Irony and Politeness: Softening or Enhancing Face-Threats.
In this paper we briefly revisit politeness research influenced by Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness theory. We argue that this research tradition does not deal with politeness but with the mitigation of face-threatening acts (FTAs) in general. In our understanding, politeness cannot just be equated with FTA-mitigation because politeness is a discursive concept. This means that what is.
Politeness theory is the theory that accounts for the redressing of the insults to face posed by face-threatening acts to addressees. Politeness theory, derived from Goffinan’s (1967) understanding of “facework,” suggests that all individuals hold two primary desires, positive face (the desire to be liked by others) and negative face (the desire to have one’s actions unconstrained by.
The key ideas of politeness theory were offered in the works by P. Brown and S. Levinson “Politeness: some universals on language usage”. Relying on the works by American sociologist Erving Goffmann (Goffman 1967), the authors chose the notion of “face” as the basis of their theory. It reflects two opposite needs of a human: on the one hand, a desire to be approved of and appreciated.
Abstract. The cross-cultural study of speech acts is vital to the understanding of international communication. In reviewing this area of research, we realize that face-threatening acts are particularly important to study because they are the source of so many cross-cultural miscommunications.
The theory holds that everyone has both negative and positive face, both of which are threatened by another at times, and that individuals will choose from among five politeness strategies to use before performing a face-threatening act. People from different cultures will implement politeness strategies according to the ethos of their particular cultures, and one or more strategy(ies) will be.
Politeness theory posits that individuals in any culture have positive and negative face wants. But many daily interaction behaviors intrinsically threaten face. The degree to which an act is face th.
Linguistic politeness. Politeness, in an interaction, can be defined as the means employed to show awareness of another person's face, i.e. his or her public self-image.When we attempt to save another's face, we can pay attention to their negative face (i.e. the need to be independent, to have freedom of action, and not to be imposed on by others) or their positive face (i.e. the need to be.