新疆师范大学语用学考试资料完整版VIP

Chapter1WhatispragmaticsTheoriginofpragmaticsCharlesMorris（1938）wasthefirsttousethetermPragmatics.Hecomeupwithsemiotics（符号学）inhisbookEmendationsofthetheoryofsigns《符号理论基础》.Hedividedsemioticsintothreebranches:syntactics(句法学),semantics(语义学),andpragmatics(语用学).Bar-Hillel(1954)tooktheviewthatpragmaticsisthestudyoflanguage,bothnaturalandartificial,thatcontainindexicalordeicticterms.Inthelate50s,theBritishphilosopherJ.Austincreatedspeechacttheory.HepublishedhisbookTheoryofSpeechAct(1962).AmericanphilosopherH.P.Grice,advancedthetheoryofcooperativeprinciple(1975).Thethreehallmarksofpragmaticsasindependentdisciplinesare:1.JournalofPragmatics(1977)2.ThefirstInternational

ConferenceonPragmaticsheldinItalyin19853.TheInternationalPragmaticsAssociationwasestablishedin1986.Pragmaticscompetence＆CommunicativecompetenceCommunicativecompetenceincludespragmaticscompetenceandlinguisticcompetence.Pragmaticscompetencecontainssocial-linguistic,discourseandstrategies.Linguisticcompetencecontainsphonetic,grammarandvocabulary.二．TherelationshipbetweenPragmaticsandSemantics1.PragmaticsLevinsonlistedninedefinitionsaboutpragmatics.Forexample:Pragmaticsisthestudyofallthoseaspectsofmeaningnotcapturedinasemantictheory;Pragmaticsisthestudyoflinguisticactsandthecontextsinwhichtheyareperformed.Therearevariousdefinitionstopragmaticsfromdifferentscholars.Basedontheirideas,wecansummarizepragmaticsasastudyoflanguageinuse.Itcontainsmeaning(deep+surface)andcontext.SemanticsSemantics:thestudyoftherelationsofsignstotheobjectstowhichthesignsareapplicable.TheirrelationshipSemanticsandpragmaticsarebothlinguisticstudiesofmeaning.However，therearesomedifferencesbetweenthem.Semanticscanbesimplydefinedasthestudythatmeaningsofwords,meaningsofsentenceswereallstudiedinanisolatedmanner,detached（分离）fromthecontextinwhichtheywereused.Pragmaticsstudiesmeaningnotinisolation,butincontext.Theessentialdistinctionbetweensemanticsandpragmaticsiswhetherthecontextofuseisconsideredinthestudyofmeaning.Ifthecontextisnotconsidered,thestudyisrestrictedtotheareaofsemantics;ifthecontextisconsidered,thestudyisbeingcarriedoutintheareaofpragmatics.Pragmaticsshouldbesubsumedinsemantics.Semanticsshouldbesubsumedinpragmatics.Semanticsandpragmaticsaredifferentbutcomplementaryareasofresearch.三．Theapproachofpragmatics1.PurepragmaticsItisalsocalledformalpragmatics.Itstudiestheformandcategoryofpragmatics,andstudiesthemostappropriatemethodfortheformalizationofpragmatics.Butitcannotdirectlysolvetheproblemofhowtounderstandanduselanguageindifferentlanguagecommunicationsituations.DescriptivePragmaticsItpayattentiontopeople'sproperuseoflanguageincertaincontextstoachieveaspecificcommunicativeintentionandaccuratelyunderstandthepragmaticcompetenceofdiscourse.AppliedPragmaticsItisnotonlyuniversallyappliedtothecoresubjectsoflinguisticsandmarginalsubjects,butalsowidelyusedinallfieldsrelatedtounderstandingdiscourse,suchasstudiesofliterature,rhetoric,languageteaching,human-machinedialogueandhumancommunication.