1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Handbook of Pragmatics
  4. Chapter

Historical politeness

image of Historical politeness

References

  1. Antonacopolou, Elena , and Haridimos Tsoukas.
    2002 “Time and reflexivity in organization studies: An introduction.” Organization Studies23(6): 857–862. 10.1177/0170840602236006
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840602236006 [Google Scholar]
  2. Auer, Peter.
    1992 “Introduction: John Gumperz’ approach to contextualization.”InThe Contextu-alization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer and Aldo Di Luzio , 1–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.22.03aue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.03aue [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin, Paddy.
    1990 “Politeness revisited: The Dark Side.”InNew Zealand Ways of Speaking English, ed. by Allan Bell and Janet Holmes , 276–294. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bax, Marcel.
    2010 “Epistolary presentation rituals: Face-work, politeness, and ritual display in early modern Dutch letter-writing.”InHistorical (Im)politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper and Dániel Z. Kádár , 37–85. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 2012 “An evolutionary take on (im)politeness: Three broad developments in the marking out of socio-proxemic space.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics12 (1/2): 255–282. 10.1075/jhp.12.1‑2.11bax
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.11bax [Google Scholar]
  6. Bax, Marcel , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    (eds.) 2012 Understanding Historical (Im) Politeness. Double Special Issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics12(1/2).
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bax, Marcel , and Streekstra, Nanne.
    2003 “Civil rites: Ritual politeness in early modern Dutch letter writing.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics4(2): 303–325. 10.1075/jhp.4.2.09bax
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.4.2.09bax [Google Scholar]
  8. Beeching, Kate.
    2007 “A politeness theoretical approach to pragmatico-semantic change.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics8(1): 303–325. 10.1075/jhp.8.1.05bee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.8.1.05bee [Google Scholar]
  9. Beetz, Manfred.
    1999 “The polite answer in pre-modern German conversation culture.”InHistorical Dialogue Analysis, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , Gerd Fritz and Frantz Lebsanft , 139–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.66.06bee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.66.06bee [Google Scholar]
  10. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana , and Elite Olhstain
    1984 “Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP).”Applied Linguistics5(3): 196–213. 10.1093/applin/5.3.196
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/5.3.196 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bremmer, Jan , and Herman Roodenburg
    1997 A Cultural History of Humour: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Cambridge: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, Penelope , and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown, Roger , and Albert Gilman
    1960 “The pronouns of power and solidarity.”InStyle in Language, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok , 253–276. New York: MIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Burke, Peter.
    1987 “The art of insulting in early modern Italy.”Culture and History2: 68–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Carpanzano, Vincent.
    2004 “Text, transference, and indexicality.”InReflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, ed. by John A. Lucy , 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Clancey, William J.
    1993 “Situated action: A neuropsychological interpretation response to Vera and Simon.”Cognitive Science17(1): 87–116. 10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7 [Google Scholar]
  17. Culpeper, Jonathan.
    2009 “Historical sociopragmatics: An introduction.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics10(2): 179–186. 10.1075/jhp.10.2.02cul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.10.2.02cul [Google Scholar]
  18. Culpeper, Jonathan , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    (eds.) 2010 Historical (Im)Politeness. Berne: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0025‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0025-9 [Google Scholar]
  19. Culpeper, Jonathan , and Kytö, Merja.
    2010 Speech in Writing: Explorations in Early Modern English Dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. De Berg, Henk.
    1992 “A systems theoretical perspective on communication.”Poetics Today16(4): 709–736. 10.2307/1773370
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1773370 [Google Scholar]
  21. Drew, Paul.
    1997 “‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation.”Journal of Pragmatics28(1): 69–101. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)89759‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7 [Google Scholar]
  22. Elden, Stuart.
    2002 Mapping the Present: Heidegger, Foucault, and the Project of Spatial History. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Eelen, Gino.
    2001 A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St Jerome.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ehlich, Konrad.
    2005 “On the historicity of politeness.”InPoliteness in Language (2nd Edition), ed. by Richard Watts , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich , 71–108. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199819
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819 [Google Scholar]
  25. Fitzmaurice, Susan.
    2002 The Familiar Letter in Early Modern English: A Pragmatic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.95
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.95 [Google Scholar]
  26. Foucault, Michel.
    1973 The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gibson, James J.
    1979 The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Goffman, Erving.
    1981 “Footing.”Semiotica25(1/2): 1–30. 10.1515/semi.1979.25.1‑2.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1979.25.1-2.1 [Google Scholar]
  29. 1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Haugh, Michael.
