Politeness theory, first introduced by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in the 1970s, is a crucial aspect of pragmatics. This theory, based on the concept of face by sociologist Erving Goffman, explores the motivations and methods behind displaying politeness in our interactions with others. As Goffman (1955) defines it, face is the "public image that we strive to portray during social exchanges" and is closely tied to our self-image. Naturally, we all want to maintain a positive self-image and present ourselves favorably to those around us.
Brown and Levinson's politeness theory is based on the idea that individuals have two types of face - positive face and negative face.
When we demonstrate politeness, we are essentially appealing to one of these two types of face.
Appealing to someone's positive face involves making them feel good about themselves. This may include complimenting their appearance, congratulating them on their accomplishments, or agreeing with them. Conversely, appealing to someone's negative face means ensuring they do not feel like their autonomy has been violated or that they have been taken advantage of.Brown and Levinson suggest that acts of rudeness or restricting someone's personal freedoms can be seen as face-threatening acts, directed at the person being spoken to. Similarly, apologizing for our mistakes can also be considered a face-threatening act, but directed at ourselves. They also stress the importance of cooperation between speakers during social interactions to maintain a positive face for both themselves and the person they are speaking to.
Brown and Levinson describe positive face as an individual's desire to be liked, admired, and positively perceived by others. Maintaining a positive face involves projecting a favorable self-image to society. Therefore, appealing to someone's positive face means boosting their self-esteem and making them feel good about themselves. This can include complimenting their appearance or acknowledging their achievements.
In contrast to positive face, negative face may be more complex to grasp. Brown and Levinson define negative face as an individual's desire to maintain their basic rights and freedoms without interference from others. While positive face may involve a desire for connection with others, negative face seeks autonomy and the ability to act on one's own interests. Thus, appealing to someone's negative face means ensuring they do not feel like their autonomy has been compromised.
By using what Brown and Levinson refer to as Negative Politeness, the speaker appeals to the listener's negative face by utilizing strategies like hedging and indirectness to avoid imposing on them.
Face-threatening acts are forms of communication that have the potential to harm a person's sense of face or go against the desires and needs of their positive or negative face. Examples of face-threatening acts include expressing disapproval, making accusations or criticisms, and showing disagreement. They can also involve disregarding the listener's positive face, such as discussing taboo or emotionally-charged topics, interrupting them, or displaying aggressive emotions.
In conclusion, understanding politeness theory can greatly impact how we interact with others by guiding us in navigating face-threatening acts and maintaining a positive self-image.
In any communication, there are speech acts that can potentially damage the self-image and personal freedoms of either the speaker or listener. These are known as face-threatening acts and can be classified as either positive or negative, depending on which aspect of face is at risk.
These acts involve the speaker's need for connection, approval, and self-worth. Examples include apologizing, confessing, and losing emotional control.
These acts involve the listener's need for freedom and autonomy. They may include giving an order, making a request, issuing a reminder, or making a threat. They can also involve the speaker expressing strong emotions towards the listener and expecting a positive reaction, such as giving a compliment and expecting one in return.
Examples of Face-Threatening Acts
Managing Face-Threatening Acts: Four Politeness Strategies
In any given situation, there are four main strategies that people employ to handle face-threatening acts, based on their relationship with the listener and the context of the interaction.
This strategy involves delivering the message directly, without any additional language or attempts to soften it. It is often used when there is a sense of urgency or with people who share a close relationship.
This strategy involves using friendly language or balancing a criticism with compliments, which can increase camaraderie and decrease social distance between the speaker and listener.
Negative politeness strategies aim to avoid imposing on the listener and can include being indirect, using hedges, minimizing the imposition, and apologizing. These strategies are often employed in situations where there is a high risk of causing awkwardness or embarrassment for the listener.
Sociological Variables
Several sociological factors can influence the level of politeness expected or recommended in a given situation. These include the social distance between the speaker and listener, perceived power dynamics, and the level of imposition on the listener.
To better understand the concept of politeness strategies, let's compare two sentences with the same meaning but different levels of politeness.
Another example:
Here, the speaker has utilized positive politeness strategies by giving a compliment and using statements of friendship.
But what exactly is Politeness Theory, and are there any criticisms of it?
Politeness Theory was developed by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in the 1970s, building upon Goffman's concept of face. It posits that each individual has two types of face: positive and negative. Positive face refers to the desire to make someone feel good about themselves, while negative face involves avoiding imposing on others.
In conclusion, face-threatening acts are any communication that may damage a person's sense of face, jeopardizing their positive or negative face needs.
In any form of communication, whether it be through words, tone, or body language, there is always a risk of causing discomfort or embarrassment to the listener. To minimize this threat and maintain positive relationships, it is important to utilize appropriate politeness strategies. These strategies can be grouped into four categories: bald on-record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off-record (indirect).
The bald on-record strategy involves directly stating the message without any attempt to mitigate the potential threat to the listener's face. This strategy is often used in informal or equal power relationships. Positive politeness, on the other hand, involves using compliments, flattery, or humor to show appreciation and build rapport with the listener. This strategy is effective in maintaining positive relationships in more formal or hierarchical settings. Negative politeness is similar to positive politeness, except it focuses on showing respect for the listener's autonomy and boundaries. This strategy is often used in more sensitive or delicate situations. Lastly, the off-record strategy involves indirectly communicating the message to avoid any potential threat to the listener's face. This strategy can be used in a variety of situations and requires more context and understanding of the listener's cultural background.
When choosing which politeness strategy to use, there are three sociological variables to consider: the social distance between the speaker and listener, the power difference, and the seriousness of the potential face threat. These variables can help determine the appropriate level of politeness to use and minimize any potential misunderstandings or discomfort.
While the Politeness Theory is widely accepted, it has also faced criticism for being ethnocentric. It fails to recognize and consider cultural differences in the understanding and use of politeness. What may be considered polite in one culture may be perceived as rude or offensive in another. Therefore, it is important to also be aware of and respect cultural differences when employing politeness strategies in communication.
In conclusion, understanding and utilizing politeness strategies is crucial for effective communication and maintaining positive relationships. However, it is equally important to consider and respect cultural differences to avoid imposing one's own cultural norms onto others. By balancing these aspects, we can effectively navigate the complex nature of communication and achieve successful outcomes in our interactions.