四．ThescopeofpragmaticsLevinsondividedpragmaticsintoBritish-AmericanschoolsandEuropean-Continentalschool,alsocalledMicropragmaticsandMacropragmatics.Micropragmaticsstudiesdeixis,conversationalimplicature,speechactsect..Macropragmaticsstudiessocio-pragmatics,cognitivepragmatics,cross-culturalpragmaticsect.Chapter2Deixis1.Thestatusofdeixisinpragmatics:Deixisistheearliesttargetorfirststudyareaofpragmatics,sinceitbearsimmediaterelationshipbetweenlanguagestructureandcontext.2.TheoriginsofDeixis:AtechnicaltermfromGreek,meaning"pointing"vialanguage.AnylinguisticformusedtoAccomplishthis"pointing"iscalledadeicticexpression.Adeicticexpressionisusedtoindicate,somethingintheimmediatecontext.Soadeicticexpressionencodesinformationincontext(Yule,1996).Deicticexpressionsincludingdefinitenounphrases,personalpronouns,demonstratives,adverbs,tenses,etc.3.Thedefinitionofdeixis.Inlinguistics,deixisreferstowordsandphrases,suchas“me”or“here”,thatcannotbefullyunderstoodwithoutadditionalcontextualinformation.(Wordsaredeicticiftheirsemanticmeaningisfixedbuttheirdenotativemeaningvariesdependingontimeand/orplace).4.TheclassificationofdeixisDeixiscanbecategorizedintofivegroups:①persondeixis:theroleofparticipants.Persondeixisconcernsitselfwiththegrammaticalpersonsinvolvedinanutterance,(1)thosedirectlyinvolved(e.g.thespeaker,theaddressee),(2)thosenotdirectlyinvolved(e.g.Over-hearers—thosewhoheartheutterancebutwhoarenotbeingdirectlyaddressed),and(3)thosementionedintheutterance.InEnglish,thedistinctionsaregenerallyindicatedbypronouns.1stperson:thespeaker2ndperson:theaddressee3rdperson:thirdparty(neitherthespeakernortheaddressee)②Placedeixis:theencodingofspatiallocationsrelativetothelocationofthespeaker.Proximal:hereDistal:there③Timedeixis:Time,ortemporal,deixisconcernsitselfwiththevarioustimesinvolvedinandreferredtoinanutterance.Thisincludestimeadverbslike"now","then","soon",andsoforth,andalsodifferenttenses.Proximal:nowDistal:thenProximal:presenttensesDistal:pasttenses④Discoursedeixis:theencodingofreferencetoportionsoftheunfoldingdiscourse:Discoursedeixis,alsoreferredtoastextdeixis,referstotheuseofexpressionswithinanutterancetorefertopartsofthediscoursethatcontainstheutterance—includingtheutteranceitself.Eg:ThatiswhatIwanttoknow.＊Tips:Distinctionmustbemadebetweendiscoursedeixisandanaphora(回指),whichiswhenanexpressionmakesreferencetothesamereferentasapriorterm.Anditispossibleforanexpressiontobebothdeicticandanaphoricatthesametime.⑤Socialdeixis:Socialdeixisconcernstheuseofdeictictermsthatindicatesocialstatusoftheparticipantsinthediscourseandtheirrelations.whichincludingthreeaspects:participant'ssocialidentity言语交际参与者的社会身份;Therelationshipbetweenlistenerandspeaker.