    2004 “Revisiting the conceptualisation of politeness in English and Japanese.”Multilingua23(1/2): 85–109. 10.1515/mult.2004.009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2004.009 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2007 “The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative.”Journal of Politeness Research3(2): 295–317.. 10.1515/PR.2007.013
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.013 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2012 “Epilogue: the first–second order distinction in face and politeness research.”Journal of Politeness Research8(1): 111–134. 10.1515/pr‑2012‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0007 [Google Scholar]
  33. Haugh, Michael , Dániel Z. Kádár , and Sara Mills
    2013 “Interpersonal pragmatics: Issues and debates.”Journal of Pragmatics. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  34. Held, Gudrun.
    1999 “Submission strategies as an expression of the ideology of politeness: Reflections on the verbalization of social power relations.”Pragmatics9(10): 21–36.. 10.1075/prag.9.1.03hel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.9.1.03hel [Google Scholar]
  35. Herring, Susan C.
    2003 “Media and language change: Introduction.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics4(1): 1–17. 10.1075/jhp.4.1.02her
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.4.1.02her [Google Scholar]
  36. Heidegger, Martin.
    [1927] 1991 Being and Time. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Ide, Sachiko.
    2005 “How and why honorifics can signify dignity and elegance: The indexicality and reflexivity of linguistic rituals.”InBroadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness, ed. by Robin T. Lakoff , and Sachiko Ide , 45–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.139.06ide
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.139.06ide [Google Scholar]
  38. Iggers, Georg G.
    2007 “Rationality and History.”Retrieved from: www.culturahistorica.es/iggers/rationality_and_history.pdf
  39. Jacobs, Andreas , and Jucker, Andreas H.
    1995 “The historical perspective in pragmatics.”InHistorical Pragmatics – Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , 3–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.04jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.04jac [Google Scholar]
  40. Jucker, Andreas H.
    1995. Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2000 “‘Thou’ in the history of English: A case for historical semantics or pragmatics?” In Words: Structure, Meaning, Function. Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, C. Dalton-Puffer , and N. Ritt , 153–163. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110809169.153
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809169.153 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2010 “‘In curteisie was set fulmuchelhir lest’, Politeness in Middle English.”InHistorical (Im) Politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper and Dániel Z. Kádár , 175–200. Berne: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 2012 “Positive and negative face as descriptive categories in the history of English.”InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax , and Dániel Z. Kádár , 178–197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.08juc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.08juc [Google Scholar]
  44. Jucker, Andreas , and Irma Taavitsainen.
    2013 English Historical Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Kádár, Dániel Z.
    2007 Terms of (Im)Politeness: On the Communicational Properties of Traditional Chinese (Im)Polite Terms of Address. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Kádár, Daniel Z.
    2010. Historical Chinese Letter Writing. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Kádár, Dániel Z.
    2012 “Relational ritual.”InHandbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Jef Verschueren , 48pp.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1017/s0047404511000716
     https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404511000716 [Google Scholar]
  48. Kádár, Dániel Z. , and Michael Haugh
    forthcoming. “Intercultural politeness research.”InHandbook of Pragmatics ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Jef Verschueren . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hop.19.int13
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.19.int13 [Google Scholar]
  49. Kaestle, Carl F.
    1985 “The history of literacy and the history of readers.”Review of Research in Education12: 11–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Kohnen, Thomas.
    2008 “Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? A study of Old English address terms.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics9(1): 140–158. 10.1075/jhp.9.1.11koh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.11koh [Google Scholar]
  51. 2012 Understanding Anglo-Saxon ‘politeness’: Directive constraints with ic wille / ic wolde . InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár , 230–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.10koh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.10koh [Google Scholar]
  52. Kopytko, Roman.
    1995 “Linguistic politeness strategies in Shakespeare’s plays.”InHistorical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , 515–540. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.27kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.27kop [Google Scholar]
  53. Kumatani, Akiyasu.
    1990 “Language policies in North Korea.”International Journal of the Sociology of Language127: 87–108.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Lee, Hyo%n-Bok.
    1990 “Differences in language use between North and South Korean.”International Journal of the Sociology of Language82: 71–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Lucy, John A.
