POLITENESS THEORY AND POLITENESS STRATEGIES

ISSUES TO BE DISCUSSED:

1. DEFINITIONS OF POLITENESS
2. BROWN AND LEVINSON’S POLITENESS THEORY
3. ‘FACE NEEDS/WANTS’ – FACE THREATENING ACT VS.
FACE SAVING ACT
4. NEGATIVE FACE VS. POSITIVE FACE
5. POLITENESS STRATEGIES
 1. POLITENESS: DEFINITIONS

WHAT IS POLITENESS?
POLITENESS: BEHAVIOR THAT IS COURTEOUS AND RESPECTFUL OF
OTHERS IS POLITE.
THE FORMS OF POLITENESS:
POLITENESS IS REFLECTED IN LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION IN
FORMS OF ADDRESS, IN USING INOFFENSIVE LANGUAGE IN
CONVERSATIONAL INTERACTIONS, AND IN GENERALLY AVOIDING
TABOO LANGUAGE.
POLITENESS IN GENERAL TERMS IS BEING TACTFUL, MODEST AND
NICE TO OTHER PEOPLE.
 LINGUISTIC POLITENESS
LINGUISTIC POLITENESS IS A ‘MEANS OF EXPRESSING
CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS’ (E.G., HOLMES, 1995: 4; THOMAS,
1995: 150; WATTS, 2003).
LINGUISTIC POLITENESS IS A MATTER OF STRATEGIC
INTERACTION AIMED AT ACHIEVING GOALS SUCH AS AVOIDING
CONFLICT AND MAINTAINING HARMONIOUS RELATIONS WITH
OTHERS (KASPER, 1990).
POLITENESS INCLUDE BEING TACTFUL, GENEROUS, MODEST,
AND SYMPATHETIC TOWARD OTHERS.
 2. BROWN AND LEVINSON’S POLITENESS THEORY

THE ORIGIN OF POLITENESS THEORY:

1. ORIGINAL FACE-SAVING MODEL OF POLITENESS WAS PROPOSED BY
BROWN AND LEVINSON IN 1978.
2. A REVISED MODEL OF POLITENESS PROPOSED 1987 IS KNOWN AS
POLITENESS THEORY.
BROWN AND LEVINSON CONSIDERED THEIR THEORY AS CROSS-
CULTURALLY VALID.
 THE BASIC IDEA OF POLITENESS THEORY:
ACCORDING TO POLITENESS THEORY, PEOPLE ARE MOTIVATED BY THEIR NEED TO
MAINTAIN THEIR ‘FACE’ (IN THE SOCIOLOGICAL SENSE, DEVELOPED BY GOFFMAN 1967): THE
NEED TO BE APPROVED OF BY OTHERS, AND TO MAINTAIN A SENSE OF SELF-WORTH (PUBLIC
SELF-IMAGE).

THE CONCEPT OF “FACE IN POLITENESS THEORY

IN THE THEORY OF POLITENESS, THE MOST RELEVANT CONCEPT IS “FACE.”
AS A TECHNICAL TERM, 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 IS DEFINED AS THE MEANS EMPLOYED TO SHOW
AWARENESS OF ANOTHER PERSON’S FACE.
 POLITENESS AS THE MEANS EMPLOYED TO SHOW AWARENESS OF ANOTHER PERSON’S FACE CAN
BE ACCOMPLISHED IN SITUATIONS OF SOCIAL DISTANCE OR CLOSENESS.
1. SHOWING AWARENESS FOR ANOTHER PERSON’S FACE WHEN THAT OTHER SEEMS SOCIALLY
DISTANT IS OFTEN DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF RESPECT OR DEFERENCE.
EXAMPLE: A STUDENT’S QUESTION TO HIS TEACHER
A. EXCUSE ME, MR BUCKINGHAM, BUT CAN I TALK TO YOU FOR A MINUTE?

2. SHOWING THE EQUIVALENT AWARENESS WHEN THE OTHER IS SOCIALLY CLOSE IS OFTEN
DESCRIBED IN TERMS OF FRIENDLINESS, CAMA­RADERIE, OR SOLIDARITY.
EXAMPLE: THE FRIEND’S QUESTION TO THE SAME INDIVIDUAL
B. HEY, BUCKY, GOT A MINUTE?

IN MOST ENGLISH-SPEAKING CONTEXTS, THE PARTICIPANTS IN AN INTERACTION OFTEN HAVE TO

DETERMINE, AS THEY SPEAK, THE RELATIVE SOCIAL DISTANCE BETWEEN THEM, AND HENCE THEIR
‘FACE WANTS’.
 3. FACE WANTS (NEEDS) – FACE THREATENING ACT VS. FACE SAVING ACT

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 INDI­
VIDUAL’S EXPECTATIONS REGARDING SELF-IMAGE, IT IS DESCRIBED AS A FACE
THREATENING ACT.
FACE SAVING ACT:
THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOME ACTION MIGHT BE INTERPRETED AS A THREAT TO
ANOTHER’S FACE, THE SPEAKER CAN SAY SOMETHING TO LESSEN THE POSSIBLE THREAT IS
CALLED A FACE SAVING ACT.
 EXAMPLE:
SITUATION: A LATE NIGHT SCENE, WHERE A YOUNG NEIGHBOR IS PLAYING HIS MUSIC
VERY LOUD AND AN OLDER COUPLE ARE TRYING TO SLEEP. ONE OF THEM, PROPOSES A FACE
THREATENING ACT AND THE OTHER SUG­GESTS A FACE SAVING ACT.

 I’M GOING TO TELL HIM TO STOP THAT AWFUL NOISE RIGHT NOW!
 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.

