Linguistic Politeness Strategies - Essay Example

Linguistic Politeness Strategies Politeness is one of the many characteristics a person has which can also describe heror his apparent attitude when dealing with other people. It is a social norm observed in most, if not all, cultures that lived or are still living today. Some examples of words like respectful, courteous, helpful, sincere and honest are associated with politeness, and are seen as positive behavior (Watts 1). More than actions, polite use of language is also considered as positive behavior, especially since the use of speech effectively projects a person’s ideas and thoughts out for other people to hear. Characterization of polite language includes careful selection of words as well as the reconstruction of the speaker’s communicative intentions through the use of logic practical reasoning (Brown 8). The use of honorifics due to the presence of complex strata within societies in order to impersonalize people as well to further elaborate politeness is another feature seen in polite forms of languages. Also, the concept of face, or the public image of the speaker as he or she perceives it and how everyone else recognizes it, becomes a motivation to be polite at all times, as seen through the eyes of other cultures (Grebe 6). By projecting a positive image of their selves, people are able to communicate effectively in such a way that they get what they want and at the same time are able to maintain their good public images by their careful selection of words and actions. Strong motivation to do as such is a key point in the use of polite forms of language, which is a reason why it still persists up to the present (Brown 23). Depending on the quality as well as the type of social relationship between the speaker and the listener, the style of speech would also be adjusted accordingly (Carter 170). Politeness with regards to speech stems from the different hierarchies within a culture, and by not using respectful language towards different classes of people, speakers would become the target of stigmatization and persecution by the community (Watts 44). The lack of politeness in speech could also mean life or death in ancient cultures as well which suggests the evolution of polite speech patterns in most languages. Most output suggests that politeness in linguistics also originated from the use of indirections in speech, as well as hints, and by not being outright or the avoidance of blatant speech gives the speaker a more amiable or positive image (Carter 169). This also saves a person’s face, or the clean public image of a person remains clean. Brown and Levinson were able to come up with formulae on how people use languages. Some people choose to use speech blatant speech, which at times could get negative effects, but at certain times work due to its clear and direct way of saying things. Another example is the use of regressive action, where the speaker tells the listener that no threat or harm is being implied (Brown 70). Still another is the use of positive politeness where the speaker tries to relate to the listener by mentioning things in common. And lastly, the use of negative politeness, or the use of formality and restraint when asking something by putting the listener’s needs as top priority. Such patterns of languages give an idea as to how a speaker thinks during his or her course of action as well as their strategies in dealing with others. In being ‘polite’, a speaker is attempting to create an implicated context that matches the one assumed by the addressee, and utterances frequently exhibit a trade-off between economy and the speaker’s preference for a more elaborate linguistic strategy than is strictly needed to communicate the relevant proposition. This just means that in order to become both polite and at the same time assertive, careful word selections and phrasings are employed by the speaker in order to gain a positive result. In order for this to work, the speaker and the listener must both have something in common, like a set of universals as well as a system of oppositions so that there would be no misunderstandings in between them (Brown 23). By having knowledge of the set of rules as to what is polite or not, both parties can have communication exchange strategies that would very well lie within their understanding. Putting up a positive face and showing politeness in front of another person would increase the chances of getting what the person wants and at the same time would save himself from losing face as well as losing favor from the person he is talking to (Watts 91). For example, a person asking for a favor from another could get the results he wants based on how he conveyed his request. If he would just simply ask for it without bringing up any form of consideration for the time and effort that the other party would be exerting, he may not get the response he needs. On the other hand, if during the course of the communication exchange, the person in need was able to tell the other that his invaluable effort in helping the other despite additional time and energy to be spent was being considered as much as the person’s effort itself, then there might be a higher chance that the request would be fulfilled. Careful choice of words as well as the syntax and intonation could very well dictate the outcome of such requests (Carter 29). Another example of the use of language patterns as seen in the exchange of words between two distinct social classes. These are dictated by the two parties’ relationship to one another. A master of a household may be expected to show less politeness when addressing the slaves or the servants, but if the latter responds with a lot less respect than what is expected, it is assumed that the relationship of master and servant has changed (Carter 169). Losing face in such a way would denote that the servant has lost respect to the master and, therefore, does not care whether his actions were polite or not. In another example of politeness in speech, a person asking for the time may choose to use words such as “Please” or “Excuse me” to ask for the time (Watts 92). Although it may seem simple, but to some people the use of such words give them recognition as individuals which need careful consideration as well. The use of polite words could elicit positive feelings for the listener, which could make them give the other person a good consideration in the future. The lack of such words or the choice of words that imply for the other person to give the exact time as promptly as possible, would give the idea that the listener is not as important as the other, and that he or she is of a lesser status than the one asking. An action of such would elicit negative feelings with regards to the listener making them lose face as well as perceiving the other person to be rather impolite and inconsiderate. In this last example, a new neighbor that wishes to borrow something from the people next door would have a lot of words to choose from. If he or she manages to come up with a good phrase as well as a good strategy of presenting the dilemma (the act of borrowing itself) and making the other party seem equally important, then a positive response can be expected (Watts 93). He or she may greet the neighbors first and talk about small things, then proceed to the borrowing. In order for their positive consideration in the future, the new neighbor could come up with follow-up actions such as giving something back so as not to seem so polite, and at the same time saving face as well. In order for people to be polite, actions as well as language and speech patterns must be put into consideration. With this in mind, some researchers of speech and languages came up with models that show how speakers think when faced with the problem of having to ask from other people. Aside from commonalities such as language and cultures, the concept of polite speech has evolved, yet remains at present. Such linguistic strategies were borne out of necessity, yet are still relevant up to this day. Works Cited Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Print. Carter, Ronald, and Paul (Eds.) Simpson. Language, Discourse and Literature. New York, NY: Routledge, 1995. Print. Grebe, Nadja. Politeness: A Theoretical Review of Brown and Levinsons Politeness Theory. Seminar Paper. Norderstedt: GRIN Verlag, 2009. Print. Watts, Richard J. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Print. Watts, Richard, Sachiko, Ide and Konrad (Eds.) Ehlich. Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005. Print. Read More