. Minimize praise of self b. Maximize dispraise of self Source: Leech 1983: 81, 132.

12. Speech-regulating A: I can drop you in town if you like. B: It’s very kind of you, but it will cause you some inconvenience, won’t it? A: No, not at all. I’m going in that direction. B: Thank you very much.

13. Examples • Maxims of approbation and modesty • What a marvelous meal you cooked! What an awful meal you cooked! A: This is one of the best articles I’ve ever read. B: Yes, it’s brilliant, isn’t it? 我这个大老粗，不会说话。

14. Leech’s Politeness Principle • Agreement Maxim a. Minimize disagreement between self and other b. Maximize agreement between self and other • Yes/Right / I think so. / Me, too. /Can’t agree more. Source: Leech 1983: 81, 132.

15. Partial agreement / token agreement A: That’s where you live, Florida? B: That’s where I was born. A: You hate your mom and dad.. B: Sometimes. A: Have you got friends? B: I have friends. So-called friends. I had friends. Let me put that way.

16. Leech’s Politeness Principle • Sympathy Maxim a. Minimize antipathy between self and other b. Maximize sympathy between self and other Source: Leech 1983: 81, 132.

17. Politeness: Examples I’m terribly sorry to hear about your cat. I’m delighted to hear about your cat. • Maxim of sympathy

18. Reminder • Tact Maxim > Generosity Maxim • Approbation Maxim > Modesty Maxim • Submaxim-a > Submaxim-b Illocutionary goals vs. social goals --- politeness • Competitive acts: requesting, ordering, refusing, etc. • Convivial acts: offering, inviting, thanking, etc. • Collaborative acts: reporting, instructing, etc. • Conflictive acts: threatening, cursing, etc.

19. A: What a nice jumper you’re wearing. B: Oh, it’s a very old one. A: What a nice jumper you’re wearing. B: Yes, it’s beautiful, isn’t it? Clash and tradeoff between maxims • Modesty and agreement

20. A: My, what a splendid garden you have here - the lawn is so nice and big, it’s certainly wonderful, isn’t it? B: Oh no, not at all, we don’t take care of it at all any more, so it simply doesn’t look as nice as we would like it to. A: Oh no, I don’t think so at all - but since it’s such a big garden, of course, it must be quite a tremendous task to take care of it all by yourself; but even so, you certainly do manage to make it look nice all the time: it certainly is nice and pretty any time one sees it. B: No. I’m afraid not, not at all ...

21. When two maxims come into conflict, we have to allow one maxim to take priority over the other. In the above example, the Japanese woman put Modesty Maxim at a prior position over Agreement Maxim, while English-speakers would be inclined to find some compromise between violating the Modesty Maxim and violating the Agreement Maxim.

22. The greater value attached to the Modesty Maxim in Japanese culture is indicated further by the greater degree of understatement employed in giving presents. An English person may call his gift “small”, the Japanese may go further, and say: “This is a gift which will be of no use to you,……” (Modesty M overrule Quality M) A host may even go to the extreme of denying the existence of the food he is offering: “There is nothing (to eat), but please……” (Modesty Maxim overrule Quality Maxim)

23. Clash between maxims • Quantity and agreement • A: This was a marvellous concert. • B: Well, the first piece was quite nice.

24. Pragmatic Paradox • Paradox arises from the conflict of 2 maxims, here from the conflict of the Modesty and Approbation Maxims, just as it may arise from the conflict of Tact and Generosity Maxims when an offer/invitation is repeatedly declined. In this case, the pragmatic paradox takes the form of repeatedly denying the truth of a compliment.

25. Trade-off between different maxims A: You were so kind to us. B: Yes, I was, wasn’t I. In offering food to a guest, a Japanese may say: Please have one! (this sentence apparently minimizes generosity, but attach greater importance to modesty: to offer more than one is to suggest that one’s food is worth eating.)

