1887
Volume 34, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study aims to examine how Chinese and Japanese speakers perceive face-enhancement and face-threat from a value-construct perspective. A mixed-method research design consisting of a questionnaire and structured interviews was employed. The results suggest that the values which trigger face-enhancement and face-threat are differently distributed between the two linguacultures in face-threatening and face-enhancing situations. Both Chinese and Japanese participants agreed that competence was the top value for face-enhancement. The Chinese participants considered status superiority as the more sensitive triggering value of face-enhancement, whereas the Japanese participants believed that good public image, self-esteem, and pride were the main factors. In face-threatening scenarios, the Japanese participants paid more attention to self-abasement and shame, inconsideration and irresponsibility, whereas the Chinese were more sensitive to incompetence. We attribute these differences in individuals’ perspectives on interpersonal relationships as a possible cause of their divergent perceptions of face.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22075.xia
2024-01-19
2024-10-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca
    2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics35 (10–11): 1453–1469. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00173‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00173-X [Google Scholar]
  2. Bogdanowska-Jakubowska, Ewa
    2011 “Cultural Variability in Face Interpretation and Management.” InPoliteness Across Cultures, ed. byFrancesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 237–357. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230305939_12
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230305939_12 [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  4. Chang, Wei-Lin Melody
    2018 “Emotivity and Face: Displaying and Soliciting Emotivity in Chinese Mediation Interactions.” Lingua2131: 43–62. 10.1016/j.lingua.2018.06.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2018.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen, Xinren
    2019 “‘Family-Culture’ and Chinese Politeness: An Emancipatory Pragmatic Account.” Acta Linguistica Academica66 (2): 251–270. 10.1556/2062.2019.66.2.6
    https://doi.org/10.1556/2062.2019.66.2.6 [Google Scholar]
  6. Diegoli, Eugenia
    2022 “The Speech Act of Apologising in Japanese Online Communication: A Corpus-Assisted Study on the Use of Gomen in Written, Computer-Mediated Settings.” East Asian Pragmatics7 (1): 123–141. 10.1558/eap.18599
    https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.18599 [Google Scholar]
  7. Doi, Takeo
    1971Amae no Kozo [The Construction of Interdependence]. Tokyo: Koobundoo.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ervin-Tripp, Susan M., Kei Nakamura, and Jiansheng Guo
    1996 “Shifting Face from Asia to Europe.” InEssays in Semantics and Pragmatics, ed. byMasayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra A. Thompson, 32–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/pbns.32.04erv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.32.04erv [Google Scholar]
  9. Fei, Xiaotong
    1992From the Soil, the Foundations of Chinese Society: A Translation of Fei Xiaotong’s Xiangtu Zhongguo, with an Introduction and Epilogue. (Gary G. Hamilton, and Zheng Wang, Trans.) Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Feldman, Ofer, and Ken Kinoshita
    2019 “Ignoring Respect: The Effects of Threat to Face on Replies and the Ensuing Questions During Broadcast Political Interviews in Japan.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology38 (5–6): 606–627. 10.1177/0261927X19834326
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X19834326 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fukushima, Saeko
    2020Metapragmatics of Attentiveness: A Study in Interpersonal and Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Bristol: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fukushima, Saeko, and Michael Haugh
    2014 “The Role of Emic Understandings in Theorizing Im/Politeness: The Metapragmatics of Attentiveness, Empathy and Anticipatory Inference in Japanese and Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics741: 165–179. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  13. Geyer, Naomi
    2010 “Teasing and Ambivalent Face in Japanese Multi-Party Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics42 (8): 2120–2130. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.015 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goffman, Erving
    1967Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gu, Yueguo
    1990 “Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics14 (2): 237–257. 10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90082‑O
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90082-O [Google Scholar]
  16. Gudykunst, William B., Yuko Matsumoto, Stella Ting-Toomey, Tsukasa Nishida, Kwangsu Kim, and Sam Heyman
    1996 “The Influence of Cultural Individualism-Collectivism, Self Construals, and Individual Values on Communication Styles Across Cultures.” Human Communication Research22 (4): 510–543. 10.1111/j.1468‑2958.1996.tb00377.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00377.x [Google Scholar]
  17. Hasegawa, Yoko
    2012 “Against the Social Constructionist Account of Japanese Politeness.” Journal of Politeness Research8(2): 245–268. 10.1515/pr‑2012‑0013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0013 [Google Scholar]
  18. Haugh, Michael
    2005 “What Does ‘Face’ Mean to the Japanese? Understanding the Import of ‘Face’ in Japanese Business Interactions.” InAsian Business Discourse(s), ed. byFrancesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Gotti Maurizio, 211–238. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2007 “Emic Conceptualisations of (Im)Politeness and Face in Japanese: Implications for the Discursive Negotiation of Second Language Learner Identities.” Journal of Pragmatics39 (4): 657–680. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  20. He, Ming, and Shaojie Zhang
    2011 “Re-Conceptualizing the Chinese Concept of Face from a Face-Sensitive Perspective: A Case Study of a Modern Chinese TV Drama.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (9): 2360–2372. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hinze, Carl G.
