The Politeness Principle

A. Definition of Politeness Politeness theory is the theory that accounts for the redressing of the affronts to face posed by Face Threatening Acts to addresses. This theory was first formulated in 1987 by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson. In their theory, politeness is defined as redressive action taken to counter-balance the disruptive effect of face threatening acts (FTAs). Moreover Mills (2003: 6) as stated in ( ) defined politeness as the expression of the speakers intention to mitigate face threats carried by certain face threatening acts toward another. While Leech defines politeness as a type of behavior that allows the participants to engage in a social interaction in an atmosphere of relative harmony. To be polite, Leech thinks you should follow politeness maxims while Brown and Levinson suggests paying attention to others Face Wants. B. The Concept of Face The basic notion of politeness theory according to Brown and Levinson is face which is defined as the public self image that every member of society wants to claim for him/her self. According to them face consists of two related aspects. Positive face is defined in two ways: as the wants of every member that his wants be desirable to at least some other people, or alternately, the positive consistent self image or personality (crucially including the desire that this self image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants. Negative face was defined as the want of every competent adult member that his/her actions be unimpeded by others, or the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-destruction, that is, the freedom of action and freedom from imposition. Brown characterized positive face by desires to be liked, admired, ratified and related to positively, noting that one would threaten positive face by ignoring someone. Then she characterized negative face by the desire not to be imposed upon, noting that negative face could be impinged upon by imposing on someone. Positive face refers to ones self esteem, while negative face refers to ones freedom to act. The two aspects of facer are the basic wants in any social interaction and so during any social interaction, cooperation is needed among the participants to maintain each other faces. C. Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) In social interactions, Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) are at times inevitable based on the terms of the conversation. A face threatening act is an act that inherently damages the face of the addressee or the speaker by acting in opposition to the wants and desires of the other. Most of these acts are verbal, however, they can also be conveyed in characteristics of speech such as tone and inflection.

Negative Face Threatening Acts Negative face is threatened when an individual does not avoid or intend to avoid the obstruction of their interlocutors freedom of choice and action. It can cause damage to either the speaker or the hearer. Damage to the hearer An act that affirms or denies a future act of the hearer creates pressure on the hearer to either perform or not perform the act. Example: orders, requests, suggestions, advice, reminding, threats or warnings. Damage to the speaker An act that shows that the speaker is succumbing to the power of the hearer. Example: the speaker commits him/her self to something s/he doesnt want to do or the acceptance of offers. Positive Face Threatening Acts Positive face is threatened when the speaker or hearer does not care about their interactors feelings wants or does not want what the other wants. Damage to the hearer When an individual is forced to be separated from others so that their well being is treated less importantly, positive face is threatened. Damage to the speaker Apologies: in this act, speaker is damaging his own face by admitting that he regrets one of his previous acts. Acceptance of a compliment (e.g; seeing a beautiful curtain in an American family, the Chinese wants to praise the room setting) Chinese: How beautiful the curtain is! Hostess: I made it on my own. Chinese: Really? I cant believe it! The Chinese used surprising tone to show she really liked the curtain, this strategy works well in China but the hostess felt insulted. Self-humiliation (when the speaker realizes that s/he has said something silly or ridiculous) Confessions (the speaker confesses his/her wrong deed).

Politeness Strategies
Politeness strategies are used to formulated massages in order to save the hearers face when face threatening acts are inevitable or desired. Brown and Levinson sum up four types of politeness strategies : bald on-record, positive politeness, negative politeness and off-record indirect.