26. Implication or Application • Cross-cultural pragmatics (Thomas, 1995) A lot of research has been made into the cultural differences in observing Leech’s Politeness Principle and those speech acts that are closely related to politeness, such as request, apology, compliment, refusal, etc. • Interlanguage pragmatics Research has been done in the difference in identifying politeness scale between natives and second language learners.

27. Criticism of PP Leech’s model has attracted a lot of criticism. It has mainly been censured for the unlimited number of maxims which can be produced to explain every perceived regularity in language use (cf. Barron 2003: 17; Spencer-Oatey 2000b: 39; Thomas 1995: 167). This makes Leech’s approach “at best inelegant, at worst virtually unfalsifiable” (Thomas 1995: 167).

28. The six maxims are not set according to the same criteria, some for polite behavior, some for polite speech.

29. Furthermore, empirical research has revealed that there is not always a positive correlation between politeness and indirectness (cf. Blum-Kulka 1987: 136ff.; Blum-Kulka 1990: 269ff.; Held 1996: 78), making Leech’s equation of indirectness and politeness untenable. • Moreover, Kasper (1990) criticizes the conversational-maxim view for its lack of any empirical basis (Kasper 1990: 194), and is supported by Watts et al. (1992: 7) and Taylor and Cameron (1987: 97) who judge Leech’s theory to be too theoretical to apply to real language. A final critical aspect concerns Leech’s narrow focus on the polite side of language and his neglect of all types of uncooperative communication (cf. Trosborg 1995: 25).

30. Politeness is culture-specific • Politeness is universal, i.e. it can be observed as a phenomenon in all cultures • Despite its universality the actual manifestations of politeness, the ways to realize politeness, and the standards of judgment differ in different cultures.

31. Leech, 1983 • Some eastern cultures (e.g. China and Japan) tend to value the Modesty Maxim much more highly than Western countries. • English-speaking culture (particularly British?) gives prominence to the Maxim of Tact. • Mediterranean cultures place a higher value on the Generosity Maxim and a low value on the Modesty Maxim.

32. Differences in Politeness Between English and Chinese Culture Modesty • A: Your new skirt is very beautiful. • B: Thank you! • 外国客人：你的工作做得很好。 • 中国服务员：不， 我的工作还有许多缺点。

33. Modesty: Responding to compliments • When being complimented, an English-speaking person would readily accept the compliment by saying something like “Thank you” to show his appreciation of the praise. • A Chinese speaker would try to deny the truth of the compliment. Self-denigration has been at the core of Chinese notion of politeness for over two thousand years. • They both are being modest and they both think they are behaving properly.

34. Studies of Politeness in China • 徐盛桓，礼貌原则新拟 （外语学刊，1992/2） • Gu, Yueguo, Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 1990:14, 237-257. • 顾曰国，礼貌，语用与文化 （外语教学与研究，1992/4）

35. 注意交际者身份，促进各方关系，注重得体性。注意交际者身份，促进各方关系，注重得体性。 徐盛桓教授的模式 1． 注意自身一方 （1） 适合自己身份地位的话，不说不适合自己身份地位的话。 （2 ） 说话通常倾向于较为谦逊。

36. 2. 尊重对方 （1）说适合对方身份地位的话，不说不适合对方身份地位的话。 （2）对于对方，话语通常倾向于较为尊重或客气，尊重客气的程度 （i） 同对方尊长或同他们跟自己疏远的程度成正比。 （ii） 同对方付出的代价的程度成正比。 （iii）同对方要求他人付出的代价成反比。

37. A: Excuse me, but would you please tell me how to get to Martin Place?” B: Well, go straight, and then turn left. You won’t miss it.

38. 3. 考虑第三方 • 充分注意到交际时在场的第三方， 不说影响到他们身份地位的话。 如果有需要，可以说适合他们身份地位的话。 • 充分注意话语中提及的第三方，不说影响到他们身份地位的话，如果有需要，可以说适合他们身份地位的话。

39. Example • Several ladies and gentlemen are attending a dinner party. At the end of it, Mr. Liu comments, “Ah, Miss Li is the most beautiful girl tonight.”