    2004. Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031 [Google Scholar]
  56. Meier, A. J.
    1995 “Passages of politeness.”Journal of Pragmatics24(4): 381–392. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00053‑H
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00053-H [Google Scholar]
  57. Mills, Sara , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2011 “Politeness and culture.”InPoliteness in East Asia, ed. by Dániel Z. Kádár and Sara Mills , 21–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.004 [Google Scholar]
  58. Moreno, Maria Cristobalina.
    2002 “The address system of the Spanish of the Golden Age.”Journal of Pragmatics34(1): 15–47. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(00)00074‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00074-6 [Google Scholar]
  59. Mützel, Sophie.
    2009 “Networks as culturally constituted processes: A comparison of relational sociology and actor-network theory.”Current Sociology57(6): 871–887. 10.1177/0011392109342223
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392109342223 [Google Scholar]
  60. Nevalainen, Terttu , and Tanskanen Sanna-Kaisa
    (eds.) 2007 Letter Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.1 [Google Scholar]
  61. Norris, Sigrid.
    2004 Analyzing Multimodal Interaction: A Methodological Framework. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Ong, Walter.
    1984 “Orality, literacy, and medieval textualization.”Oral and Written Traditions in the Middle Ages16(1): 1–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Pan, Yuling , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2011 Politeness in Historical and Contemporary Chinese. London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Peacock, James L. and Dorothy L. Holland
    1993 “The narrated self: Life stories in process.”Ethos21(4): 367–383. 10.1525/eth.1993.21.4.02a00010
     https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.1993.21.4.02a00010 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ruhi, Ükriye and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2012 “‘Face’ across historical cultures: A comparative analysis of Turkish and Chinese.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics12 (1/2): 25–48. 10.1075/jhp.12.1‑2.02ruh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.02ruh [Google Scholar]
  66. Seppänen, Eeva-Leena.
    2003 “Demonstrative pronouns in addressing and referring in Finnish.”InDiachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, ed. by Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas H. Jucker , 375–399. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107.15sep
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.15sep [Google Scholar]
  67. Shields, David S.
    1997 Civil Tongues and Polite Letters in British America. Chapell Hill and London: University of North California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Sifianou, Maria.
    1999 Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Silverstein, Michael.
    2003 “Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life.”Language and Communication23: 193–229. 10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  70. Skewis, Malcolm.
    2003 Honglou mengJournal of Pragmatics35(2): 161–189. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00084‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00084-X [Google Scholar]
  71. Spencer-Oatey, Helen , and Wenying Jiang
    2003 “Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic findings: Moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs).”Journal of Pragmatics35 (10/11): 1633–1650. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(03)00025‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00025-0 [Google Scholar]
  72. Spencer-Oatey, Helen.
    [2000] 2008 “Introduction: Language, culture and Rapport Management.”InCulturally Speaking, ed. by Helen Spencer-Oatey , 1–10. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Suhr, Carla and Irma Taavitsainen
    (eds.) 2012 Developing Corpus Methodology for Historical Pragmatics. Special issue of VARENG 11.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Taavitsainen, Irma and Andreas H. Jucker
    (eds.) 2003 Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107 [Google Scholar]
  75. Trosborg, Anna.
    1995 Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110885286
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110885286 [Google Scholar]
  76. Van De Walle , Lieve
    1993 Pragmatics and Classical Sanskrit: A Pilot Study in Linguistic Politeness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.28
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.28 [Google Scholar]
  77. Watts, Richard J.
    1999 “Language and politeness in early eighteenth century Britain.”Pragmatics9(1): 5–20.. 10.1075/prag.9.1.02wat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.9.1.02wat [Google Scholar]
  78. 2005 Quo vadis? In Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory, and Practice, ed. by Richard J. Watts , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich , xi–xlvii. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199819
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819 [Google Scholar]
  79. 2012 “A socio-cognitive approach to historical politeness.”InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár , 103–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.05wat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.05wat [Google Scholar]
  80. Wayne, Pace R.
    1962 “Oral communication and sales effectiveness.”Journal of Applied Psychology46(5): 321–324. 10.1037/h0043815
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043815 [Google Scholar]
  81. Wetzel, Patricia.
    2004 Keigo in Modern Japan: Polite Language from Meiji to the Present. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Wheeler, Max W.
    1994 “‘Politeness’: Sociolinguistic theory and language change.”Folia Linguistica HistoricaXV: 149–174.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Whitehead, Neil L.
    1995 “The historical anthropology of text: The interpretation of Ralegh’s Discoverie of Guiana.”Current Anthropology36(1): 53–74. 10.1086/204342
     https://doi.org/10.1086/204342 [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Antonacopolou, Elena , and Haridimos Tsoukas.