说话人和听话人之间的关系;Therelationshipbetweenthespeakerandtherelatedpeople.说话人和所谈到的人（第三者）之间的关系.Twomajorformsofit:Vdistinctions(isthenamegiventothephenomenonwhenalanguagehastwodifferentsecond-personpronouns.):tu/vousdistinctioninFrench;ni/ninChinese.Honorifics():Anhonorifictitleorwayoftalkingisusedtoshowrespectorhonourtosomeone.Thistypeofsocialdeixis’application：formalsocialsituations；chattingwithseniority;meetingsomeoneunfamiliarorforthefirsttime；conference,negotiateandotherofficialoccasions.5.TheCharacteristicsofdeixisAlldeicticexpressionsdepend,fortheirinterpretation,onthespeakerandthehearerwhosharethesamecontext.Inface-to-faceexpression,deixisseemsmoretiedtothespeaker’scontext.Thisisbecausethespeakerexpresseshisideasabouttheworldfromhispersonalpointofview.Thereforedeicticexpressionshavebasicdistinctionsbetweenbeing"nearspeaker"and"distantfromspeaker"or"awayfromspeaker".6.Theusageofdeixis:Deicticusageandnon-deicticusage1)Deicticusage:revolvingarelationbetweenanobjectintheworldandalinguisticformwithnosemanticallydeterminedreference(theformXisusedtorefertoA,thereferenceisdeterminedinthediscourse)以语境为转移，语境明确时，含义明确。Gesturalusage:Theuseofdeicticexpressiontogetherwithparalinguisticfeatures(bodymovementssuchaseye-gaze,facialexpressions,noddingofthehead,gesturesofthehand,variationofpitch,etc.)Symbolicusage:bycontrast,requiresgenerallyonlybasicspatio-temporalknowledgeoftheutterance.Non-deicticusage:involvingrelationsbetweensuchaformandsomeotherlinguisticexpression(theformXisusedtothesamething"asitsantecedent;coreferentialrelations)无需有特定的指称对象，普遍适用。Chapter3ConversationalImplicature3.1MeaningandIntentionGrice’stheoryofmeaning-nn:Naturalmeaning:factiveornotinvolvingintentionentailmentNon-naturalmeaning(meaning-nn):non-factiveandintentioninvolvedForGrice,meaninghastobeinterpretedintermsofthehearerandsomeaningandintentionwerebroughttogetherinhisanalysis.ThisisthecrucialpointinunderstandingGrice'stheoryandSearle'sone.Searle'stheory:meaning=intentionrepresentedbythespeaker(intentiontorepresent)Grice'stheory:meaning=intentioninterpretedbythehearer(intentiontocommunicate)3.2Thenotionofconversationalimplicature（CI）Grice’ssecondtheory,inwhichhedevelopstheconceptofimplicature,isessentiallyatheoryabouthowpeopleuselanguage.Thenotionofconversationalimplicatureisoneofthesinglemostimportantideasinpragmatics.Thesalienceoftheconceptinrecentworkinpragmaticsisduetoanumberofsources:Implicaturestandsasaparadigmatic（[ˌpærədɪɡ'mætɪk]范例的）exampleofthenatureandpowerofpragmaticexplanationoflinguisticphenomena.Itprovidessomeexplicitaccountofhowitispossibletomeanmorethanwhatisactually‘said’.Thenotionofimplicatureseemslikelytoeffectsubstantialsimplificationsinboththestructureandthecontentofsemanticdescription.Implicature,oratleastsomecloselyrelatedconcept,seemstobesimplyessentialifvariousbasicfactsaboutlanguagearetobeaccountedforproperly.Theprinciplesthatgenerateimplicatureshaveaverygeneralexplanatorypower:afewbasicprinciplesprovideexplanationsforalargearrayofapparentlyunrelatedfacts.3.2.1CooperativePrinciple(CP)CPIn1967,AmericanphilosopherGriceputforwardtheCooperativePrinciple.Heclaimed:“makeyourcontributionsuchasisrequired,atthestageatwhichitoccurs,bytheacceptedpurposeordirectionofthetalkexchangeinwhichyouareengaged.”AndinordertofurtherexplaintheCooperativePrinciple,Gricedivideditintofourcategoriesofmaxims:themaximumofquantity,quality,mannerandrelation.Themaximofquality:trytomakeyourcontributiononethatistrue,specifically:1.Donotsaywhatyoubelievetobefalse;2.Donotsaythatforwhichyoulackadequateevidence.Themaximofquantity:1.Makeyourcontributionasinformativeasisrequired(forthecurrentpurposeoftheexchange);2.Donotmakeyourcontributionmoreinformativethanisrequired.Themaximofrelevance:makeyourcontributionsrelevantThemaximofMannerbeperspicuous,andspecially:AvoidobscurityAvoidambiguityBebriefBeorderlyThegenerationofconversationalimplicatureViolationofthe4maximsThefourkindsofviolation:1).Thespeakerisunwillingtocooperate.e.g.“Idon'twannatalk.”2).Sometimesthespeakerliesalthoughs/heknowsit'snottrue(thehearerdoesnotknow).3).Thespeakerconfrontsakindofconflict(usuallybetween2Q),sos/hehastoviolateoneprincipleinordertoobeytheother:i.e.A:WheredoesXlive?B:Somewhereinthesuburbsofthecity.(S/hereallydoesn'tknow.)TheabovethreeviolationofCPcannotreallydevotesCI,whilethenextonecan--4).Thespeakerovertlyrunsagainstanyofthefourmaxims,meanwhiles/hewantsthehearerknowthats/heviolatesaprinciple(“Flouting”):(He,p.158)A:Where'sBill?B:There'sayellowVWoutsideSue'shouse.Note:Griceputoutthattherhetoricaluseofirony,metaphor,hyperboleandmeiosisareallastheresultofviolatingthequalitymaxim.ThelimitationofGrice'sCP1.Sperber&Wilson(1986)thinkthatthereisnoCPandhumanbeingsinteractionisacognitionactivitywhosebasisistherelevanceofutterances:i）thewordsofeveryspeakerinacommunicationshouldberelatedtothewholetopicaswellasthepreviouswordsthathavebeenuttered;ii）theefficientinteractioninvolvestwofactors:thequantityofdeliveredmessage,andtheprocessedquantityofthereceivedmessage.2.CPonlyexplainstherelationshipbetweendenotationmeaningandconnotationmeaningofanutterance,butnotexplainwhypeopleoftenviolatetheCPtoexpressandexchangethoughtsindirectly.3.Grice'stheoryofcommunicationimplicatureputsemphasisonthestudyofspecialCI,whichdoesn'tincludegeneralCI,thus,limitingtheexplanationstrengthsofCP.Variants:RelevanceTheory(SperberandWilson1995,2004)seekstoreducethemaximstojustone,thoughwithinternaloppositions.Horn(1984,1989,1996)reducesthemaximstodirectlyopposingprinciplesgoverningspeakereffortandhearerenrichment.Levinson(2000)reducesthemaximstothree(furtherillustrationinnextpart).Levinson'sthreeprinciplesofCIQuantityPrincipleInformationPrincipleMannerPrincipleRULE:Q>M>IQuantityPrinciple

