Principles of conversation Agreement and Politeness

Agreement Principle When we are happy for someone to take the lead in a conversation, we do not wish to impose our ego or our point of view, tacit agreement is the norm – normally signalled by murmurs of assent , short grunts or, at the level of kinesics, by nods of approval (feedback). The Agreement Principle does not necessarily mean that the listener agrees with what the first Speaker says, it merely signals that the respondent is supporting the first speaker.  

Politeness Principle Robin Lakoff (1973) Language and Woman’s Place pointed out three maxims that are conventionally followed. Together they make up the politeness principle: 1 Don’t impose, 2 Give options 3 Make your receiver feel good.   These maxims can explain why many utterances carry no information but have the function of facilitating social interaction

Beyond the maxims Close the door There’s a draft Would you close the door Would you be so kind as to close the door? According to the Maxims 1. would be sufficient, but politeness phenomena are also at work in communication. If we are to account for how inferences are drawn, we should take into consideration also norms of politeness

Face Linguistic politeness involves the concept of ‘face’. ‘Face’ is your public self-image. it is ‘the emotional and social sense of self that every person has and expects everyone else to recognize.’ (George Yule, The Study of Language, 1985, 1996)

Positive and negative face Every participant in the social process has the need to be appreciated by others (positive face). This includes the need of social inclusion, i.e . belonging to a group the need not to be interfered with (negative face) People in general cooperate in maintaining face in interaction: i.e. they strife for stability

Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) Speech that represents a threat to another person’s face is called a face-threatening act; Refusing a request or reproaching someone can threaten the other’s face.

Acts threatening positive face: S does not care about H’s feelings or wants Expression of disapproval, criticism, disagreement… Acts threatening negative face: S interferes with H’s freedom of action Orders, requests, suggestions, remindings…

Face-Saving Acts These are meant to reduce potential threats to the other person’s face. Used to show that “no […] face threat is intended or desired, and that S in general recognizes H’s face wants and himself wants them to be achieved. Such redressive action takes one of two forms, depending on which aspect of face (negative or positive) is being stressed” (Brown and Levinson 1978: 70).

Saving negative face Many face saving acts in everyday conversation preserve the other person’s negative face, because the speaker signals the wish not to impose on the other person; e.g. ‘I’m sorry to bother you…, ‘if I could just trouble you for a second…’, If I could just steal a minute of your time...’

Saving Positive Face A face-saving act that emphasises a person’s positive face will show solidarity and draw attention to a shared goal or view: e.g., ‘I couldn’t agree with you more.’ ‘ Let’s do this.’ ‘you and I have the same problem.’

Is B being positively or negatively polite Is B being positively or negatively polite? (B thinks that the dress is ugly) A: So, what do you think of my new dress? B: Well, it’s risqué, that’s for sure.

Face and social factors Brown / Levinson (1978) model established a relationship between the intensity (weight) of the threat to face and the deployment of linguistically realized politeness strategies. The weight is the sum of 3 social parameters: the rate of imposition (borrowing a pen vs borrowing a car) the social distance (brother vs. neighbour) the power the addressee has over the speaker (friend vs. boss) Excuse me, Sir, would it be all right if I close the window? Mind me closing the window?

Face and social factors Using a direct speech act to make someone do something implies that you are acting as though you have more social power than the other person. Indirect speech acts reduce the amount of imposition/threat

Explain the misunderstanding in the following dialogue using the notions of face and indirect speech acts A: Are you going to do anything with those old chairs? B: No, you can have them A: Oh, no, that’s not what I meant

Positive and negative face saving acts combined Promote drunken Blogging: PUHLEES buy the GTL a beer [Request for donation] Positive politeness: claim common attitudes (lightheartedness + willingness to accept the joke) Negative politeness: “a beer” to downsize the request Gun toting liberal