Grounded in naturally-occurring language data and drawing on findings from linguistic pragmatics and social psychology, Jonathan Culpeper. Politeness and Impoliteness Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University) 1. Introduction Thirty or so years ago politeness was a specialist, even somewhat. Impoliteness strategies. Jonathan Culpeper. Uploaded by. Jonathan Culpeper. Loading Preview. Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the .

Author: Maugar Vudole
Country: Burundi
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 21 April 2007
Pages: 202
PDF File Size: 2.8 Mb
ePub File Size: 13.15 Mb
ISBN: 421-5-96304-491-9
Downloads: 69607
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kicage

I take strategies to be ways impoliteenss getting things done in interaction that are conventional for a particular community. An example they give from their data is “Do me a favour”, which they argue is a kind of apology in Brown and Levinson’s terms in so far as there is an admission that the ‘favour’ will impinge on the other negative politenessbut also a kind of reciprocal doing of favours positive politeness.


Rather than antagonistic relationships, hate, coercion, and so on, we have a strong loving family unit Francesca has just demonstrated her affection by giving her culpsper a kiss. An enduring problem in psychology. The other key dimension in Figure 1 is negative versus positive behaviour, presumably referring to a participant’s evaluation of the behaviour.

Three categories of similar definition can also be found in Domenici and Littlejohn Mixed sarcastic messages often involve multimodality: I suggest this is the basis on which a well-founded cross-cultural pragmatic research could proceed.

Leech a is a much more developed maxim-based culpepeer to politeness. The bulk of the work in politeness studies has been based on or related to Brown and Levinson In practice then, I have argued that Locher and Watts’s work knowingly combines approaches of different orders.

They studied politeness phenomena in nurses’ talk to institutionalised elderly people, and, in particular, attempts to redress the face threat involved in requesting that medicines be taken.

The study reported in Culpeper It encompasses, in other words, commonsense notions of politeness. Face and social norms. Explicitly associate the other with a negative aspect – personalize, use the pronouns ‘I’ and ‘you’. Research has strongly supported Brown and Levinson’s claims for the power variable: Social Intelligence and Interaction: The background to this lies in Grice’s distinction between particularised and generalised implicatures, and its elaboration by Levinson e. They are mainly concerned with politeness2 approaches masquerading as politeness1 approaches, or vacillation between the two.


Impoliteness: Using and Understanding the Language of Offence

But the inference that it is she who plasters on make-up like a trollop can clearly be drawn. Labov, William Language in the Inner City: I will return to these definitional issues in the final section of this chapter, but first let us survey the various approaches to politeness in more detail.

In a nutshell, “politeness is anticipated when the behaviour giving rise to politeness is expected, while it is inferred when the behaviour giving rise to politeness is not expected” Haugh For example, the Tact Maxim might be a strong feature of some British cultures, Modesty of some Japanese cultures and Generosity of some Mediterranean cultures.

There is an alternative way of conceiving of impoliteness strategies, and it is one that focuses much more on the idea that a strategy involves something that is routine, that is a known regularity within a particular community, rather than an abstract way of getting something done.

Goffman, Erving Interaction ritual. Condescend, scorn or ridicule] Interrupt when someone is speaking. Furthermore, many of the acts that Brown and Levinson list as primarily threatening the hearer’s face can have ramifications for the speaker’s face. Meier see politeness as a matter of doing what is appropriate, but Watts is clearly right in allowing for the fact that people frequently do more than what is called for. Culpeperwho draws on Leech a.

An attitude involves a favourable or unfavourable reaction to stimuli, and has cognitive, affective and behavioural elements see Bradac et al.

Locher eds Impoliteness in Language: There are also some echoes of politic behaviour relating as it does to social routines.

Impoliteness strategies | Jonathan Culpeper –

Similarly, aggressive, with overtones of violence and power, has only a very general opposite in politeness theory, that impoliteeness harmony.

Therefore what s really means is polite to h and true. He spells out his position thus: Morgan eds Syntax and Semantics 3.

It should be noted here that some culpeepr these critical challenges simply reflect the fact that thinking about how communication and social and interpersonal interaction works had moved on since the s, when the seeds of Brown and Levinson and Leech a were sown. One problem here, however, is that Watts’s definitions, as given in the previous paragraph, suggest a hard line between politic behaviour and politeness: Bousfield, Derek and Jonathan Culpeper eds Impoliteness: But impoliteneds did not back this up with a suitable methodology one which is more qualitative in nature and thus able to handle the complexityand subsequent researchers often chose to ignore it.


Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Recent “relational” approaches iimpoliteness politeness, to be reviewed in section 2. The idea is that the general appreciation of the hearer’s wants will serve to counterbalance the specific imposition.

Using Language to Cause Offence. For each variable “there is not one value, but a tension between at least two interpretations of the situation” Myers According to bulge theory, our responses to the extremes on the social scale, strangers and intimates, are similar; it is acquaintances, co-workers and casual friends who are different, because their social relationship is less certain and thus requires more negotiation.

The other concerns the negative acts, threats and curses. Haugh, Michael Anticipated versus inferred politeness. For example, of particular note is the development of the discursive approach in social psychology, spurred on especially by Derek Edwards and Jonathan Potter e.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

Baxterfor example, showed that affect i. It would be the equivalent of comparing apples with oranges and concluding that they are different; whereas applying dimensions of variation e.

The latter Politeness Principle consists of the following maxims: Elsewhere, however, Brown and Levinson Face-threatening acts are redressed with apologies for interfering or transgressing, with linguistic and non- linguistic deference, with hedges on the illocutionary force of the act, with impersonalizing mechanisms such as passives that distance S and H from the act, and with other softening mechanisms that give the addressee an “out”, a face- saving line of escape permitting him to feel that his response is not coerced.

This article was written by admin