Grounded in naturally-occurring language data and drawing on findings from linguistic pragmatics and social psychology, Jonathan Culpeper. Politeness and Impoliteness Jonathan Culpeper (Lancaster University) 1. Introduction Thirty or so years ago politeness was a specialist, even somewhat. Impoliteness strategies. Jonathan Culpeper. Uploaded by. Jonathan Culpeper. Loading Preview. Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the .

Author: Mikar Maumi
Country: Algeria
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Life
Published (Last): 9 November 2010
Pages: 199
PDF File Size: 10.86 Mb
ePub File Size: 3.31 Mb
ISBN: 220-8-36816-418-5
Downloads: 29825
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Yolabar

There was a problem providing the content you requested

The Theory of Generalised Conversational Implicature. Section 2 immediately following is devoted to politeness and is the largest section in this chapter.

In Fine, Jonathan ed. To illustrate, the Republican presidential candidate John McCain responded to his wife when she teased him about his thinning hair in front of reporters: What exactly is politeness? Clearly, being inconsiderate is a descriptive label that strikes a chord with participants. Clearly, the informant assumes that, whilst the addressee is Joe, the target is her, something which seems to be supported by the fact that it was said “straight away when I got there”.

For example, of particular note is the development of the discursive approach in social psychology, spurred on especially by Derek Edwards and Jonathan Potter e. A consequence of focussing on the dynamic and situated characteristics of politeness is that politeness is declared not to be a predictive theory Watts Impoliteness triggers are the forms or formulae associated with impoliteness.


However, there is some empirical evidence which suggests that the combination of these variables is not that simple. Impoliteness impolitneess power in language. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse. Chapter 5 suggests that impoliteness that is relatively direct and impoliteness that is relatively indirect were both inclined to produce more offence. Brown and Levinson admit that they “may have been xulpeper error to set up the three super- strategies, positive politeness, negative politeness, and off record, as ranked unidimensionally to achieve mutual exclusivity” Put the other’s indebtedness on record.

Here we have the opposite of genuine impoliteness, that is, mock impoliteness, which consists of impolite forms whose effects are at least theoretically for the most part cancelled by the context the term “mock impoliteness” is used in Leech a; also see Bernalfor a discussion of culpepet vs.

Impoliteness strategies | Jonathan Culpeper –

Also, they include impolite behaviour within the scope of relational work, whilst avoiding presenting it as culppeer simple dichotomy with politeness. The Ipmoliteness Interpretation of Language and Meaning. Still, even with Spencer-Oatey’s more sophisticated framework there is no guarantee that every positive evaluative belief necessarily correlates with politeness attitudes. Briefly stated, [the socio-cultural view] assumes that each society has a particular set of social norms consisting of more or less explicit rules that prescribe culpeeper certain behavior, a state of affairs, or a way of thinking in context.

For example, amusing somebody is an interpersonal activity that is generally viewed positively, but it is not at all clear that it would normally be considered a matter of politeness.


These represent communities talking about strategies which they recognise and which have conventional status.


Language, Behaviour, Culture 1 2: Orders, threats, criticisms and contradictions carry potentially unfavourable, and hence self face threatening, attributions e. What Watts refers impolteness as second-order politeness or politeness2 is the stuff of the pragmatic view previously mentioned, or what in this chapter constitutes the first wave of politeness research.

Cambridge University Press, pp. He spells out his position thus: Negotiating norms of linguistic behaviour.

Field, Margaret Politeness and indirection in Navajo directives. Interestingly, this approach encompasses a wider context than the local structures of conversation analysts, including for example aspects of identity and the history of particular identities. The terms “positive” impolieness “negative” have nothing to do with being good and bad, but, in the world of Brown and Levinson, relate to, respectively, the positive values claimed by the participant, and the wish not to be imposed upon]:.

I understand conventionalisation here in the same way as Terkourafi e. Journal of Pragmatics 39 4: Markedness here relates to appropriateness: In my view, the relational and frame aspects so clearly do not fit discursive characteristics, as listed above, that they could not be considered discursive.

Subscribe US Now