    2002 “Time and reflexivity in organization studies: An introduction.” Organization Studies23(6): 857–862. 10.1177/0170840602236006
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840602236006 [Google Scholar]
  2. Auer, Peter.
    1992 “Introduction: John Gumperz’ approach to contextualization.”InThe Contextu-alization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer and Aldo Di Luzio , 1–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.22.03aue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.03aue [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin, Paddy.
    1990 “Politeness revisited: The Dark Side.”InNew Zealand Ways of Speaking English, ed. by Allan Bell and Janet Holmes , 276–294. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bax, Marcel.
    2010 “Epistolary presentation rituals: Face-work, politeness, and ritual display in early modern Dutch letter-writing.”InHistorical (Im)politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper and Dániel Z. Kádár , 37–85. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. 2012 “An evolutionary take on (im)politeness: Three broad developments in the marking out of socio-proxemic space.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics12 (1/2): 255–282. 10.1075/jhp.12.1‑2.11bax
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.11bax [Google Scholar]
  6. Bax, Marcel , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    (eds.) 2012 Understanding Historical (Im) Politeness. Double Special Issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics12(1/2).
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bax, Marcel , and Streekstra, Nanne.
    2003 “Civil rites: Ritual politeness in early modern Dutch letter writing.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics4(2): 303–325. 10.1075/jhp.4.2.09bax
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.4.2.09bax [Google Scholar]
  8. Beeching, Kate.
    2007 “A politeness theoretical approach to pragmatico-semantic change.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics8(1): 303–325. 10.1075/jhp.8.1.05bee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.8.1.05bee [Google Scholar]
  9. Beetz, Manfred.
    1999 “The polite answer in pre-modern German conversation culture.”InHistorical Dialogue Analysis, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , Gerd Fritz and Frantz Lebsanft , 139–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.66.06bee
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.66.06bee [Google Scholar]
  10. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana , and Elite Olhstain
    1984 “Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP).”Applied Linguistics5(3): 196–213. 10.1093/applin/5.3.196
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/5.3.196 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bremmer, Jan , and Herman Roodenburg
    1997 A Cultural History of Humour: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Cambridge: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, Penelope , and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown, Roger , and Albert Gilman
    1960 “The pronouns of power and solidarity.”InStyle in Language, ed. by Thomas A. Sebeok , 253–276. New York: MIT.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Burke, Peter.
    1987 “The art of insulting in early modern Italy.”Culture and History2: 68–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Carpanzano, Vincent.
    2004 “Text, transference, and indexicality.”InReflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics, ed. by John A. Lucy , 293–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Clancey, William J.
    1993 “Situated action: A neuropsychological interpretation response to Vera and Simon.”Cognitive Science17(1): 87–116. 10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1701_7 [Google Scholar]
  17. Culpeper, Jonathan.
    2009 “Historical sociopragmatics: An introduction.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics10(2): 179–186. 10.1075/jhp.10.2.02cul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.10.2.02cul [Google Scholar]
  18. Culpeper, Jonathan , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    (eds.) 2010 Historical (Im)Politeness. Berne: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0025‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0025-9 [Google Scholar]
  19. Culpeper, Jonathan , and Kytö, Merja.
    2010 Speech in Writing: Explorations in Early Modern English Dialogues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. De Berg, Henk.
    1992 “A systems theoretical perspective on communication.”Poetics Today16(4): 709–736. 10.2307/1773370
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1773370 [Google Scholar]
  21. Drew, Paul.
    1997 “‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation.”Journal of Pragmatics28(1): 69–101. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)89759‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7 [Google Scholar]
  22. Elden, Stuart.
    2002 Mapping the Present: Heidegger, Foucault, and the Project of Spatial History. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Eelen, Gino.
    2001 A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St Jerome.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ehlich, Konrad.
    2005 “On the historicity of politeness.”InPoliteness in Language (2nd Edition), ed. by Richard Watts , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich , 71–108. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199819
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819 [Google Scholar]
  25. Fitzmaurice, Susan.
    2002 The Familiar Letter in Early Modern English: A Pragmatic Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.95
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.95 [Google Scholar]
  26. Foucault, Michel.
    1973 The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Vintage Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Gibson, James J.
    1979 The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Goffman, Erving.
    1981 “Footing.”Semiotica25(1/2): 1–30. 10.1515/semi.1979.25.1‑2.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1979.25.1-2.1 [Google Scholar]
  29. 1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Haugh, Michael.
