politeness theory brown & levinson (1987) cheryl holden

10
Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Upload: jemimah-french

Post on 23-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Politeness TheoryBrown & Levinson (1987)

Cheryl Holden

Page 2: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Introduction• Where does this theory fit into linguistics?

• Who are Brown & Levinson?

• B&L’s objectives

• So, what’s the theory?

• How does it work?

• Is it bomb-proof?

Page 3: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Where does this theory fit into linguistics?

• Linguistics > pragmatics / interactional sociolinguistics > politeness / facework

• Brown & Levinson < Erving Goffman(1922-1982) <<< Émile Durkheim (1858-1917)

Page 4: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Who are Brown & Levinson?

• Penny Brown and Stephen Levinson

• Worked with ‘situated conversational exchanges‘.

• Theirs remains one of the most prominent works in this domain.

Page 5: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

B&L’s objectives• To examine the assumptions and reasoning used

by participants.

• Account for cross-cultural similarities in the abstract principles behind polite usage.

• To draw up a formal model to account for cross-cultural similarities that also worked for culturally-specific use.

Page 6: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

So, what’s the theory? (1)

• All parties have positive face and negative face and are rational agents, and so will choose means that satisfy their ends.

• If the satisfaction of face wants relies on the actions of others, it is generally in the interests of both parties to maintain each other’s face.

• Some actions (or FTAs) are inherently threatening to face.

Page 7: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

So, what’s the theory? (2)

• A speaker (S) will therefore want to maintain the face of his hearer (H) ... unless S’s desire to perform the FTA outweighs his need to respect H’s face.

• Given the above, the more that face is threatened, the more S will want to use a strategy that minimizes risk.

• Since these strategies are known to both parties, they will not use a less risky strategy than necessary, lest this be perceived as indicating that the FTA is more threatening that is really the case.

Page 8: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

How does it work?

Page 9: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Calculating the seriousness of an FTA

• Wx = D(S,H) + P(H,S) + Rx

Page 10: Politeness Theory Brown & Levinson (1987) Cheryl Holden

Is it bomb-proof?• Criticisms that it’s too west-centric.

• Even within Europe, politeness is not universal.- turn-taking (France)- thanking (Spain)

• Values of D, P and R not fixed, but can change according to context.

• Other factors – such as prosody – can prompt perceptions of difference in politeness.