Speaker'sMaxim说话人准则:Don'tmakeyourstatementweakthantheinformationyouhaveknowunlessyourstatementcollideswiththeinformationprinciple.Recipient'scorollary听话人推论:Tobelievethatthespeaker'sstatementisasstrongass/hehasknown.ScalarQuantityImplicature等级数量含义：说强含弱，说弱否定强>:wordmeaningfromstrongtoweak1.Allboyswenttotheparty.2.Someoftheboyswenttotheparty.3.A:Doyouloveme?B:Ilikeyouverymuch.<all,most,many,some,few><always,often,sometimes><succeedindoing,trytodo,wanttodo>...ClausalQuantityImplicatures小句数量含义：说弱不听强e.g.:believe<knowa.IbelieveJohnisaway.(Probobal)b.IknowJohnisaway.(Must)Rule:CQL>SQIInformationPrincipleSpeaker'sMaxim说话人准则:i)MaximofMinimization极小量准则:“speakaslittleaspossible”,andonlyprovidetheleastlanguageinformationforachievinginterationalgoal(payattentiontoquantityprinciple).ii)Semanticminimization语义极小量：themeaningofasentenceisgeneralandnotconcrete.iii)Expressionminimization词语极小量:thelengthandcomplexityofsentencesound,e.g.he&themanRecipient'scorollary听话人推论:EnrichmentRule扩展规则:Enrichingtheinformationcontentofthespearker'sutterancetofindexactunderstandingandmakesurethespeaker'sspeakingintention.e.g.Johnturnedthekeyandtheenginestarted.(cause-effect;sequence...)MannerPrincipleSpeaker'sMaxim:Withoutreason,don'tuselong,obscureormarkedexpressions.Recipient'scorollary:Ifthespeakeruselongormarkedexpressions,s/heexpressesdifferentmeaningass/heuttered,especially,whenthespeakeristryingtoavoidcommonassociation.e.g.:(Hu,p.178)a.Johncouldsolvetheproblem.(Solved)b.Johnhadtheabilitytosolvetheproblem.(Notsolved)ComparisonGrice’sCPLevinson’sthreeprinciplesofCISimilarities:thelatteristheevolutionoftheformer(principles,subjects)Differences:differentemphasisspecialCIthroughtheviolationofCP;withthehelpofcontext.notonlyspecialCI(contextneeded),butalsocommonCI(throughQP&IP,nocontextinference).3.2.2Generalizedimplicatures&ParticularizedimplicaturesGeneralizedimplicatures:theimplicaturestobeinferredbybeingcloselyassociatedwithlinguisticexpressions,notmuchdependentoncontext,withtheassumptionthatthespeakerisobservingthemaxims.E.g.Hesawawomangoingintohishouse.Theuseoftheindefinitearticleimpliesthatthewomaninquestionwasnothiswife.Particularizedimplicatures:implicaturestobeinferredbybeingmuchdependentoncontextwiththeassumptionthatthespeakerisnotobservingthemaxims.Inotherwords,suchimplicaturesarisewhenthespeakerovertlyordeliberatelyfloutsor-violatessomemaximsorcertaincommunicativepurposes.i.e.A:Macao'sinSpainisn'tit,teacher?B:AndLondon'sinAmericaIsuppose.(irony)Thespeakerisabsolutelyincorrect.3.3Characteristicpropertiesofimplicatures1）Cancellability/defeasibility可取消性animplicaturecanbecancelled.thespeakercanimplysomethingandthendenythatimplicature.e.g.A:Johnhasfourbooks.Johnhasonlyfourbooksandnomore.B:Johnhasfourbooksandperhapsfiveormore.(Byadding"perhapsfiveormore",theimplicaturedisappears.)2）Non-detachability不可分离性animplicatureisattachedtothesemanticcontentofwhatissaid,nottolinguisticform.Forexample,ifeveryoneknowsthatBobisanidiot,thesameimplicatureisexpressed:a)Bobisamentalprodigy.b)Bobisanexceptionallycleverhumanbeing.c)Bobisanenormousintellect.d)Bobisabigbrain.3）Calculability/derivability可推导性animplicatureiscalculable,thatistosay,itcanbeworkedoutfromtheliteralmeaningorthesenseoftheutteranceontheonehand,andtheCooperativePrincipleanditsmaximsontheotherhand.4）Non-conventionality非规约性implicaturesarenotpartoftheconventionalmeaningoflinguisticexpressions.Butweshouldnoticethatwhatbeginsasaconversationalimplicaturemaybecomethemeaningofalexicalitemorlinguisticexpression.Forexample:"Gotothebathroom"originallymeantGoingtoWCasaneuphemism,butnowhasbecomeconventionalized.Wedon'thavetoderivetheimplicaturebytheCPbutbyconvention.5）Indeterminary不确定性Thismeansthatanexpressionwithasinglemeaningcangiverisetodifferentimplicaturesondifferentoccasions.e.g.Heisanox.Ifsaidbyhissuperiorsinpraisinghim,itwillimplicatethatheistoughandhard-working;Ifsaidinanothercontext,itmayimplicatethatheisbad-tempered.Inthiscase,howisanimplicaturerelatedtoconnotations?ChapterFourPolitenesstheoryPolitenesstheory

