1887
(Im)politeness in Spanish-speaking socio-cultural contexts
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

This corpus-based article explores London and Madrid teenagers’ use of phatic expressions as a politeness device in their everyday conversations. The starting-point for the study is Leech’s ‘Phatic Maxim’, which he suggests as a supplement to the four maxims making up Grice’s Cooperative Principle. The purport of the maxim is to avoid silence by keeping talking, which may involve anything from loose formulaic talk to connectors and the use of taboo words, all of which are phatic devices with a strong bonding effect. The teenage talk studied here is largely void of the formulaic expressions that characterize conversational openings and closings in adult speakers’ casual encounters. Both groups are frequent users of turn-final appealers which trigger turn-initial uptakes and of reaction signals realized by interjections and taboo words, all with a strongly bonding effect. Boys in particular are not only allowed but even expected to use taboo language as a sign of camaraderie and a means to reinforce the phatic strength of an exchange. In both corpora, there is ample use of fillers that help the speaker to hold the turn, and hedges, which often act as fillers in addition to helping the speaker avoid self-commitment. And whereas the Spanish teenagers use certain vocatives as a purely conversational resource to establish and maintain contact, the English teenagers insert ‘unsolicited’ minimal feedback signals (for example, realized by ) which encourage the current speaker to go on speaking.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.18.4.04ste
2008-01-01
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aitchison, Jean
    (1996) The seeds of speech. Language origin and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Briz, Antonio
    (1993) Los conectores pragmáticos en la conversación coloquial (II): Su papel metadiscursivo. Español Actual: Universidad de Valencia, pp. 39-56.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cheepen, Christine
    (1988) The Predictability of Informal Conversation. London and New York: Pinter Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Clark, Herbert H
    (1996)  Using Language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Coates, Jennifer
    (ed) (1998) Language and gender. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cortés, Luis
    (1991) Sobre conectores, expletivos y muletillas en el español hablado. Málaga: Editorial Librería Ágora.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Crystal, David
    (1995) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. García Vizcaíno , María José , and Miguel A. Martínez-Cabeza
    (2005) The pragmatiics of well and bueno in English and Spanish. Intercultural Pragmatics2-1: 69-92.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gibbon, Dafydd
    (1997) Oh er, phatic focus. Unpublished talk. University of Bielefeld.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. González, Montserrat
    (2004) Pragmatic Markers in Oral Narrative. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.122
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.122 [Google Scholar]
  11. Grundy, Peter
    (1995) Doing Pragmatics. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fine, Gary Alan
    (1981) Rude words. Insults and narration in preadolescent obscene talk. MaledictaV: 51-68.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fuentes Rodríguez, Catalina
    (1990) Algunos operadores de función fatica. Habla de Sevilla y hablas americanas. Sociolingüística andaluza 5: 137-170.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (1993) Comportamiento discursivo de bueno, bien, pues bien. Estudios de Lingüistica 9. Universidad de Alicante, pp. 205-221.
  15. Holmes, Janet
    (1986) Functions of you know in women’s and men’s speech. Language in Society15:1. 1- 22. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500011623
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500011623 [Google Scholar]
  16. Jacobson, Roman
    (1960) Linguistics and poetics. In T.A. Sebeok (ed), Style in Language. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Langford, David
    (1994) Analysing Talk. London: Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Laver, John
    (1975) Communicative functions of phatic communion. In A. Kendon et al . (eds), The Organization of Behaviour in Face-to-Face Communication. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Leech, Geoffrey
    (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Levinson, Stephen
    (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lyons, John
    (1977) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Malinowski, Bronislaw
    (1923) Phatic communion. In J. Laver and S. Hutcheson (eds), Communication in Face to Face Interaction. Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Mateo, José , and Francisco Yus
    (2000) Insults: A relevance-theoretic taxonomical approach to their translation. International Journal of Translation12.1: 97-130.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. McCarthy, Michael , and Ronald Carter
    (1993) Language as Discourse. Perspectives for Language Teaching. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Senft, Gunter
    (1995) Phatic communion. In J. Verschueren , J-O. Östman , J. Blommaert and C. Bulcaen (eds), Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (loose-leaf contribution). doi: 10.1075/hop.1.pha1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.1.pha1 [Google Scholar]
  26. Stenström, Anna-Brita
    (1994) An Introduction to Spoken Interaction. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (2006) Taboo words in teenage talk: London and Madrid girls’ conversations compared. Spanish in Context3: 115-138. doi: 10.1075/sic.3.1.08ste
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.3.1.08ste [Google Scholar]
  28. Verschueren, Jef
    (1999) Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Viagara Tauste , Ana María
    (1990) Aspectos del español hablado. Aportaciones al estudio del español coloquial. Madrid: Sociedad General Española de Librería, S.A.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. (1990) La función fática del lenguaje. In Actas del Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Lingüística. XX Aniversario. Madrid: Gredos, pp. 1088-1097.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Zegarac, Vladimir
    (1998) What is phatic communication? In V. Rouchota and A. Jucker. Current Issues in Relevance Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 327-361. doi: 10.1075/pbns.58.14zeg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.58.14zeg [Google Scholar]
  32. Zegarac, Vladimir , and Billy Clark
    (1999) Phatic communication and relevance theory: A reply to Ward & Horn. Journal of Linguistics35: 565-577. doi: 10.1017/S0022226799007707
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226799007707 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.18.4.04ste
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Continuity , Corpus linguistics , Phatic expressions , Rapport and Teenage conversation
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