40. Gu Yueguo’s set of politeness maxims Four notions underlying the Chinese conception of “limao” (Gu, 1990): • Respectfulness: appreciation or admiration of other (concerning the latter’s face, social status…) [largely identical with the need to maintain the hearer’s positive face] • Modesty/Self-denigration [though varying in the importance attached to it in different cultures, is to a large extent universal; but to interpret it as self-denigration is uniquely Chinese] • Attitudinal warmth: demonstration of kindness, consideration, hospitality to other [bears a strong Chinese trait for demonstrating kindness and consideration and hospitality, the speaker runs the risk of infringing on the hearer’s personal freedom, thus threatening his negative face] • Refinement: self’s behavior to other which meets certain standards [represents the normative character of politeness, which, though universal, has not been mentioned in any important theory concerning politeness raised by western scholars so far]

41. This formulation has integrated certain features universally recognized in the conception of politeness in various cultures and certain features so much emphasized in the Chinese culture as to be almost uniquely Chinese.

42. Politeness maxims specific to China (Gu,1992) • “自卑而尊人”与贬己尊人准则 (The maxim of denigrating oneself and elevating the others) • 上下有义，贵贱有分， 长幼有等”与称呼准则(Addressing maxim ) • 彬彬有礼”与文雅准则 (Refinement maxim) • “脸”“面子”与求同准则 (Agreement-seeking maxim) • “有德者必有言与德、言、行准则 ” (Virtue, speech and act maxim)

43. “自卑而尊人”与贬己尊人准则 The tradition of humbling oneself and honoring others lies at the very core of Chinese way of politeness.In modern times,self-denigration and self-effacing take the place of humbling oneself. The maxim of self-denigration and other-respecting requires that one should be modest and humble in addressing oneself and things related to oneself. On the other hand,when one addressing a hearer and things related to the hearer, he should try to elevate and honor the hearer. e.g.鄙人，小弟 您老，阁下小儿，小女 令郎，令爱 愚见，拙见 高见，尊意

44. 上下有义，贵贱有分， 长幼有等”与称呼准则 This maxim manifests itself in the way of addressing, which shows the social relation between people, and the change of which more or less indicates the variations in people's relationship. e.g.姓+老师（学生对老师），老先生（对长者），小朋友（对小孩），大使夫人您好（不说大使老婆你好） Therefore, addressing maxim means greet others with appropriate terms.

45. 彬彬有礼”与文雅准则 Refinement maxim demands the use of refined statement and avoidance of vulgar speech, and also demands more frequent use of euphemisms instead of direct way of speaking.

46. “有德者必有言与德、言、行准则 ” Virtue, speech and act maxim means trying every means to minimize the cost of others and maximize the benefits of others when meaning to do something; try every means to overstate one's benefits and understate one's cost. 甲：鸡我帮你买。 乙：行吗？太麻烦你了。你不是要到邮局去吗？ 甲：顺便。放在车篓里，又不费事。 乙：那太谢谢你了。

47. “脸”、“面子”与求同准则 The so-called agreement-seeking maxim denotes that both the speaker and the hearer seek agreement with each other in many respects and try their best to meet the desire of the other side. For example,when one has to scold others or air different view, they tend to praise the other side before speaking out his disagreement. In making a request, which is not impolite in nature,one exposes his feeling to the hearer.

48. Chen Xinren: Normative politeness vs strategic politeness, in “Polysemous” Politeness: Speaker Self-referring Forms in Honglou Meng, in Yuling Pan & Dániel Z. Kádár (eds.) , Chinese Discourse and Interaction, EQUINOX, LONDON • Michael Haugh, Anticipated politeness versus inferred politeness, Multilingua 22, 4: 397-413

49. Chaoqun Xie, Ziran He, & Dajin Lin, Politeness: myth and truth, Studies in Language, Volume 29, No.2, 2005, pp.285-551.

50. New Development • Politeness: Is There an East-West Divide <<外国语>>2005年06期