isthetheorythataccountsfortheredressingoftheaffrontstofaceposedbyface-threateningactstoaddressees.Firstformulatedin1978by

\o"PenelopeBrown(pagedoesnotexist)"PenelopeBrown

and

\o"StephenC.Levinson(pagedoesnotexist)"StephenLevinson,politenesstheoryhassinceexpandedacademia’sperceptionofpoliteness.

\o"Politeness"Politeness

istheexpressionofthespeakers’intentiontomitigate

\o"Face(selfimage)"face

threatscarriedbycertainfacethreateningactstowardanother.Anotherdefinitionis"abatteryofsocialskillswhosegoalistoensureeveryonefeelsaffirmedinasocialinteraction".

Therefore,beingpolitecanbeanattemptforthespeakertosavetheirownfaceorthefaceofwhoheorsheistalkingto.TheconceptoffacewasderivedfromChineseintoEnglishinthe19thcentury.

\o"ErvingGoffman"ErvingGoffman

wouldthengoontointroducetheconceptintoacademiathroughhistheoriesof'face'and'\o"Face(sociologicalconcept)"facework'.Face-savingtheory(FST)wasputforwardby\o"PenelopeBrown(pagedoesnotexist)"PenelopeBrown

and

\o"StephenC.Levinson(pagedoesnotexist)"StephenLevinson,basedonGoffman’snotionof“face”.Positiveandnegativeface\o"Face(selfimage)"Face

isthepublic

\o"Self-image"self-image

thateverypersontriestoprotect.BrownandLevinsondefinedpositivefacetwoways:as"thewantofeverymemberthathiswantsbedesirabletoatleastsomeothersexecutors",oralternatively,"thepositiveconsistentself-imageor'\o"Personalitytype"personality'(cruciallyincludingthe

\o"Desire(emotion)"desire

thatthisself-imagebeappreciatedandapprovedof)claimedbyinteractants(atleastsomeotherpeople)."

Negativefacewasdefinedas"thewantofevery'competentadultmember'thathisactionsbeunimpededbyothers",or"thebasicclaimtoterritories,personalpreserves,

\o"Right"rights

tonon-distraction—i.e.the

\o"Liberty"freedom

ofactionandfreedomfromimposition".

Whereaspositivefaceinvolvesadesireforconnectionwithothers,negativefaceneedsincludeautonomyandindependence.Tenyearslater,Browncharacterizedpositivefacebydesirestobeliked,admired,ratified,andrelatedtopositively,notingthatonewouldthreatenpositivefacebyignoringsomeone.Atthesametime,shecharacterizednegativefacebythedesirenottobeimposedupon,notingthatnegativefacecouldbeimpingeduponbyimposingonsomeone.

Positivefacereferstoone's

\o"Self-esteem"self-esteem,whilenegativefacereferstoone'sfreedomtoact.

Face-threateningactsAfacethreateningactisanactthatinherentlydamagesthefaceofthe

\o"Addressee"addressee

orthespeakerbyactinginoppositiontothewantsanddesiresoftheother.Facethreateningactscanbeverbal(usingwords/language),paraverbal(conveyedinthecharacteristicsofspeechsuchas

\o"Tone(linguistics)"tone,

\o"Inflection"inflection,etc.),ornon-verbal(facialexpression,etc.).Basedonthetermsofconversationinsocialinteractions,face-threateningactsareattimesinevitable.Atminimum,theremustbeatleastoneofthefacethreateningactsassociatedwithan

\o"Utterance"utterance.Itisalsopossibletohavemultipleactsworkingwithinasingleutterance.PolitenessstrategiesPolitenessstrategiesareusedtoformulatemessagesinordertosavethehearer'spositivefacewhenface-threateningactsareinevitableordesired.BrownandLevinsonoutlinefourmaintypesofpolitenessstrategies:baldon-record,negativepoliteness,positivepoliteness,andoff-record(indirect)aswellassimplynotusingtheface-threateningact.Baldon-recordstrategydoesnotattempttominimizethethreattothehearer'sface,althoughtherearewaysthatbaldon-recordpolitenesscanbeusedintryingtominimizeface-threateningactsimplicitly,suchasgivingadviceinanon-manipulativeway.

Oftenusingsuchastrategywillshockorembarrasstheaddressee,andsothisstrategyismostoftenutilizedinsituationswherethespeakerhasacloserelationshipwiththelistener,suchasfamilyorclosefriends.Positivepolitenessstrategiesseektominimizethethreattothehearer'spositiveface.Thesestrategiesareusedtomakethehearerfeelgoodaboutthemselves,theirinterestsorpossessions,andaremostusuallyusedinsituationswheretheaudienceknowseachotherfairlywell.

Inadditiontohedgingandattemptstoavoidconflict,somestrategiesofpositivepolitenessincludestatementsoffriendship,solidarity,compliments.Negativepolitenessstrategiesareorientedtowardsthehearer'snegativefaceandemphasizeavoidanceofimpositiononthehearer.Byattemptingtoavoidimpositionfromthespeaker,theriskofface-threattothehearerisreduced.

