POLITENESS

1. Semra Emici Tuba Göktürk Duygu YoldaşRıdvan GürevinNihan ErgönülHüda Karasu Mustafa Murat Ata POLITENESS

2. Politeness Mustafa Murat Ata

3. At all times when people interact, identities and senses of selves are jostling for attention. A central concept in pragmatics is the concept of face, that is, the public self-image that we all want to maintain.

4. There are two aspects to the concept of face: • Negative face, which basically denotes the need to be independent and free from imposition. Example: A- Couldyoulend me a pen? B- I’m sorrytobotheryou, but can I ask youfor a penorsomething? C- I knowyouarebusy,butmight ı ask you if-emm- ifyouhappentohave an extrapenfor me?

5. Positive face, which very simplified, denotes the need to belong and be accepted. Example: Yourfriendasksfor a ridetotheairport. Positivefaceneeds: Youthink, I bettertakehim, because ı wanthimtolike me, and I wantthereputation of being a reliableperson. Inconclusion, negativeface is theneedto be independent, andpositiveface is theneedto be connected.

6. Politeness is a way of interaction which shows awareness of and respect for someone else’s face. A face threatening act is an act that threatens the integrity and self-image of another person. For example, giving someone a direct order such as “Sit down” and “be quit” implies having social power over that person. Conversely, if we act or behave in a way that lessens a possible threat to another person’s face, we engage in a face saving act. If, for example, you wish to get on with the meeting and that your colleague would stop roaming about the room talking on his mobile phone, you might convey this by using an indirect speech act like “Right”, “should we sit down and continue?”

7. This section will give a very brief sketch of how indirect speech acts differ from direct speech acts, as well as mention some ways in which languages have grammaticalized politeness. It is beyond the scope of this section to give a comprehensive discussion of all the aspects involved in the study of linguistic politeness.

8. INDIRECT SPEECH ACTS RıdvanGÜREVİN

9. A speech act is an utterance that has performative function in language and communication. Speech acts may be either direct or indirect. In a direct speech act the content of the utterance corresponds the speaker’s intention of the utterance. So the declarative is a statement uttered with the purpose of giving information whereas interrogative is a question uttered with the purpose of getting information, and the imperative is a command uttered with the purpose of getting someone to do something.

10. Namely; when engaging in direct speech, we mean what we say. When using the direct speech, we must take into account social situations involving the complex structures of cooperation. For example; giving someone a direct command implies that we have power over him or we are very intimate with him or both. A parent can give a command to his child, or close friends sometimes can give commands to each other. But it is not useful for a student to give a command to his teacher. Therefore, we engage in various politeness strategies.

11. If we want to save someone’s negative face, we must use some phrases like excuse me, pardon me, I am sorry to bother you, etc. A way of saving someone’s positive face is to increase the sense of group belonging, for example we can use the inclusive we (You are at a meeting and one of your friend is talking on the phone as well as walking around. And you: Right, should we sit down and continue?). Although the use of we gives a tone of group belonging, there is one intended addressee.

12. When engaging indirect speech, we do not mean exactly what we say. For example, when a stranger asks you do you know where the Forum is? You probably answer it by giving directions instead of answering something like yes I know. For example, you and your friend are in your room and your friend says you here is too hot. You probably interpret that as an indirect command ‘’ open the windows.’’ Namely; interrogatives and declaratives can be used as politely disguised request or commands.

13. Indirect speech acts are commonly used to reject proposals and to make requests. For example, a speaker asks, "Would you like to meet me for coffee?" and another replies, "I have class." The second speaker used an indirect speech act to reject the proposal. This is indirect because the literal meaning of "I have class" does not entailany sort of rejection.

14. When interpreting speech acts, there is always a misunderstanding between individuals and cultures. What is polite for someone may not be for the other and so on. For example; the individual who has been raised to never directly ask for something might, when having dinner with his colleagues, ask her neighbor would you like some more potatoes? in the expectation that the neighbor will then ask the same question to which she can safely say yes.

15. But if the neighbor does not think it impolite to ask for something, he might not understand the question as an indirect speech act, and might therefore simply answer no thank you, in which case there has been a miscommunication. This is true for clashes between people of different cultures.

16. Honorifics Hüda Karasu

17. Honorifics Manylanguagesgrammaticalizevariouspolitenessstrategies. Honorifics can be thought as devicesformarkingsocialdistinction. Following Brown andLevinsonwe can classifyhonorifics in threetypesdepending on therelationshipbetweenthespeakerandothers. Thereferenthonorifics, whichhaveto do withtherelationshipbetweenthespeakerandthingsorpersonsreferredto. Addresseehonorifics, whichhaveto do withtherelationshipbetweenthespeakerandaddressee. Bystanderhonorifics, whichhaveto do withtherelationshipbetweenthespeakerandthe “bystanders” oroverhearers.

