politeness & face

IIC politeness, face | Raymond Sheehan | October 6th, 2002

Anybody working on IIC at the moment with a particular interest in politeness and 'face' in interaction (i.e. spoken rather than textual/TDA)? If so, how about exchanging ideas, references, etc.?

Thanks,

Raymond
UAE

Re: politeness, face | John Bartrick | October 9th, 2002

Hi Raymond,

I've finished IIC, but enjoyed it so much I still like talking about it! A standard read must be: Brown, P. and Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Also useful,

Drew, P. and Wootton, A. 1988. Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, Cambridge: Polity Press

For people who collect or at least don't delete old discussion list messages, there was a good discussion about "Face" in Jan 2001. Hoping that my self-image has been appreciated and approved of (positive face)

John

Re: Politeness, face | Colin Graham | October 10th, 2002

Hi Raymond,

I'm not working on IIC, but I read through Brown & Levinson while I was doing TDA and I'm happy to discuss things from a 'lay' view if you think it'll be helpful. I'm interested in the issue of formality versus politeness, both written and spoken, because of the almost polar opposites between what Japanese people see as polite and what an average American (if there is such a thing!) sees as polite- with me as a Brit somewhere in the middle! Use of titles in names, for example...

Anyway, get back to me if you think my ramblings will be of any use.

Colin
:-)

Re: Politeness, face | Raymond Sheehan | October 12th, 2002

Hi, John and Colin:

Thanks for your replies re IIC. I'm copying this to the list along with a brief piece of 'interaction in context' because it might also fit in with some people's FND task on transcribing and analysing conversation.

The context below is a peer feedback session. I had invited two colleagues to come into my class and observe a lesson. Forty-five minutes afterwards, they gave me feedback from their notes and I transcribed the conversation.

The excerpt below is a tiny one from a seventeen-minute session, but it represents a typical sequence as a new topic is introduced, developed and finalised. I'm in the process of analysing three or at most four of these exchanges (not the one excerpted below, most probably).

I had looked at the transcript for several months (while writing up CSD) and it suggested too many rather than too few possibilities re areas of analytical interest. Then, Brown and Levinson came along like a breath of divine revelation and I could see   a common pattern in the exchanges as each of the participants in the exchange is concerned, in varying ways, with the maintenance, enhancement or saving of face. So many linguistic gambits are in evidence below (and in the transcript as a whole) to underscore politeness while raising issues that might cause loss of face.

It's not relevant to my argument, but might be to those who wish to analyse politeness in terms of national/cultural differences, that the three participants have different nationalities: American, New Zealander and Irish. But there appears to be an institutional or professional standard of politeness that they all adhere to in this discourse.

Any comments on the exchange would be much appreciated!

EXCERPT:

Ron: I noticed one time ahm perhaps more than once. When giving instructions you'd go to one group give the instructions to them and then go to the next group and give the same instructions to them.

Ray: umhem

Ron: ahm

Ron: I wondered if perhaps instructions could have been given to the whole (0.4) class first in some instances

Ray: Yeah, I mean they could but em very often if its given to a group of 16 of them there are one or two who lose it whereas. if I'm giv giving it to three or four I can kinda see that Mohammed Hassan has a blank look still on his face you know before I leave them so I just think maybe for them there's more of a connection if it comes from me in a small group you know. I think, OK

Ron: Mmm no in fact by the time you'd got to the third and fourth groups they'd it heard already

Ray: Right, ok so

Ron: IN fact you didn't need to tell them. Perhaps with more complicated instructions then you might have told them =

Ray: = I'm also trying to minimise instructions a bit like in the very first activity 'I don't want to tell you what do do' it should be obvious you know so why-

Ron: yeah you said-

Ray -listen to me

Ron -read the instructions and find out

Ray: Yeah, and in fact there weren't even instructions. There were pictures and there were words and they said- must have figured out OK it's a matching thing you know ah

Ron: Ahm

Darcy: I liked they kept moving. That was one thing I liked about your lesson.

Re: Politeness face | John Bartrick | October 12th, 2002

Hi Raymond and all,

Let me comment on what, to me, was the most striking part of the excerpt.

Ron: I wondered if perhaps instructions could have been given to the whole (0.4) class first in some instances

By anyone's standards that is a serious amount of hedging for one sentence: "I wondered if," "perhaps," "could," "in some circumstances."

Ron clearly wants to say, "Why didn't you give instructions to the whole class?"

or perhaps:

"You should have given instructions to the whole class."

Such a statement is, in this context, negative appraisal. However, he considers this "bald" statement too "face-threatening" and seeks to lessen its effect.

So, in Brown and Levinson's terms, he does the FTA (Face Threatening Act) on record (here, face-to-face), with redressive action by negative politeness (a lot of hedging).

(Brown and Levinson 1987: 60-70)

Consider yourself seriously "hedged"!!

:)

John

Re: Politeness, face | Raymond Sheehan | October 15th, 2002

True, John: a wealth of hedging details.

However, 'the most striking part', as you put it, could scarcely take place if the hedgers/critics in the interaction had not already built up a 'reservoir' of compliments and positive comments that they can draw upon as 'credit' and goodwill when they come to be critical. The compliments may even contain an element of hyperbole so that even more credit can be drawn upon when the interlocutor finally becomes critical. In other words, the critical interludes in my transcript are preceded and followed by glowing comments in order to soften the blow of negative issue raising.

Raymond
UAE

 

Archive Categories