7 Politeness and Interaction (Yule’s book)

In order to make sense of what is said in interaction, we have to look at various factors
which relate to social distance and closeness.

External factors: are established prior and they typically involve the relative status of
the participants, based on social values tied to things like age and power.

Speakers who see themselves as lower status in English-speaking contexts tend to mark
social distance between themselves and higher 5tatus speakers by using address
forms that include a title and a last name, but not the first name (for example, Mrs
Clinton, Mr Adams, Dr Dang).

Internal factors: are often negotiated during an interaction and can result in the initial
social distance changing and being marked as less, or more, during its course.

The amount of imposition Or degree of friendliness are internal factors. This may result,
for example, in participants moving from a title-plus-last name to a first-name basis
within the talk.

Both factors have an influence not only on what we say but also on how we are
interpreted. In many cases, the interpretation goes beyond what we might have
intended to convey and includes evaluations such as ‘rude’ or ‘considerate’. Recognizing
such evaluations makes it clear that more is being communicated than is said.

The investigation is carried out in terms of politeness. In order to describe it, we need
the concept of face.

Face means the public self-image of a person. It refers to that emotional and social
sense of self that everyone has and expects everyone else to recognize.

Politeness in an interaction refers to the means employed to show awareness of

another person’s face. In this sense, politeness can be accomplished in situations of
social distance or closeness.

a. Showing awareness of another person’s face when that other seems socially
distant is often described in terms of respect or deference.
b. Showing the equivalent awareness when the other is socially close is often
described in terms of friendliness, camaraderie or solidarity.
The first type in example [a] and second in example [b]

[1] a. Excuse me, Mr Buckingham , but can I talk to you minute?

b. Hey, Bucky, got a minute?

There will be different kinds of politeness associated with the relative social distance or
closeness and depending on ‘face wants.’ Face wants refers to the public self-image
Face wants

Within their everyday social interactions, people generally behave as if their

expectations concerning their public self-image, or their face wants, will be respected.

Face threatening act If a speaker says something that represents a threat to another
individual’s expectations regarding self-image, it is described as a.

Face saving act when some action might be interpreted as a threat to another’s face,
the speaker can say something to lessen the possible threat.

Example, Imagine a late night scene, where a young neighbor is playing his music very
loud and an older couple is trying to sleep. One of them, in [2], proposes a face
threatening act and the other suggests a face saving act.

[2] Him: I’m going to tell him to stop that awful noise right now!
Her: Perhaps you could just ask him if he is going to stop soon because it’s getting a
bit late and people need to get to sleep.

Because it is generally expected that each person will attempt to respect the face wants
of others, there are many different ways of performing face saving acts. These are
according to Brown and Levinson 1987.

Negative and Positive Face

When we attempt another’s face, we can pay attention to their negative face wants or
their positive face wants.

Person’s Negative face is the need to be independent, to have freedom of action, and
not to be imposed on by others. The word ‘negative’ here doesn’t mean ‘bad’, it’s just
the opposite pole from ‘positive’.

Person’s Positive face is the need to be accepted (or connected), even liked, by others,
to be treated as a member of the same group, and to know that his or her wants are
shared by others.

Self and other; say nothing

You need a pen and you think that the person next to you may provide you with one. In
this scenario, you will be ‘self’ and the other person will be ‘other’. Your first choice is
whether to say something or not. You can simply say nothing and fish in your bag to
look for a pen and the person next to you would notice and offer you a pen.

However, this ‘say nothing approach’ may or may not work, but if it does, it is because
the ‘other’ offers and not because the ‘self’ asks.
[3] Self: (looks in bag)
Other: (offers a pen) Here, use this.

Say something: off and on record

When you decide to say something, you can

A. Off record (indirect statements)

produce a statement such as.

[4] a. Uh, I forgot my pen.

b. Hmm, I wonder where I put my pen.
These are statements and not directly addressed to the other. The other can act as if
the statements have not been heard.

Off record statement may or may not succeed.

B. On Record (direct address forms) AKA bald on record

You can directly address the other as a means of expressing your needs. The most direct
approach is using imperative forms.