18. Referenthonorifics With a referenthonorificthepolitenessorrespectdistinctionsareconveyedbyreferringtothetarget of therespect, that is, thechoice of thelinguistic form is dependent on what is referredto. A wellknowninstance of referenthonorifics is thechoice of pronounwhenaddressing a person. InEuroppeanlanguages it is verycommontohave a binarydistinction of politeness, whereone form is consideredfamiliarandtheotherpolite, as in the French distinction tu/vous, both of whichreferto a singleperson. Thisbinarydistinction in pronouns of address is oftencalledT/V pronouns, tu ‘you.SG.NOM’ andvous ‘you.PL.NOM’.

19. In his sample of 207 languages on politenessdistinctions in secondpersonpronouns, Helmbrechtfoundthat 49 languages (23.7 %) makeuse of thiskind of binarydistinction, many of whichcluster in Europe, but theselanguagesshowsvastlydifferentlevels of T/V pronounusage. Forexample, in Germanthepolite form Sie is theStandard form of addressbetweenadultswhoare not in a closesocialrelation. InSwedish, however, it is imaginabletousethepluralpronoun form nitoaddress a singleperson, thecontextwould be highlymarkedindeed.

20. Addressingbetweenadultswhodon’tknoweachother is withthesingulardu. Theusage of universalduin Swedish is a ratherrecentphenomenonand, interestinglyenough, it seemsthatthelanguagemight be changingbacktomakingpolitenessdistinctions.

21. Somelanguages, 15 (7.2%) in Helmbrecht’sdatabase, mainlyclustered in South Asia but alsofoundelsewhere, usemultiplepolitenessdistinctions fort he secondpersonpronoun. Nepali is an example of a languagewiththreelevels of politenessdistinctions in thesingularandtwo in theplural.

22. Nepali (Indo-European (Indic): Nepal

23. PRONOUN AVOIDANCE Nihan Ergönül

24. ► Therearealsolanguageswhere a pronoun is avoidedforthesake of politeness. Intheselanguages it may be consideredfacethreateningtodirectlyaddress a person, sootherkinds of termsareusedinstead, such as statusandkindshiptermsorvariouskinds of titles, andso on.

25. ► InIndonesian, forexample, kinshipterms: Saudara ‘sibling;relative of samegeneration’ function as an impersonalpronounusedbetweenspeakers of thesamegeneration (orby a speakertosomebodyyounger) whentheyare not wellacquainted. Whilesuchterm as bapak ‘father’ oribu ‘mother’ areused as a respectfuladdresstopeopleolderthanthespeakerandbetweenadults of marriable age. ► Veryoftenpeoplewillavoidusingthepronounevenwhen on an equalstatuslevel, andinsteadusetheaddressee’s name. Effectivelysayingsomethinglike ‘DoesTomwantmoretea?’ whenaddressingTom.

26. ►Themajority of thelanguages in Helmbrecht’sdatabase, however, do not makeanypolitenessdistinctionsforthesecondpersonpronominals. Thelanguages in APICS display an almostidenticalpatterns, as shown in theTablebelow.

27. ►Referenthonorificswhichpronounpoliteness is a part of thechoice of form is dependent on whoorwhat is beingreferredto. Withsecondpersonpronounsthereferentandthetargethappento be thesame. But wemayalsohavehonorificdistinctions in thethirdperson. InKorean, forexample, thechoice of thethirdpersonpronoun is dependent on what is beingreferredtoandwhatlevel of politeness is required:

28. 3rd PERSON SINGULAR PLURAL THING D-kes ‘it’ D-kes-tul ‘they’ CHILD D-ay ‘s/he’ D-ay-tul ‘they’ ADULT:FAMILIARD-salam ‘s/he’ D-salam-tul ‘they’ ADULT:BLUNT D-i ‘s/he’ D-i-tul ‘they’ ADULT:POLITE D-pun ‘s/he’ D-pun-tul ‘they’

29. ADDRESSEE HONORIFICS Semra Emici

30. Addresseehonorifics : expresssocialstatus of personbeingspokento (thehearer) regardless of what is beingtalkedabout. Forexample, Javanese has threedifferentwordsfor “house” depending on thestatuslevel of thepersonspokento. An addresseehonorificsystem : linguistic form choice is dependent on theaddressee of theutterance. ● Languagesmayhavemorphologicallyvariableformsdepending on levels of politeness. Thismay be seen in verbforms ( differentkinds of imperativescarryingdifferentkinds of politenessconnotations. Languagesmaymake a distinctionbetweenimmediateanddistalimperatives (immediateimperative is a familiarcommandwhilethedistalimperative is a politecommand).

