1887
Volume 2, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2542-3851
  • E-ISSN: 2542-386X
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

(Im)politeness research has often focused either on the importance of social norms or on the intentions of the speaker, with the active role of the listener in assigning social meanings overlooked. This limitation particularly applies to so-called “discernment languages” such as Korean and Japanese. The current paper addresses this gap by offering a small-scale qualitative study of recipient agency in Korean naturally occurring computer-mediated communication (CMC). The data analyzed includes 14 text messages between the recipient (the proprietor of an online food business) and his customer, which were posted on a blog that he owned and operated. We focus on how the recipient agentively evaluates the language usage of the customer, including inconsistent evaluations of her use of non-honorific language, or . The results suggest that the instability of (im)politeness interpretations cannot be explained solely by social norms or intentions but should also include the socially-mediated agency of the recipient.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00036.kim
2019-10-21
2019-12-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ahearn, Laura M.
    2001 “Language and agency.” Annual Review of Anthropology30: 109–137. 10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.109
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.109 [Google Scholar]
  2. 2017Living Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology (2nd. edn.). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Androutsopoulos, Jannis K.
    2000 “Non-standard spellings in media texts: The case of German fanzines.” Journal of Sociolinguistics4(4): 514–533. 10.1111/1467‑9481.00128
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00128 [Google Scholar]
  4. Angouri, Jo, and Theodora Tseliga
    2010 “‘you HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!’: From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora.” Journal of Politeness Research6(1): 57–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, Lucien
    2011Korean Honorifics and Politeness in Second Language Learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.206
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.206 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2013a “‘Mind your own esteemed business’: Sarcastic honorifics use and impoliteness in Korean TV dramas.” Journal of Politeness Research9(2): 159–186. 10.1515/pr‑2013‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2013-0008 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2013b “Teaching ‘casual’ and/or ‘impolite’ language through multimedia: the case of non-honorific panmal speech styles in Korea.” Culture and Curriculum26(1): 1–18. 10.1080/07908318.2012.745551
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.745551 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2013c “‘Oppa, hold my purse’: A sociocultural study of identity and indexicality in the perception and use of Oppa ‘Older Brother’ by second language learners.” Korean Language in America18: 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2015 “Revisiting ‘polite’ -yo and ‘deferential’ -supnita speech style shifting in Korean from the view point of indexicality.” Journal of Pragmatics79: 43–59. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.01.009 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2016 “An activity-theoretic study of agency and identity in the study abroad experiences of a lesbian nontraditional learner of Korea.” Applied Linguistics37(6): 807–828.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown, Lucien, and Bodo Winter
    2019 “Multimodal indexicality in Korean: Doing deference and performing intimacy through nonverbal behavior.” Journal of Politeness Research15(1): 25–54. 10.1515/pr‑2016‑0042
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2016-0042 [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, Lucien, Bodo Winter, Kaori Idemaru, and Sven Grawunder
    2014 “Phonetics and politeness: Perceiving Korean honorific and non-honorific speech through phonetic cues.” Journal of Pragmatics66: 45–60. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.011 [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1978 “Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena.” InQuestions and Politeness, ed. byEsther N. Goody, 56–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  15. Byon, Andrew S.
    2006 “The role of linguistic indirectness and honorifics in achieving linguistic politeness in Korean requests.” Journal of Politeness Research2(2): 247–276. 10.1515/PR.2006.013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/PR.2006.013 [Google Scholar]
  16. Choo, Miho
    2006 “The structure and use of Korean honorifics.” InKorean Language in Culture and Society, ed. byHo-min Sohn, 132–154. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Pres.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chun, Sun Young
    2014 “Features and strategies of Korean EFL elementary school children’s email discourse.” STEM Journal15(1): 197–217. 10.16875/stem.2014.15.1.197
    https://doi.org/10.16875/stem.2014.15.1.197 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cook, Haruko M.
    2011 “Are honorifics polite? Uses of referent honorifics in a Japanese committee meeting.” Journal of Pragmatics43(15): 3655–3672. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.008 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2013 “A scientist or salesman? Identity construction through referent honorifics on a Japanese shopping channel program.” Multilingua32(2): 177–202. 10.1515/multi‑2013‑0009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2013-0009 [Google Scholar]
  20. Culpeper, Jonathan, and Michael Haugh
    2014Pragmatics and the English Language. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑39391‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-39391-3 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dunn, Cynthia
    2005 “Pragmatic functions of humble forms in Japanese ceremonial discourse.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology15(2): 218–238.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Duranti, Alessandro
    2004 “Agency in language.” InA Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, 451–473. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Dynel, Marta
    2012 “Swearing methodologically: the (im)politeness of expletives in anonymous commentaries on Youtube.” Journal of English Studies10: 25–50. 10.18172/jes.179
    https://doi.org/10.18172/jes.179 [Google Scholar]
  24. Eelen, Gino
    2001A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Graham, Sage
    2007 “Disagreeing to agree: Conflict, (im)politeness and identity in a computer-mediated community.” Journal of Pragmatics39: 742–759. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.017 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2018 “Impoliteness and the moral order in online gaming.” Internet Pragmatics1(2): 303–328. 10.1075/ip.00014.lam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00014.lam [Google Scholar]
  27. Haugh, Michael
    2007 “The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative.” Journal of Politeness Research3(3): 295–317.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2010 “When is an email really offensive?: Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research6(1): 7–3. 10.1515/jplr.2010.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.002 [Google Scholar]
  29. Haugh, Michael, and Wei-Lin M. Chang
    2019 “‘The apology seemed (in)sincere’: Variability in perceptions of (im)politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics142: 207–222. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.022
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.022 [Google Scholar]
  30. Harrison, Sandra
    2006 “Transgressions, miscommunication and flames: Problematic incidents in email discussion.” InInternet Research Annual, ed. byMia Consalvo, and Caroline Haythornthwaite, 105–117. New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Herring, Susan C.
