politeness and appropriatenessWord格式文档下载.docx

politeness and appropriatenessWord格式文档下载.docx

《politeness and appropriatenessWord格式文档下载.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《politeness and appropriatenessWord格式文档下载.docx（39页珍藏版）》请在冰点文库上搜索。

Preface

In1994,IwasadmittedasastudentofcorrespondencecourseforBAdegreetoAnhuiNormalUniversity,whereIwasfirstacquaintedwithandindulgedinlinguisticsthroughlecturenotescompiledbyProfessorOuyangJunlin.Since1997whenIenteredAnhuiUniversityforMAdegree,IhavebeenreceivingunfailinglyacademicandmoralsupportfromProfessorZhuYue,whohasledmeintothefieldofmysteriousbutcharminglinguistics,andhashelpedmelayasolidfoundationandenhancedmoreenthusiasmformyfutureresearchwork.ThedissertationowesitspresentformtoProfessorZhuforhisdetailedandcriticalcomments.NosmallthanksarealsoduetoProfessorsHongZeng-liu,ZhouFang-zhu,ChenZhen-fa,HeGong-jie,HuaQuan-kun,andZhangZu-wufromAnhuiUniversity,Dr.HeimbeckfromUSA,Dr.StewartfromAustralian,withoutwhosepatienceandencouragementIcouldnothavefinishedthethree-yearstudysuccessfully.

ChapterOneGoal-directedViewofCommunication

Communicationasafunctionoflanguagearousesmuchdiscussion.Sofarasthenatureofcommunicationisconcerned,therearevariousviews:

aformofsocialinteraction,theexchangeofinformationbetweenatleasttwoindividualsthroughtheuseofverbalandnon-verbalsymbols,andproductionandcomprehensionprocesses.Butcommunicationisunderstoodinthispaperasanattainmentofasetofgoalsinlanguageproductionandinterpretation.Theactualuseoflanguageisinvestigatedbyexaminingthewaythatactualusersuselanguagetoattaingoalsinreallifesituations,withafullrecognitionofactualusersasdiscoursemanagers.

Ineverydaylanguage,peoplealsouse“motive”,“purpose”,or“end”totalkaboutothers’ortheirownactions.SomelinguistssuchasLeech（1983:

24,36）alsopropose,“Languageismotivated”,and“means-endsanalysis”.Gu（1999）distinguishestwosuper-goals:

thecommunicativeandextra-communicativegoals.Thecommunicativegoalisthegoalofgettingthemessageacross.Theextra-communicativegoalisthegoalthatparticipantshopetoachieveviadiscourse.Thecommunicativegoalwillbeassociatedwithillocutionaryacts,whereastheextra-communicativegoal,withthepurposeofthewholeinteraction.Thecommunicativegoalisameanstotheattainmentoftheextra-communicativegoal.Othersdistinguishsubordinategoalsfromsuperordinategoals,andmajorgoalsfromminorgoals.

Inthelinguisticcommunication,theattainmentofgoalsisrealizedthroughlanguagepotential,knowledgeoflanguageasasystemofchoices,andsocialpotentialderivedfromsocialrole,status,andsoon.Conversely,therealizationoflanguagepotentialandsocialpotentialdependsmuchongoalsdesiredbyinterlocutors.Certaingoalsalwayscorrespondtocertainrealizationofsocialandlanguagepotentialinlanguageforms.Thiscorrespondenceis,withthepassageoftime,naturallymappedinman’smindascertainrules.Inotherwords,manappliescertainrulestorealizepotentialsfortheattainmentofgoals.

Thecommonsensemeaningoftheterm“rule”issomeprincipletowhichanactionconformsorisintendedtoconform.Sofaraslinguisticactivity—theactualuseoflanguageisconcerned,rulesfallintotwokinds—constitutiverulesandregulativerules.Theformercreatethelinguisticbehaviorwhilethelatterregulateanalreadyexistingformofbehavior.Therulesofplayingfootballandchessbelongtotheformerbecausewithouttherulestherewould,indeed,benogametoplay.Thetrafficrulesshouldbeclassifiedasregulativeones,withoutwhichvehiclesstillrunbutwithmoreaccidents.Constitutiverulesaredescriptive,inthesensethattheyattempttodescribewhatactuallyhappens,andregulativerulesnormativeorprescriptive,layingdownlawsconcerningwhatoughtoroughtnottohappen.Inordertomakelinguisticactivityefficienttheremustbecertainrules.

However,thetem“rules”easilyremindspeopleofgrammarwhichisregardedassimplyconsistingofruleseversinceChomsky.Inearlierversionsoftransformationalgrammar,ruleswerethoughtofasexclusivelysyntacticinoriginandfunction.Asfarassyntaxisconcerned,languageisrule-generated.Leech（1983:

5）observes,“semanticsisrule-governed;

generalpragmaticsisrule-controlled.”Rulesonlymakesenseinsemanticsandsyntaxoutsidethecontextoftheactuallanguageuse.Principlesappearonthestageofpragmatics,thestudyoftheactuallanguageuse.Soconstitutiverulesfallintothenarrowsenseofrules—concerningtheactivityofgeneratingwell-formedness.Regulativerulescorrespondtoprinciplesinthattheyeitherregulatethelinguisticactivityormakeiteffective,whichistheconcernofthispaper.

