Linguistic Politeness: Editor as diplomat

1. Linguistic Politeness: Editor as diplomat TECM 5195 Dr. Chris Lam

2. Linguistic Politeness Theory • Brown and Levinson (1987) • Founded in pragmatics and based on speech act theory (Austin, 1962) • All utterances perform a locutionary act and an illocutionary act • Locutionary act is the act of saying something • Illocutionary act is the underlying meaning • What are the potential meanings of this question? Does this need salt?

3. Face • Face is positive self-image (Goffman, 1967) • Don’t think about positive and negative face as one being more valuable than another • Negative face- need for autonomy/individualism • Positive face- need for social approval, solidarity

4. Some assumptions • All model persons (MPs) have positive and negative face and are rational agents (i.e.- they choose means that will satisfy their end) • In general, it’s of mutual interest to two MPs to maintain each other’s face (unless there is coercion or trickery involved) • Some acts are intrinsically face threatening (FTA)

5. So what can we do? • We can either 1) perform the FTA or 2) mitigate the FTA • Bald on Record- performed without redressive action • On the record with redressive action • Positive politeness • Negative politeness • Off the record (Hint)

6. Practice • Hey, would you mind changing the channel? • Close the door. • Please forward me the email. • If it’s not too much trouble, get back to me by Friday. • You’ve been so reliable in the past, so could I ask you to send me the file by Friday?

7. Examples • Bald on Record- Close the door. • Positive politeness- Since we’ll be here for a while, can you close the door? • Negative politeness- If you don’t mind, could you close the door? • Off the record- It’s getting loud in the hallway.

8. Sociological Variables • Social distance • Think about how you would say “pass the salt” to a stranger versus a family member • Power distance • Think about how you would say “pass the salt” to the president of the University versus your roommate • Absolute ranking • Think about asking someone to “pass the salt” versus “borrowing $500 dollars”

9. Politeness Strategies • Syntactic (changing the structure of the sentence to make it less direct) • Could you pass the salt? • Would you pass the salt? • Pass the salt. • Optional moves (additional linguistic choices that are completely optional) • Supportive moves (add semantic content) • It’s cold outside, so close the window. • You’re the tallest person, so could you close the window? • Hey buddy, close the window. • Downgraders (don’t add semantic content) • Please close the window. • Close the window if possible. • Would it be possible if weclosed the window?

10. So, how do you choose correctly? • Consider your face • Consider hearer’s face • Consider sociological variables • Consider the need for clarity

11. Relationships between writers and editors • Relationships between writers and editors are often contentious • Writers don’t want editors to “demand a single solution” • Editors can be seen as “controlling” or taking “control of a paper” • Important for editors to be language experts AND diplomats

12. Editing as an FTA • Editing is inherently an FTA • Telling a writer to make a change impedes negative face • Criticizing a writer (explicitly or implicitly) impedes positive face • So where does politeness come into play? • Linguistic politeness refers to using language to tend to both positive and negative face needs

13. So, what’s the dilemma? • Relationships between writers and editors is already contentious • Editing is inherently an FTA • SO, editors must balance clarity and politeness

14. Levels of directness • Direct- Unambiguous • Include a table • Conventionally indirect- Creates pragmatic ambiguity (2 possible meanings) • Can you include a table? • Nonconventionally indirect (hints)- Creates pragmatic vagueness (many meanings) • Graphic aids create interest

15. Downgraders • Can be added to both direct or indirect utterances • Fine tune the level of indirectness of an utterance • Can be stacked • Lexical or phrasal (word-level) • I think (Subjectivizer) • Maybe/Perhaps (Hedge) • Possibly (Downtoner) • OK? (Appealer) • You know, (Cajoler) • Just (Understater)

16. Supportive Moves • Can be added to direct and indirect strategies • Mitigate FTAs • Add semantic content (move beyond word or phrase-level) • This will help the reader find your work experience more easily (payoff statement) • This is a good start, but (compliment)

17. Direct strategies • Bald-on-record • Locution-derivable • Opinion statement

18. Bald-on-record • Most face-threatening, but also most clear • Some non-native speakers actually prefer bald-on-record • Insert work experience here • Suggestions for bald-on-record • Mitigate with downgraders (Insert work experience here, OK?) • Mitigate with compliments (I like what you’ve listed, but insert work experience here) • Mitigate Payoff statement (Insert work experience here. The reader will be able to access it more easily)

19. Locution-derivable • The locution (force or obligation) can be derived by the hearer • Insert a high-value modal verb • Should, will, or ought • Suggestions for locution-derivable • Avoid passive voice locution-derivable (The table ought to be inserted here.) • Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with downgraders (You know, you should include a table here) • Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with compliments (The content is good for this section, but you should include a table here.) • Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with payoff statements (You should include a table here; it will make it easier for the audience)

20. Opinion statement strategy • Changes the point-of-view, while remaining direct and unambiguous • Suggestions • Use them! (I would put my work experience before education)

21. Conventionally indirect strategies • Preparatory • Interrogative

22. Preparatory • Refers to some condition that must be true for the hearer to be prepared to perform the directive • More polite than most direct strategies, but introduces ambiguity • Use low-value modal verbs • Can and Could Suggestions • Avoid preparatory strategies when intent is to convey obligations • Reserve for possibility or options (You could remove your references)

23. Interrogative strategy • Less direct than all previous • States directive as a question Suggestions • Avoid when obligation is intended. • Reserve for actual inquiries (Can you include more information for each work entry?)

24. Non-Conventionally Indirect Strategies • Strong hints (This section has a lot of information) • Mild hints (Tables can help when you have a lot of information) Suggestions • AVOID!

25. Conveying possibilityand not obligation • Use illocutionary-force indicating device (explicitly state purpose) • Use with preparatory strategies • You might include more information about your work experience. This is just a suggestion, however.