    2007 “A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse.” [email protected]4(1). https://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2007/761 (accessed8 March 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Hwang, Juck-ryoon
    1990 “‘Deference’ versus ‘politeness’ in Korean speech.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language82: 41–55.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Ide, Sachiko
    1989 “Formal forms and discernment.” Multilingua8(2): 223–248. 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2‑3.223
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kádár, Dániel Z., and Michael Haugh
    2013Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139382717
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717 [Google Scholar]
  35. Kádár, Dániel Z., and Sara Mills
    2011 “Introduction.” InPoliteness in East Asia, ed. byDániel Z. Kádár, and Sara Mills, 1–17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.003 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kim, Eun Young A., and Lucien Brown
    2014 “Negotiating pragmatic competence in computer-mediated communication: The case of Korean address terms.” CALICO Journal3(3): 264–284. 10.11139/cj.31.3.264‑284
    https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.31.3.264-284 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kim, Hyun-Oak A.
    2011 “Politeness in Korea.” InPoliteness in East Asia, eds. byDániel Z. Kádár, and Sara Mills, 176–207. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.010
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.010 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kim-Renaud, Young-Key
    1990 “On Panmal in Korean.” InICKL 7: Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Korean Linguistics, 232–255. Osaka: ICKL and Osaka University of Economics and Law.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lantolf, James, and Aneta Pavlenko
    2001 “‘(S)econd (l)anguage (a)ctivity theory: understanding second language learners as people.” InLearner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research, ed. byMichael Breen, 141–158. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lantolf, James, and Steven Thorne
    2006Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lee, Iksop, and Robert Ramsey
    2000The Korean Language. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Lee, Jung-bok
    2001Kweke kyengepep sayong-uy cenlyakcek thukseng [The Characteristics of Korean Honorific Strategic Use]. Seoul: Thaehaksa.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. 2009Intheneys thongsin ene-uy hwaksan-kwa hankwuke yenkwu-uy hwaktay [The Spread of Internet Communication and the Expansion of Korean Language Research]. Seoul: Sotong.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Lo, Adrienne
    2009 “Lessons about respect and affect in a Korean heritage language school.” Linguistics and Education20(3): 217–234. 10.1016/j.linged.2009.07.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2009.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  45. Mills, Sara
    2003Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615238
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615238 [Google Scholar]
  46. Mitchell, Nathaniel, and Michael Haugh
    2015 “Agency, accountability and evaluations of impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research11(2): 207–238. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0009 [Google Scholar]
  47. Oh, Sun-Young
    2007 “The interactional meanings of quasi-pronouns in Korean conversation.” InPerson Reference in Interaction, ed. byNick J. Enfield, and Tanya Stivers, 203–225. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2010 “Invoking categories through co-present person reference: The case of Korean conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics42(5): 1219–1242. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019 [Google Scholar]
  49. Park, Chongwon
    2010 “(Inter) subjectification and Korean honorifics.” Journal of Historical Pragmatics11(1): 122–147. 10.1075/jhp.11.1.05par
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.11.1.05par [Google Scholar]
  50. Pasfield-Neofitou, Sarah
    2007 “Textual features of intercultural Internet chat between learners of Japanese and English.” CALL-EJ Online9(1). callej.org/journal/9-1/pasfield-neofitou.html (accessed2 Mey 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Pomerantz, Anita
    2012 “Do participants’ reports enhance conversation analytic claims? Explanations of one sort or another.” Discourse Studies14(4): 499–505. 10.1177/1461445611434229
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611434229 [Google Scholar]
  52. Reiter, Rosina M., and Sara Orthaber
    2018 “Exploring the moral compass: Denunciations in a Facebook carpool group.” Internet Pragmatics1(2): 242–271.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Sinkeviciute, Valeria
    2018 ““Ya bloody drango!!!”: Impoliteness as situated moral judgement on Facebook.” Internet Pragmatics1(2): 272–302. 10.1075/ip.00013.sin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00013.sin [Google Scholar]
  54. Strauss, Susan, and Jong Oh Eun
    2005 “Indexicality and honorific speech level choice in Korean.” Linguistics43(3): 611–651. 10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.611 [Google Scholar]
  55. Terkourafi, Marina
    2005 “Beyond the micro-level in politeness research.” Journal of Politeness Research1(2): 237–262. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.237
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.237 [Google Scholar]
  56. Upadhyay, Shiv
    2010 “Identity and impoliteness in computer-mediated reader responses.” Journal of Politeness Research6(1): 105–127. 10.1515/jplr.2010.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.006 [Google Scholar]
  57. Watts, Richard J.
    1989 “Relevance and relational work: linguistic politeness as politic behavior.” Multilingua8(2):131–166. 10.1515/mult.1989.8.2‑3.131
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.131 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2003Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]
  59. Yeon, Jaehoon, and Lucien Brown
    2011Korean: A Comprehensive Grammar. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Yoon, Kyung-Joo
    2004 “Not just words: Korean social models and the use of honorifics.” Intercultural Pragmatics1(2): 189–210. 10.1515/iprg.2004.1.2.189
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2004.1.2.189 [Google Scholar]
  61. Yoon, Sang-Seok
    2015 “Korean honorifics beyond politeness markers: Change of footing through shifting of speech style.” InInterdisciplinary Perspectives on Im/politeness, ed. byMarina Terkourafi, 97–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.14.06seo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.14.06seo [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ip.00036.kim
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): (im)politeness , agency , CMC , integrative pragmatics and Korean
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