What’stherelationshipamonggoals,rulesandprinciples,andtheactualuseoflanguage?

Intheprocessofobtaininggoals,interlocutors,tobeginwith,havetoseekforlanguagepotential.Theyapplyrulestoproducegrammaticallycorrectspeechacts,whichareallinaccordwithinterlocutors’intention.Thensocialpotentialrequiresinterlocutorstoapplyprinciplesintheextractionoftheactualusefromthesespeechacts.Theextractionisnotmadeatrandombutsubjecttorules（governinglanguagepotential）andprinciples（governingsocialpotentialandhencelanguagepotential）mappedininterlocutors’minds.Theactualusefrompotentialistheresultofthecompositeforceofrulesandprinciples.

Thegoalofpolitenessinlinguisticcommunicationhasbeenprevailinginhistoryofallcultures.Gu（1990）holdsthatinChina“li”wasfirstdocumentedinthebookLiJi,where“li”wasequatedwithdemonstrationofself-denigrationandrespecttoothers,especiallyinverticalrelationship.NowadaysChinesechildrenaretaughtto“JiangLimao”（tobepolitetoothersinactionandspeech）.InWesterncountries,politenessdatesbacktothe15thcentury;

inthe17thcentury,apolitepersonwasofrefinedcourteousmanners,whichisshownintheOxfordDictionaryofEnglishEtymology.“Ladyfirst”maybemosttypicalofpoliteness.InJapanhonorificsarewidelyused.Intermsoflexicon,“差し上げる”isusedtodenote“givesomethingtosomebodywhoishigherinstatus”insteadof“ぁげる”,“givesomethingtosomebodywhoisequalorlowerinstatus”.Intermsofstructure,“です”,“ござぃます”areoftenusedattheendofthesentence.Inthissense,politenessisuniversal.

InordertoachievethegoalofpolitenessLeechputsforwardthefamousandcontroversialPPanditsmaximsaswellashisotherconceptsofpolitenesstocontroltheextractionfrompotential.Nodoubtthattheycanbesatisfactorilyappliedinproducingandinterpretingpoliteness,buttheystillleavesmuchtobedesired.

ChapterTwoTheObjectofInquiry:

Leech’sConceptofPoliteness

1.Approachestopoliteness:

areview

BeforeLeech,therearetwomainapproachestopoliteness.FirstlyLakoffseesGrice’srulesasessentiallyrulesofclarity,andproposesthattherearetwopriorrulesofpragmaticcompetence:

“BeClear”and“BePolite”,whereclarityamountstoacondensedversionoftheGriceanmaxims,whilepolitenessservestoavoidconflictsbetweenparticipants.Sheproposesherownthreerulesofpoliteness:

1.formality:

don’timpose/remainaloof;

2.hesitancy:

givetheaddresseehisoptions;

3.equality:

actasthoughyouandtheaddresseewereequal/makehimfeelgood.

Secondly,theface-savingviewofpoliteness,proposedbyBrownandLevinson（1978）isrelatedtothefolkexpression“loseface”.Theysuggesttwokindsofface.Oneis“negativeface”ortherightstoterritories,freedomofactionandfreedomfromimposition;

essentiallythewantthatyouractionsbenotimpededbyothers.Theotheris“positiveface”,thepositiveconsistentself-imagethatpeoplehaveandwanttobeappreciatedandapprovedofbyatleastsomeotherpeople.

2.Leech’sapproachtopoliteness

InthissectionLeech’streatmentofpolitenessisexamined.

2.1PPandCP

PPisanalogoustoCPinthatbothofthemconsistofasetofmaximsrespectively.PP’smaximsrequireinterlocutorstoadoptstrategiesof（a）maximizingpolitebeliefsand（b）minimizingimpolitebeliefs,alsoexpressedinthenegativeimperative“Donotoffendothers”andinthepositiveimperative“Benicetoothers”.Theseaddupto“anessentialasymmetryinpolitebehavior,inthatwhateverisapolitebeliefforthespeakertendstobeanimpolitebeliefforthehearer,andviceversa”（Leech1983:

169）.Hefurtheradvancesscalesofpoliteness:

thecost-benefitscale,theoptionalityscale,andtheindirectnessscale.

Leech（1983:

80）clarifiestherelationshipbetweenPPandCPasfollows:

CPinitselfcannotexplain（i）whypeopleareoftensoindirectinconveyingwhattheymean;

and（ii）whatistherelationbetweensenseandformwhennon-declarativetypesofsentencearebeingconsidered.PPcanbeseen