    2002 “Re-Thinking ‘Face’ Pursuing an Emic-Etic Understanding of Chinese Mian and Lian and English Face.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Queensland.
  22. 2012 “Chinese Politeness Is Not about ‘Face’: Evidence from the Business World.” Journal of Politeness Research8 (1): 11–27. 10.1515/pr‑2012‑0002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0002 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ho, David Yau-fai
    1976 “On the Concept of Face.” American Journal of Sociology81 (4): 867–84. 10.1086/226145
    https://doi.org/10.1086/226145 [Google Scholar]
  24. Holtgraves, Thomas, and Brian Kraus
    2018 “Processing Scalar Implicatures in Conversational Contexts: An ERP Study.” Journal of Neurolinguistics461: 93–108. 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2017.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2017.12.008 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hsu, Chuanhsi Stephen
    1996 “‘Face’: An Ethnographic Study of Chinese Social Behavior.” Ph.D. dissertation. Yale University.
  26. Hu, Hsien Chin
    1944 “The Chinese Concepts of ‘Face’”. American Anthropologist46 (1): 45–64. 10.1525/aa.1944.46.1.02a00040
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1944.46.1.02a00040 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hwang, Alvin, Anne Marie Francesco, and Eric Kessler
    2003 “The Relationship Between Individualism-Collectivism, Face, and Feedback and Learning Processes in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology34 (1): 72–91. 10.1177/0022022102239156
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102239156 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jacobs, J. Bruce
    1979 “A Preliminary Model of Particularistic Ties in Chinese Political Alliances: Kan-Ch’ing and Kuan-Hsi in a Rural Taiwanese Township.” The China Quarterly781: 237–273. 10.1017/S0305741000040467
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741000040467 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jin, Yingzhe, and Xinren Chen
    2020 “‘Mouren’ (‘Somebody’) Can Be You-Know-Who: A Case Study of Mock Referential Vagueness in Chinese Weibo Posts.” Journal of Pragmatics1641: 1–15. 10.1016/j.pragma.2020.04.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.04.010 [Google Scholar]
  30. Leech, Geoffrey N.
    2014The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Li, Hui
    2020 “Towards an Emic Understanding of Mianzi Giving in the Chinese Context.” Journal of Politeness Research16 (2): 281–303. 10.1515/pr‑2017‑0052
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2017-0052 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lin, Chun-Chi, and Susumu Yamaguchi
    2008 “Japanese Folk Concept of Mentsu: An Indigenous Approach from Psychological Perspectives.” InPerspectives and Progress in Contemporary Cross-Cultural Psychology: Proceedings from the 17th International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, ed. byGang Zheng, Kwok Leung, and John G. Adair, 343–357.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Matsumoto, Yoshiko
    1988 “Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics12 (4): 403–26. 10.1016/0378‑2166(88)90003‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Morisaki, Seiichi, and William B. Gudykunst
    1994 “Face in Japan and the United States.” InThe Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. byStella Ting-Toomey, 47–93. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Nakane, Chie
    1970Japanese Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Obana, Yasuko, and Michael Haugh
    2018 “Malefactive Uses of Giving/Receiving Expressions: The Case of Te-Kureru in Japanese.” East Asian Pragmatics3 (2): 201–231. 10.1558/eap.35239
    https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.35239 [Google Scholar]
  37. Olsson-Collentine, Anton, Marcel A. L. M. van Assen, and Chris H. J. Hartgerink
    2019 “The Prevalence of Marginally Significant Results in Psychology Over Time.” Psychological Science30 (4): 576–586. 10.1177/0956797619830326
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619830326 [Google Scholar]
  38. Pan, Yuling, and Dániel Z. Kádár
    2011 “Historical vs. Contemporary Chinese Linguistic Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (6): 1525–1539. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.018 [Google Scholar]
  39. Ran, Yongping, and Linsen Zhao