Bald on-record Bald on-record strategies usually do not attempt to minimize the threat to the hearers face, although there are ways that bald on-record politeness can be used in trying to minimize face threatening acts implicitly. Often using such a strategy will shock or embarrass the addressee and so this strategy is most often utilized in situations where the speaker has a close relationship with the audience such as a family or close friends. The cases which use bald on-record strategies are: 1. Instances in which threat minimizing does not occur Great urgency or desperation Watch out! Help. Help me. Task oriented Pass me the hammer. 2. Instances in which the threat is minimized implicitly Welcome Come in. Offers Leave it. Ill clean up later. Positive politeness Positive politeness strategies seek to minimize the threat to the hearers positive face. They are used to make the hearer feels good about him self, his interests or possessions and are most usually used in situations where the audience knows each other fairly well. Some strategies of positive politeness include statements of friendship, solidarity and compliment. Attend to hearers interests, needs and wants. You look sad. Can I do anything? use solidarity in-group identity markers. Heh, mate, can you lend me a dollar? Being complimentary Thats a nice hair cut you got; where did you get it?

Assume agreement So when are you coming to see us?

Negative politeness Negative politeness strategies are oriented towards the hearers negative face and emphasize avoidance of imposition on the hearer. These strategies presume that the speaker will be imposing on the listener and there is a higher potential for awkwardness or embarrassment than in bald on-record strategies and positive politeness. Negative face is the desire to remain autonomous so the speaker is more apt to include an out for the listener, through distancing styles like the use of apologetic language. - Be indirect Would you know where Oxford street is? - Use hedges or questions Er, could you, er, perhaps, close the, um, window? - Apologizing Im sorry; its a lot to ask, but can you lend me a thousand dollars? - Minimize the imposition Asking permission: Would you mind if I closed the window? Asking someone else to do something: Would you mind closing the window. - Impersonalizing The management requires all windows to be closed. - Indicating deference Excuse me, Sir, would you mind if I asked you to close the window? - Favor seeking Favor seeking or a speaker asking the hearer for a favor, is a common example of negative politeness strategies in use. There are three main stages in favor seeking: the preparatory phase, the focal phase and the final phase. 1. The preparatory phase is when the favor seeking is preceded by elaborating precautions against loss of face to both sides. It often involves signals of openings and markers to be used to clarify the situation (e.g. You see or So). The request is often softened, made less direct and less imposing (e.g. Past continuous tense I was wondering, informal tag Whatd you

reckon?). The speaker must also reduce his own self-importance in the matter and exaggerate the hearers (down-scaling compliments) 2. The focal stage is subdivided into elements such as askers reasons or constrains (e.g. Ive tried everywhere but cant get one), the others face (e.g. Youre the only person I can turn to) 3. The third stage is the final stage which consists of anticipatory thanks, promises and complaints (e.g. I knew you would say yes, youre an angel). An example that is given by Mc Carthy and Carter is the following dialogue from the Australian television soap opera, Neighbors. Clarrie: So I said to him, forget your books for one night, throw a party next weekend. Helen : A party at number 30! What will Dorothy say about that? Clarrie: Well, what she doesnt know wont hurt her. Ill be keeping my eye on things and (SIGNAL OF OPENING) that brings me to my next problem. (EXPLAIN PROBLEM) You see, these young people, they dont want an old codger like me poking my nose in, so Ill make my self scare, but I still need to be closer to hand, you see. So, (ASK FAVOR) I was wondering, would it be all right if I came over here on the night? Whatd you reckon? Helen: Oh, Clarrie, I . Clarrie: Oh (MINIMIZATION) Id be no bother. (REINFORCE EXPLANATION) Itd mean a heck of a lot to those kids. Helen: All right. Clarrie: (THANK WITH BOOST) I knew youd say yes. Youre an angel, Helen. Helen: Ha! (laughs) All of this is done in attempt to avoid a great deal of imposition on the hearer and is concerned with proceeding towards a goal in the smoothest way and with sensitivity to ones interlocutors. An English (Excuse me, Sir, close the window?) is associated with the avoidance or downplaying of an imposition, the more we feel we might be. It is clearly a strategy for negative politeness and the redressing of a threat to negative face, through things like favor-seeking. Off-record indirect This strategy uses indirect language and removes the speaker from the potential to be imposing. For example, a speaker using the indirect strategy might merely say Wow, its getting cold in here insinuating that it would be nice if the listener would get up and turn up the thermostat without directly asking the listener to do so. Off-record indirect strategies take some of the pressure off through: - Giving hints: Its it cold in here. - Being vague: perhaps someone should open the window. - Being sarcastic or joking: Yeah, its really hot here.