31. EpenaPedeee ( Choco ( Choco): Colombia) a. phatakho-ti plantaineat- IMP. PL ‘ Eattheplantain!’ b. thipiphua-pheda a-hi firewoodblow- POL. IMP say- PAST ‘ He said, “ youwillhaveto fan the fire’’’. Above, it is seenthatThere is politeimperativereceivingitsownmorphologicalmarking. Compare –ti in (a) with – pheda in (b). Thisshowsthataction is goingtohaveto be carriedoutsomepoint in thefuture. Thedistal natüre of thiskind of imperativemakes it lessdirectandsologicallymorepolite.

32. Korean: Korean honorifics Koreanhonorificspeech is a mixture of subjecthonorification, objectexaltation, andthevariousspeechstyles. Depending on how thesethreefactorsareused, thespeakerhighlightsdifferentaspects of therelationshipbetweenthespeaker, thesubject, andthelistener (whomayalso be thesubject). TheKoreanlanguageincorporates a hierarchy of speech stylesdividedaccordingtoitssystem of honorificseachwithitsown set of verbendings.Thesixspeechstylesfromlowesttohighestare:

33. 1. Plain style (haeracheor해라체) • Formal • Signalsmoresocialdistancebetweenthespeakerandaddresseethanthatwhenusingintimatestyle • Generallyusedwhenwritingfor a general audience • Generallyused in writtenlanguage, but when it used in spokenlanguage, it representsadmiration.

34. 2. Banmalorintimate style (haecheor해체) • Informal. • Typicallyusedwithclosefriends, byparentstotheirchildren, by a relativelyolderspeakerto a child, bychildrentochildren, orbyyoungsterstothesame-ages. • Recently, manychildrenusebanmaltotheirparents.

35. 3. familiar style (hagecheor하게체) • Moreformalthanbanmalstyle • Signalsthatthespeakerwilltreatthelistenerwithconsiderationandcourtesy • Typicallyusedwhentheaddressee is belowthespeaker in ageorsocialrank (e.g. thespeaker is at leastthirtyyearsoldandtheaddressee is of collegeage) • Thefamiliarstylegenerallyimpliesthespeaker is showingauthoritythereforetypicallyrequiresthespeakerto be sufficientlymature. • Womenseldomusefamiliarstylebecause it is commonlyassociatedwithmaleauthority. • Generally, it is usedbyseniorcitizens, gettingout of usebymost of people in everydaylanguage.

36. 4. semiformal or blunt style (haocheor하오체) • Moreformalthanfamiliarstylewithneutralpoliteness • Usedtoaddresssomeone in an inferiorposition (e.g. ageorsocialrank) • A speakerwillusesemiformalstylewith a strangerwhosesocialrank is clear but not particularlylowercomparedtothespeaker. • It is generallyusedbyseniorcitizens, gettingout of usedbymost of people in everydaylanguage. • Whensemiformalstyle is usedbyyoungpeople, it alsorepresentshumorous sense, and is thoughtto be unsuitableforserioussituations.

37. 5. polite style (haeyocheor해요체) • Informalbut polite. • Typicallyusedwhentheaddressee is a superior (e.g. bychildrentotheirparents, studentstoteachers) • This is themostcommonspeechstyleand is commonlyusedbetweenstrangers.

38. 6. formal or deferential style (hapshocheor합쇼체) • Usedtotreatsuperiorswiththemostreserveandthemostrespect • Commonlyused in speechesdeliveredtolargeaudiences, in newsreports, radiobroadcasts, business, andformaldiscussions. • Inmost of cases, booksarewritten in plainstyle(herache), orformalstyle(hapshoche). • Insomecases, speakerswillswitchbetweenpoliteandformalstylesdepending on thesituationandtheatmospherethatonewishestoconvey. • Thesesixspeechstylesaresometimesdividedintohonorificandnon-honorificlevelswheretheformalandpolitestylesarehonorificandthe rest arenon-honorific. Accordingto Strauss andEun, thetwohonorificspeechlevelsare “prototypicallyusedamongnon-intimateadults of relativelyequalrank”. Comparatively, thenon-honorificspeechlevelsaretypicallyusedbetweenintimates, in-groupmembers, or in “downwarddirections of addressbythespeakerto his or her interlocutor.