[5] a. Give me a pen.

b. Lend me your pen.
These bald on record forms may be followed by followed by expressions like ‘please’
and ‘would you?’ which serve to soften the demand (They are called mitigating devices)

We cannot equate the bald on record approach with imparatives. Why?

Because imperative forms are often used by close familiars without being interpreted as
commands, for example,
[6] a. Have some more cake. (offering a friend to eat)
b. Gimme that wet umbrella. (trying to help someone)
Emergency expressions are not bald on record forms. The situation occasion the use of
commands,

[7] a. Don’t touch that!

b. Get out of here!
Finally, bald on record expressions are considered appropriate among social equals.
They are associated with speech events where the speaker assumes that he or she has
power over the other (military context)

Positive and Negative Politeness Strategies

A. Positive Politeness Strategies

Leads the requester to appeal to a common goal and even friendship via expressions
such as those in [8]
[8] a. How about letting me use your pen?
b. Hey. Buddy, I’d appreciate it if you’d let me use your pen.
These on record (direct) expressions do lead to a risk of refusal by the hearer.

B. Negative Politeness Strategies

A face saving act is more commonly performed via negative politeness strategy. The
most typical form is a question containing a modal verb such as in [10]

[10] a. Could you lend me a pen?

b. I’m sorry to bother, but can I borrow a pen?
Using this strategy also results in forms which contain expressions of apology for the
imposition. Finally, negative politeness is typically expressed via questions.

FIGURE 7.1 How to get a pen from someone else (following Brown and Levinson 1987)

Strategies

A. Solidarity Strategy: the tendency to use positive politeness forms,

emphasizing closeness between speaker and hearer.
It will be marked via inclusive terms such as ‘we’ and ‘let’s’ as in the party
invitation in [11].

[11] Come on, let’s go to the party. Everyone will be there. We’ll have fun.

B. Deference Strategy: the tendency to use negative politeness forms,

emphasizing the hearer’s right to freedom.
It is involved in what is called ‘formal politeness.’ It is impersonal as if
nothing is shared
 It can include expressions that refer to neither the speaker nor the hearer.
The language used emphasizes the speaker’s and the hearer’s independence.
[12] is an alternative version of the party invitation in [11]

[12] There is going to be a party, if you can make it. It will be fun.

Pre-sequences

The greatest risk appears to be when the other is put in a difficult position. One way of
avoiding risk is to provide an opportunity for the other to halt the potentially risky act.
Rather than simply make a request, speakers will often first produce what can be
described as a pre-request.

For example,

[13]

Her: Are you busy? (= pre-request)

Him: Not really. (= go ahead)

Her: Check over this memo. (= request)

Him: Okay. (= accept)

The advantage of the pre-request element is that it can be answered either with a ‘go-
ahead’ response, as in [13], or with a ‘stop’ response, as in [14].

[14]

Him: Are you busy? (= pre-request)

Her: Oh, sorry. {= stop)

The response in [14] allows the speaker to avoid making a request that cannot be
granted at the time.

These pre-sequences also apply to

Pre- invitation

[17]

Him: What are you doing this Friday? (= pre-invitation)

Her: Hmm, nothing so far. ( go ahead)

Him: Come over for dinner. (= invitation)

Her: Oh, I’d like that. (= accept)

[18]

Him: Are you doing anything later? (= pre-invitation)

Her: Oh, yeah. Busy, busy, busy. (= stop)

Him: Oh, okay. (= stop)

Pre- announcement

[19]

Child: Mom, guess what happened? (=pre-announcement)

Mom: Silence

Child: Mom, you know what? (=pre-announcement)

Mom: Not right now, Jacy, I’m busy. (=stop)

There are two pre-announcements, neither of which receives a ‘go-ahead’. The initial
pre-announcement is met with silence, which is generally interpreted as a ‘stop’. The
child’s second attempt must be based on an interpretation that the parent did not hear
the first attempt. The final response has to be interpreted as a ‘stop’, but noticeably it is
expressed, in face-saving terms, as a postponement.