Politeness Maxims Geoffrey Leech has proposed a series of maxims which supports the idea that negative politeness (avoidance of discord ) is more important than positive politeness (seeking concord). Not all of the maxims are equally important. For instance, tact influences what we say more powerfully than does generosity, while approbation is more important than modesty. However, the maxims may vary from culture to culture, what may be considered polite in one culture may be strange or downright rude in another. The tact maxim This maxim states: minimizing the expression which imply cost to other, maximize the expression which imply benefit to other. The first part of this maxim fits in with Brown and Levinsons negative politeness strategy of minimizing the imposition and the second part reflects the positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearers interests, wants and needs. Minimizing imposition: I just wanted to ask you if I could use your pen. Attend to the hearers need: You must be hungry, its a long time since breakfast. How about some lunch? The generosity maxim This maxim states: minimize the expression tor implies benefit to self, maximize the expression that expresses or implies cost to self. Unlike the tact maxim, the maxim of generosity focuses on the speaker and says that others should be put first instead of the self. Minimize benefit to self: You relax and let me do the dishes. Maximize cost to self: You must come and have dinner with us. The approbation maxim This maxim states: minimize the expression which expresses dispraise to other, maximize the expression which expresses praise or approval of other. The first part of the maxim avoids disagreement, the second part intends to make other people feel good by showing solidarity. Minimizing dispraise of other: I heard you singing at the karaoke last night. It sounded like you were enjoying your self! Maximizing praise of other: Gideon, I know youre genius would you know how to solve this math problem here?

The modesty maxim This maxim states: minimize the expression of praise of self, maximize the expression of dispraise of self. Oh, Im so stupid I didnt make a note of our lecture! Did you? The agreement maxim This maxim runs as follows: minimize the expression of disagreement between self and other, maximize the expression of agreement between self and other. It is in line with Brown and Levinsons positive politeness strategy of seek agreement and negative politeness strategy of avoid disagreement. However, it is not being claimed that people totally avoid disagreement. It is simply observed that they are much more direct in expressing agreement rather than disagreement. A: I dont want my daughter to do this, I want her to do that. B: Yes, but maam, I thought we resolved this already on your last visit. The sympathy maxim This maxim states: minimize antipathy between self and other, maximize sympathy between self and other. This includes a small group of speech acts such as congratulation, commiseration and expressing of condolences all of which is in accordance with Brown and Levinsons positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearers interests, wants and needs. Im sorry to hear about your father.

The syntactic patterns

1. Using an imperative sentence to give command or make a request which is usually used in bald on record strategy: (a). Positive imperative sentence V1 + N/NP Shut the door. V1 + Adj. Be diligent. (b). Negative imperative sentence Dont + V1 + N/NP/Adj. Dont shut the door. Dont be late.

3. A polite request with I or you as the subject May I and Could I are used to request permission. They are considered more polite than Can I. May I (please) borrow your pen? Could I borrow your pen (please)? Can I is used informally to request permission, especially if the speaker is talking to someone s/he knows fairly well. Can I is often used in positive politeness. Can I borrow tour pen? Would you and Could you in a polite request. Would you pass the salt (please)? Could you (please) pass the salt? Can you is often used informally. It usually sounds less polite than Could you and Would you. Can you pass the salt? 3. Making a polite request with would you mind which is usually use in negative politeness. (a). Asking permission Would you mind if I closed the window? (Would you mind + if + simple past tense) (The meaning : may I close the window? Is it all right if I close the window? Will it cause you any trouble or discomfort if I close the window?) (b). Asking someone else to do something Would you mind closing the window? (would you mind + gerund) (The meaning : I dont want to cause you any trouble but would you please close the window? Would that cause you any inconvenience?)