    2018 “Building Mutual Affection-Based Face in Conflict Mediation: A Chinese Relationship Management Model.” Journal of Pragmatics1291: 185–98. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.01.013 [Google Scholar]
  40. Ren, Juanjuan, and Xinren Chen
    2019 “Kinship Term Generalization as a Cultural Pragmatic Strategy among Chinese Graduate Students.” Pragmatics and Society10 (4): 613–38. 10.1075/ps.18009.ren
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.18009.ren [Google Scholar]
  41. Schwartz, Shalom H., Jan Cieciuch, Michele Vecchione, Eldad Davidov, Ronald Fischer, Constanze Beierlein, Alice Ramos, Markku Verkasalo, Jan-Erik Lönnqvist, Kursad Demirutku, Ozlem Dirilen-Gumus, and Mark Konty
    2012 “Refining the Theory of Basic Individual Values.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology103 (4): 663–688. 10.1037/a0029393
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029393 [Google Scholar]
  42. Sueda, Kiyoko
    1998 “Chugokujin Gakusei to Nihonjin Gakusei no “Mentsu” no Gainen oyobi Komyunikeshon Sutoratejii ni kansuru Hikaku no Ichi Jirei Kenkyuu [A Quantitative Analysis of Differing Perceptions of Mien-tzu/Mentsu between Chinese and Japanese Students: A Case Study].” Japanese Journal of Social Psychology13 (2): 103–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Takiura, Masato
    2013Nihongo wa Shitashisa o Tsutae Rareru ka [Can Japanese Language Communicate Closeness?]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Terkourafi, Marina, Benjamin Weissman, and Joseph Roy
    2020 “Different Scalar Terms are Affected by Face Differently.” International Review of Pragmatics12 (1): 1–43. 10.1163/18773109‑01201103
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01201103 [Google Scholar]
  45. Triandis, Harry C., Christopher McCusker, and C. Harry Hui
    1990 “Multimethod Probes of Individualism and Collectivism.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology59 (5): 1006–1020. 10.1037/0022‑3514.59.5.1006
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Wang, Jiayi, and Helen Spencer-Oatey
    2015 “The Gains and Losses of Face in Ongoing Intercultural Interaction: A Case Study of Chinese Participant Perspectives.” Journal of Pragmatics891: 50–65. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.09.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  47. Yabuuchi, Akio
    2004 “Face in Chinese, Japanese, and U.S. American Cultures.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication14 (2): 261–297. 10.1075/japc.14.2.05yab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.14.2.05yab [Google Scholar]
  48. Yuan, Zhoumin
    2022 “Yanyu Jiaoyu Zhong de Guanxi Guanli Moxing: Bentu Yuyong Shijiao [Guanxi Management Model in Verbal Communication: An Indigenous Pragmatic Perspective].” Foreign Language Research21: 1–7. 10.16263/j.cnki.23‑1071/h.2022.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.16263/j.cnki.23-1071/h.2022.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhang, Xin-an, Qing Cao, and Nicholas Grigoriou
    2011 “Consciousness of Social Face: The Development and Validation of a Scale Measuring Desire to Gain Face Versus Fear of Losing Face.” The Journal of Social Psychology151 (2): 129–149. 10.1080/00224540903366669
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540903366669 [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhou, Ling, and Shao-jie Zhang
    2016 “Hanyu Wenhua Texing de Jiji Pingjia Mianzi yu Xiaoji Pingjia Mianzi Gainian Jiangou: Jiyu Shenfen Lilun de Shijiao [Constructing Positively-evaluated Face and Negatively-evaluated Face in Chinese Culture: An Identity Theory-based Approach].” Foreign Languages and Their Teaching51: 41–49+145.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 2017 “How Face as a System of Value-Constructs Operates through the Interplay of Mianzi and Lian in Chinese: A Corpus-Based Study.” Language Sciences641: 152–166. 10.1016/j.langsci.2017.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2017.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  52. 2018 “Reconstructing the Politeness Principle in Chinese: A Response to Gu’s Approach.” Intercultural Pragmatics15 (5): 693–721. 10.1515/ip‑2018‑0024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2018-0024 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22075.xia
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.22075.xia
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Chinese; face-enhancement; face-threat; Japanese; values
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