    2004 “Revisiting the conceptualisation of politeness in English and Japanese.”Multilingua23(1/2): 85–109. 10.1515/mult.2004.009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2004.009 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2007 “The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative.”Journal of Politeness Research3(2): 295–317.. 10.1515/PR.2007.013
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.013 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2012 “Epilogue: the first–second order distinction in face and politeness research.”Journal of Politeness Research8(1): 111–134. 10.1515/pr‑2012‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0007 [Google Scholar]
  33. Haugh, Michael , Dániel Z. Kádár , and Sara Mills
    2013 “Interpersonal pragmatics: Issues and debates.”Journal of Pragmatics. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  34. Held, Gudrun.
    1999 “Submission strategies as an expression of the ideology of politeness: Reflections on the verbalization of social power relations.”Pragmatics9(10): 21–36.. 10.1075/prag.9.1.03hel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.9.1.03hel [Google Scholar]
  35. Herring, Susan C.
    2003 “Media and language change: Introduction.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics4(1): 1–17. 10.1075/jhp.4.1.02her
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.4.1.02her [Google Scholar]
  36. Heidegger, Martin.
    [1927] 1991 Being and Time. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Ide, Sachiko.
    2005 “How and why honorifics can signify dignity and elegance: The indexicality and reflexivity of linguistic rituals.”InBroadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness, ed. by Robin T. Lakoff , and Sachiko Ide , 45–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.139.06ide
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.139.06ide [Google Scholar]
  38. Iggers, Georg G.
    2007 “Rationality and History.”Retrieved from: www.culturahistorica.es/iggers/rationality_and_history.pdf
  39. Jacobs, Andreas , and Jucker, Andreas H.
    1995 “The historical perspective in pragmatics.”InHistorical Pragmatics – Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , 3–36. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.04jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.04jac [Google Scholar]
  40. Jucker, Andreas H.
    1995. Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2000 “‘Thou’ in the history of English: A case for historical semantics or pragmatics?” In Words: Structure, Meaning, Function. Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky, C. Dalton-Puffer , and N. Ritt , 153–163. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110809169.153
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110809169.153 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2010 “‘In curteisie was set fulmuchelhir lest’, Politeness in Middle English.”InHistorical (Im) Politeness, ed. by Jonathan Culpeper and Dániel Z. Kádár , 175–200. Berne: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 2012 “Positive and negative face as descriptive categories in the history of English.”InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax , and Dániel Z. Kádár , 178–197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.08juc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.08juc [Google Scholar]
  44. Jucker, Andreas , and Irma Taavitsainen.
    2013 English Historical Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Kádár, Dániel Z.
    2007 Terms of (Im)Politeness: On the Communicational Properties of Traditional Chinese (Im)Polite Terms of Address. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Kádár, Daniel Z.
    2010. Historical Chinese Letter Writing. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Kádár, Dániel Z.
    2012 “Relational ritual.”InHandbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Jef Verschueren , 48pp.Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1017/s0047404511000716
     https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404511000716 [Google Scholar]
  48. Kádár, Dániel Z. , and Michael Haugh
    forthcoming. “Intercultural politeness research.”InHandbook of Pragmatics ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Jef Verschueren . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/hop.19.int13
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.19.int13 [Google Scholar]
  49. Kaestle, Carl F.
    1985 “The history of literacy and the history of readers.”Review of Research in Education12: 11–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Kohnen, Thomas.
    2008 “Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? A study of Old English address terms.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics9(1): 140–158. 10.1075/jhp.9.1.11koh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.9.1.11koh [Google Scholar]
  51. 2012 Understanding Anglo-Saxon ‘politeness’: Directive constraints with ic wille / ic wolde . InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár , 230–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.10koh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.10koh [Google Scholar]
  52. Kopytko, Roman.
    1995 “Linguistic politeness strategies in Shakespeare’s plays.”InHistorical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, ed. by Andreas H. Jucker , 515–540. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.35.27kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.35.27kop [Google Scholar]
  53. Kumatani, Akiyasu.
    1990 “Language policies in North Korea.”International Journal of the Sociology of Language127: 87–108.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Lee, Hyo%n-Bok.
    1990 “Differences in language use between North and South Korean.”International Journal of the Sociology of Language82: 71–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Lucy, John A.