Thesestrategiespresumethatthespeakerwillbeimposingonthelistener.Additionally,thereisahigherpotentialforawkwardnessorembarrassmentthaninbaldonrecordstrategiesandpositivepolitenessstrategies.Negativefaceisthedesiretoremainautonomoussothespeakerismoreapttoincludeanoutforthelistenerthroughdistancingstyleslikeapologiesorindirectspeech.Theuseofnegativepolitenessstrategiesassumeadirectrelationshipbetweenindirectnessandpoliteness.ThefinalpolitenessstrategyoutlinedbyBrownandLevinsonistheindirectstrategy.Thisstrategyusesindirectlanguageandremovesthespeakerfromthepotentialtobeimposing.Thisstrategyreliesheavilyon

\o"Pragmatics"pragmatics

toconveytheintendedmeaningwhilestillutilizingthe

\o"Semantics"semantic

meaningasawaytoavoidlosingface.PolitenessstrategyBaldon-recordPositivepolitenessNegativepolitenessOff-record(indirect)Explanationdoesnothingtoreducethethreattothehearer'sfaceandisthereforeusedincloserelationshipsorwheninformationneedstobesharedquickly.isusedasawaytomakethehearerfeelasenseofclosenessandbelonging.isusedasawaytointeractwiththehearerinanon-imposingway.isusedtocompletelyremovethespeakerfromanypotentialtoimposeonthehearerandonlyalludestothespeaker'sideaorspecificrequest.Situationofuse1.Urgencyordesperation2.Whenefficiencyisnecessary3.Task-oriented4.Littleornodesiretomaintainsomeone'sface5.Doingtheface-threateningactisintheinterestofthehearer6.Situationswherethethreatisminimizedimplicitly7.Welcomes8.Offers1.Attendtothehearer'sinterests,needs,wants2.Usesolidarityin-groupidentitymarkers3.Beoptimistic4.Includebothspeakerandhearerinactivity5.Offerorpromise6.ExaggerateinterestinHandhisinterests7.AvoidDisagreement8.Joke1.Beindirect2.Usehedgesorquestions3.Bepessimistic4.Minimizetheimposition5.Useobviatingstructures,likenominalizations,passives,orstatementsofgeneralrules6.Apologetic7.Usepluralpronouns1.ReliesonimplicationUseexamples1.Watchout!2.Hearmeout...3.Passmethehammer4.Don'tforgettocleantheblinds!5.Yourheadlightsareon!6.Comein7.Leaveit,I'llcleanituplater.8.Eat!Youlooksad.CanIdoanything?Heh,mate,canyoulendmeadollar?I'lljustcomealong,ifyoudon'tmind.Ifwehelpeachother,Iguess,we'llbothsinkorswiminthiscourse.Ifyouwashthedishes,I'llvacuumthefloor.That'sanicehaircutyougot;wheredidyougetit?Yes,it'sratherlong;notshortcertainly.Wow,that'sawhopper!WouldyouknowwhereOxfordStreetis?Perhaps,hemighthavetakenit,maybe.Couldyoupleasepasstherice?Youcouldn'tfindyourwaytolendingmeathousanddollars,couldyou?SoIsupposesomehelpisoutofthequestion,then?It'snottoomuchoutofyourway,justacoupleofblocks.Ihopeoffensewillnotbetaken.Visitorssigntheledger.Spittingwillnotbetolerated.I'msorry;it'salottoask,butcanyoulendmeathousanddollars?Weregrettoinformyou.1.Wow,it'sgettingcoldinhere.PolitenessmaximsAccordingto

\o"GeoffreyLeech"GeoffreyLeech,thereisa

\o"Politeness"politeness

principlewith

\o"Griceanmaxims"conversationalmaxims

similartothoseformulatedby

\o"PaulGrice"PaulGrice.Helistssixmaxims:tact,generosity,approbation,modesty,agreement,andsympathy.Thefirstandsecondformapair,asdothethirdandthefourth.Thesemaximsvaryfrom

\o"Culture"culture

toculture:whatmaybeconsideredpoliteinoneculturemaybestrangeordownrightrudeinanother.ThetactmaximThetactmaximstates:'Minimizetheexpressionofbeliefswhichimplycosttoother;maximizetheexpressionofbeliefswhichimplybenefittoother.'ThefirstpartofthismaximfitsinwithBrownand

\o"StephenC.Levinson"Levinson'snegative

\o"Politeness"politeness

strategyofminimisingtheimposition,andthesecondpartreflectsthepositivepolitenessstrategyofattendingtothehearer'sinterests,wants,andneeds.Forexample:CouldI