39. Koreanverbsare not onlymarkedwith TMA andsentencetypeaffixes but also a host of affixesrelatingtoaddreseehonorifics. Forexample, statementlikeit israiningtakessixdifferentformsdepending on thesocialrelationshipbetweenthespeakerandtheaddressee:

40. Korean (Isolate: N, S Korea)

41. Javanesehas a so -called ‘honorificregister’, thechoice of vocabulary is addreseehonorific. Thechoice of whichwordstousefor an utterance is dependent on therelationshipbetweenthespeakerandtheaddressee. Three main speechlevels: • Ngoko (informal) : usedonlyspeakingtosmoveryfamiliar. • Madyo (semi-polite): usedwithpeople of an intermediatelevel of familiarity, likeneighbours. • Kromo (polite) : usedwithdistantadults.

42. Respectvocabularyconveys an addedlevel of respect. It has twosubcategories 1. Kromoinggel : withhighlyrespectedpersons. 2. Kromoandap : used in referringtoanyperson’sactionstowards a highlyrespectedperson. Fivedifferentwordsthataretranslatedthesamewayinto English, carrydifferentlevels of politeness.

43. NGOKO MADYO KROMO KROMO INGGEL KROMO ANDAP Akonkenkengken/purehdawohng-atur-I Above, therearefivedifferentwordsthatalltranslateintothesamething in English. But thewordchoice is dependent on thelevel of therespectthespeakerwishesor is obligedtoshowtheaddressee. Therearealsofurtherdistinctions in thechoice of grammaticalaffixes. Thecombination of vocabularyandaffixesleadsto nine differentlevels of politeness. Thethree main speechlevelvocabularieshavedifferentsizes: ngoko is thebasicvocabularycarryingeverykind of concept, kromo has about 850 words , kromoinggel has about 260 words, madyo has about 35 wordsandkromoandap has about 20 words ( Myhill: 75f). Javanese(Austronesian ( Javanese): Indonesia)

44. BYSTANDER HONOROFICS Duygu Yoldaş

45. Bystanderhonoroficsexpressthestatus of someonewho is nearby, but not a participant in theconversation. Withbystanderhonorofics, thelinguistic form of thelanguageisn’tdependent on thespeakeror on theaddressee, but on who is withinearshot of theutterance. Thelinguistic form of thelanguageisn’tdependent on therelationshipbetweenthespeakerandtheaddresssee, nor it is dependent on what is beingreferredto.

46. However, it depends on anyonewho can hearwhat is beingsaid. Therefore, thiscoversparticipants, such as audiences, as well as “non-participants” or “bystanders”. This is oftentermed “avoidancelanguage” or “honoroficsregister”. It is theleastcommon, andarefoundprimarily in “avoidancespeech” such as themother-in-lawlanguages of aboriginalAustralia, whereonechangesone’sspeech in the presence of an in-laworothertabooedrelative. ManyAustralianlanguageshavebystanderhonorificstovaryingdegrees.

47. Dyirbal is famousforhaving had twolanguagevariantssuch as GuwalandDyalɲuy. Guwalwasused in allcircumstancesexceptwhencertain “taboorelatives” werepresent. Inthesekind of situations in whichtaboorelativeswereusedDyalɲuy had to be used. Thereforetheavoidancelanguage, Dyalɲuy, had to be usedwhenever a taboorelativewaswithinearshot. Thetaboowassymmetricalforinstance – if X wastabooto Y sowas Y to X.

48. Taboorelativeswere: 1-) a parent in-law of theoppositesex; and, bythesymmetryrule, a child in-law of theoppositesex. 2-) a cross-cousin of theoppositesex- that is, father’sormother’sbrother’schild. AlthoughthetwolanguagesGuwalandDyalɲuydiffercompletely in theirvocabulary, theywereidenticalphonologicallyandalmostidenticalgramatically.

49. Dyirbal ( Australian (Pama- Nyungan) : Australia) GuwalDyalɲuy yanubawalbil‘go’ buɽalɲuɽimal‘see, look at’ ɲalɲgaɲalmaru‘child’ ɲinaymadirabil‘sit, stay, camp’

50. Taboorelativesare not identicalcross- culturallywhilst a number of languagesmayhave ‘taboorelatives’. InGuugu- Yimidhirr, a traditionalAustralianAboriginallanguage, specialavoidancelexemesareusedtoexpressdeferencewhen in the presence of tabooed in-lawrelatives. Inotherwords, speakerswilleither be completelyprohibitedfromspeakingtoone’smother-in-lawormustemployavoidancelanguagetoone’sbrother in-law.