EACH PERSON WILL ATTEMPT TO RESPECT THE FACE WANTS OF OTHERS, THERE ARE
MANY DIFFERENT WAYS OF PERFORMING FACE SAVING ACTS.
 4. NEGATIVE FACE VS. POSITIVE FACE

WHEN WE ATTEMPT TO SAVE ANOTHER’S FACE, WE CAN PAY ATTENTION TO THEIR

NEGATIVE FACE WANTS OR THEIR POSITIVE FACE WANTS.
1. NEGATIVE FACE:
A 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’.
2. POSITIVE FACE:
A PERSON’S POSITIVE FACE IS THE NEED TO BE ACCEPTED, VALUED, EVEN LIKED AND
ADMIRED, BY OTHERS, TO BE TREATED AS A MEMBER OF THE SAME GROUP, AND TO KNOW
THAT HIS OR HER WANTS ARE SHARED BY OTHERS.
NEG­ATIVE FACE IS THE NEED TO BE INDEPENDENT
POSITIVE FACE IS THE NEED TO BE CONNECTED.
 5. POLITENESS STRATEGIES

POLITENESS STRATEGIES ARE USED TO EXPRESS CONCERN FOR OTHERS

AND MINIMIZE THREATS TO SELF-ESTEEM OR "FACE" IN PARTICULAR SOCIAL
CONTEXTS.

FOUR MAIN TYPES OF POLITENESS STRATEGIES:

1. POSITIVE POLITENESS
2. NEGATIVE POLITENESS
3. BALD ON-RECORD
4. OFF-RECORD (INDIRECT)
 1. POSITIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES.
POSITIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES ARE ORIENTED TOWARDS THE HEARER'S POSITIVE
FACE AND INTENDED TO AVOID GIVING OFFENSE BY HIGHLIGHTING FRIENDLINESS.  THEY
ARE USED AS A WAY TO MAKE THE HEARER FEEL A SENSE OF CLOSENESS AND BELONGING.
POSITIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES INCLUDE USING
JOKES, NICKNAMES, HONORIFICS, TAG QUESTIONS, SPECIAL DISCOURSE
MARKERS (PLEASE), AND SHARED DIALECT, JARGON AND SLANG.
EXAMPLES:
YOU LOOK SAD. CAN I DO ANYTHING?
HEH, MATE, CAN YOU LEND ME A DOLLAR?
HEY, BUDDY, I’D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU’D LET ME USE YOUR PEN.
IF WE HELP EACH OTHER, I GUESS, WE'LL BOTH SINK OR SWIM IN THIS COURSE.
IF YOU WASH THE DISHES, I'LL VACUUM THE FLOOR.
THAT'S A NICE HAIRCUT YOU GOT; WHERE DID YOU GET IT?
2

2. NEGATIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES. NEGATIVE POLITICAL STRATEGIES ARE  ORIENTED

TOWARDS THE HEARER'S NEGATIVE FACE AND INTENDED TO AVOID GIVING OFFENSE BY
SHOWING DEFERENCE. THEY ARE USED AS A WAY TO INTERACT WITH THE HEARER IN A NON-
IMPOSING WAY.
NEGATIVE POLITICAL STRATEGIES INCLUDE QUESTIONING (CONTAINING A MODAL
VERB), HEDGING, EXPRESSIONS OF APOLOGY FOR THE IMPOSITION, USING NOMINALIZATIONS,
PASSIVES, OR STATEMENTS OF GENERAL RULES, PLURAL PRONOUNS.

EXAMPLES:
WOULD YOU KNOW WHERE RADISSON STREET IS?
PERHAPS, HE MIGHT HAVE TAKEN IT, MAYBE.
COULD YOU LEND ME A PEN?
I’M SORRY TO BOTHER YOU, BUT CAN I ASK YOU FOR A PEN OR SOMETHING?
FORMAL POLITENESS:
I HOPE OFFENSE WILL NOT BE TAKEN. VISITORS SIGN THE LEDGER. SPITTING WILL NOT BE
TOLERATED. WE REGRET TO INFORM YOU.
 3. BALD ON-RECORD STRATEGY.
BALD ON-RECORD STRATEGY DOES NOT AIM TO MINIMIZE THE THREAT TO THE
HEARER'S FACE, AND IS MOST OFTEN USED IN SITUATIONS WHERE THE SPEAKER HAS A
CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LISTENER, SUCH AS FAMILY OR CLOSE FRIENDS, AND WHEN
INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE SHARED QUICKLY.
EXAMPLES:
WATCH OUT!
PASS ME THE PLIERS.
DON'T FORGET TO CLEAN THE KITCHEN!
YOUR HEADLIGHTS ARE ON!
COME IN.
LEAVE IT, I'LL CLEAN IT UP LATER. EAT!
 4. OFF-RECORD (INDIRECT) STRATEGY.
THIS POLITENESS STRATEGY MAKES USE OF INDIRECT LANGUAGE AND REMOVES THE
SPEAKER FROM THE POTENTIAL TO BE IMPOSING. THIS STRATEGY IS CONCERNED WITH
PRAGMATICS TO CONVEY THE INTENDED HIDDEN (IMPLIED) MEANING.

EXAMPLES: IT'S GETTING COLD IN HERE.

THE TRASH BASKET IS FULL.
“I’M SO TIRED. A CUP OF COFFEE WOULD HELP.”
 SOURCES
 
1. BROWN, P., S. LEVINSON. (1987). POLITENESS. SOME UNIVERSALS OF LANGUAGE USAGE.
CAMBRIDGE: CUP.
2. GRUNDY, P. (2000). DOING PRAGMATICS. LONDON: ARNOLD.
3. LEECH, G.N (1983) PRINCIPLES OF PRAGMATICS, LONGMAN
4. YULE, G. (1996). PRAGMATICS. OXFORD: OUP.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!