    2004. Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031 [Google Scholar]
  56. Meier, A. J.
    1995 “Passages of politeness.”Journal of Pragmatics24(4): 381–392. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00053‑H
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00053-H [Google Scholar]
  57. Mills, Sara , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2011 “Politeness and culture.”InPoliteness in East Asia, ed. by Dániel Z. Kádár and Sara Mills , 21–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.004
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.004 [Google Scholar]
  58. Moreno, Maria Cristobalina.
    2002 “The address system of the Spanish of the Golden Age.”Journal of Pragmatics34(1): 15–47. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(00)00074‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00074-6 [Google Scholar]
  59. Mützel, Sophie.
    2009 “Networks as culturally constituted processes: A comparison of relational sociology and actor-network theory.”Current Sociology57(6): 871–887. 10.1177/0011392109342223
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392109342223 [Google Scholar]
  60. Nevalainen, Terttu , and Tanskanen Sanna-Kaisa
    (eds.) 2007 Letter Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.1 [Google Scholar]
  61. Norris, Sigrid.
    2004 Analyzing Multimodal Interaction: A Methodological Framework. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Ong, Walter.
    1984 “Orality, literacy, and medieval textualization.”Oral and Written Traditions in the Middle Ages16(1): 1–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Pan, Yuling , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2011 Politeness in Historical and Contemporary Chinese. London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Peacock, James L. and Dorothy L. Holland
    1993 “The narrated self: Life stories in process.”Ethos21(4): 367–383. 10.1525/eth.1993.21.4.02a00010
     https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.1993.21.4.02a00010 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ruhi, Ükriye and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2012 “‘Face’ across historical cultures: A comparative analysis of Turkish and Chinese.”Journal of Historical Pragmatics12 (1/2): 25–48. 10.1075/jhp.12.1‑2.02ruh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.02ruh [Google Scholar]
  66. Seppänen, Eeva-Leena.
    2003 “Demonstrative pronouns in addressing and referring in Finnish.”InDiachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems, ed. by Irma Taavitsainen and Andreas H. Jucker , 375–399. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107.15sep
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107.15sep [Google Scholar]
  67. Shields, David S.
    1997 Civil Tongues and Polite Letters in British America. Chapell Hill and London: University of North California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Sifianou, Maria.
    1999 Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Silverstein, Michael.
    2003 “Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life.”Language and Communication23: 193–229. 10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  70. Skewis, Malcolm.
    2003 Honglou mengJournal of Pragmatics35(2): 161–189. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00084‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00084-X [Google Scholar]
  71. Spencer-Oatey, Helen , and Wenying Jiang
    2003 “Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic findings: Moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs).”Journal of Pragmatics35 (10/11): 1633–1650. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(03)00025‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00025-0 [Google Scholar]
  72. Spencer-Oatey, Helen.
    [2000] 2008 “Introduction: Language, culture and Rapport Management.”InCulturally Speaking, ed. by Helen Spencer-Oatey , 1–10. London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Suhr, Carla and Irma Taavitsainen
    (eds.) 2012 Developing Corpus Methodology for Historical Pragmatics. Special issue of VARENG 11.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Taavitsainen, Irma and Andreas H. Jucker
    (eds.) 2003 Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.107
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.107 [Google Scholar]
  75. Trosborg, Anna.
    1995 Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110885286
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110885286 [Google Scholar]
  76. Van De Walle , Lieve
    1993 Pragmatics and Classical Sanskrit: A Pilot Study in Linguistic Politeness. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.28
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.28 [Google Scholar]
  77. Watts, Richard J.
    1999 “Language and politeness in early eighteenth century Britain.”Pragmatics9(1): 5–20.. 10.1075/prag.9.1.02wat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.9.1.02wat [Google Scholar]
  78. 2005 Quo vadis? In Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory, and Practice, ed. by Richard J. Watts , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich , xi–xlvii. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199819
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819 [Google Scholar]
  79. 2012 “A socio-cognitive approach to historical politeness.”InUnderstanding Historical (Im)Politeness, ed. by Marcel Bax and Dániel Z. Kádár , 103–130. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bct.41.05wat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.41.05wat [Google Scholar]
  80. Wayne, Pace R.
    1962 “Oral communication and sales effectiveness.”Journal of Applied Psychology46(5): 321–324. 10.1037/h0043815
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043815 [Google Scholar]
  81. Wetzel, Patricia.
    2004 Keigo in Modern Japan: Polite Language from Meiji to the Present. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Wheeler, Max W.
    1994 “‘Politeness’: Sociolinguistic theory and language change.”Folia Linguistica HistoricaXV: 149–174.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Whitehead, Neil L.
    1995 “The historical anthropology of text: The interpretation of Ralegh’s Discoverie of Guiana.”Current Anthropology36(1): 53–74. 10.1086/204342
     https://doi.org/10.1086/204342 [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027257680-hop.m2.his3
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027257680-hop.m2.his3
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027257680
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error