1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics
  4. Volume 23, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
PDF

Abstract

This study explores the evaluation of (im)politeness, which is made by a hearer (or a beneficiary). Although discursive researchers advocate the importance of the evaluation of (im)politeness made by a hearer in politeness research, empirical studies on the evaluation of (im)politeness are still limited. The non-linguistic aspect has not been much researched in previous politeness studies. This study tries to fill these gaps in politeness research, by focusing on evaluation of (im)politeness from the non-linguistic perspective. Among many other things, the evaluation of attentiveness (demonstrator’s preemptive response to a beneficiary’s verbal/non-verbal cues or situations surrounding a beneficiary and a demonstrator, which takes the form of offering) is focused on in this study, making cross-cultural (Japanese and American) and cross-generational (university students and their parents’ age groups) comparisons. The data were collected through a questionnaire, which consisted of six situations, and interviews. 298 people (Japanese university students, Japanese parents and American university students) served as the participants. The results of the questionnaire data show that there were significant differences among the participants in the evaluation of attentiveness in two situations, those of the interview data revealing that most participants evaluated attentiveness positively, except in two situations. This study contributes to further understanding of (im)politeness from the perspective of attentiveness with cross-cultural and cross-generational differences as well as similarities.

© 2013 International Pragmatics Association
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.23.2.04fuk
2013-01-01
2024-12-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/prag.23.2.04fuk
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arundale, Robert
    (2008) Against (Gricean) intentions at the heart of human interaction. Intercultural Pragmatics 5.2: 231-260. doi: 10.1515/IP.2008.012
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/IP.2008.012 [Google Scholar]
  2. Azuma, Shoji
    (2009) Shakai Gengogaku Nyumon [Introduction to Sociolinguistics]. Tokyo: Kenkyusha.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bousfield, Derek
    (2007a) Impoliteness, preference organization and conductivity. Multilingua26: 1-33. doi: 10.1515/MULTI.2007.001
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2007.001 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2007b) Beginnings, middles and ends: A biopsy of the dynamics of impolite exchanges. Journal of Pragmatics39: 2185-2216. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.005
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bousfield, Derek , and Miriam Locher
    (eds.) (2008) Impoliteness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110208344
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110208344 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, Penelope , and Stephen C. Levinson
    (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Caffi, Claudia
    (2009) Metapragmatics. In Jacob L. Mey (ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 625-630.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chang, Wei-Lin Melody , and Michael Haugh
    (2011) Evaluation of im/politeness of an intercultural apology. Intercultural Pragmatics8.3: 411-442.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Culpeper, Jonathan
    (1996) Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics25: 349-367. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(95)00014‑3
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2003) Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects. Journal of Pragmatics35: 1545-1579. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00118‑2
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00118-2 [Google Scholar]
  11. (2005) Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: ‘The Weakest Link’. Journal of Politeness Research 1.1: 35-72.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. (2011) Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511975752
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752 [Google Scholar]
  13. Darics, Erika
    (2010) Politeness in computer-mediated discourse of a virtual team. Journal of Politeness Research 6.1: 129-150.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Eelen, Gino
    (2001) A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Fukushima, Saeko
    (2000) Requests and Culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (2004) Evaluation of politeness: The case of attentiveness. Multilingua 23.4: 365-387. doi: 10.1515/mult.2004.23.4.365
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.2004.23.4.365 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2009) Evaluation of politeness: Do the Japanese evaluate attentiveness more positively than the British?Pragmatics19.4: 501-518.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. (2010) Hearer’s aspect in politeness: The case of requests. In Dingfang Shu , and Ken Turner (eds.), Contrasting Meaning in Languages of the East and West. Oxford: Peter Lang, pp. 103-135.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. (2011) A cross-generational and cross-cultural study on demonstration of attentiveness. Pragmatics 21.4: 549-571.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar , Nuria Lorenzo-Dus , and Patricia Bou-Franch
    (2010) A genre approach to impoliteness in a Spanish television talk show: Evidence from corpus-based analysis, questionnaires and focus groups. Intercultural Pragmatics7.4: 689-723.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Haugh, Michael
    (2007a) The co-constitution of politeness implicature in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics39: 84-110. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.004
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2007b) The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research3: 295-317.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. (2010a) When is an email really offensive?: Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research 6.1: 7-31.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. (2010b) The metapragmatics of im/politeness. Plenary talk presented atthe 5th International Symposium on Politeness. University of Basel. 30 June, 2010.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. (2010c) Intercultural im/politeness and the micro-macro issue. In Anna Trosborg (ed.), Pragmatics across Languages and Cultures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 139-166.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. (2011) Epilogue: Culture and norms in politeness research. In Dániel Z. Kádár , and Sara Mills (eds.), Politeness in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 252-264. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.013 [Google Scholar]
  27. Himeno, Tomoko
    (2003) Hairyo hyogen kara mita nihongo [The Japanese language from the perspective of expressions of consideration]. Gekkan Nihongo 16.4: 66-69.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Hirschon, Renée
    (2001) Freedom, solidarity and obligation: The socio-cultural context of Geek politeness. In Arin Bayraktaroğlu , and Maria Sifianou (eds.), Linguistic Politeness across Boundaries: The Case of Greek and Turkish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 17-42. doi: 10.1075/pbns.88.03hir
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.88.03hir [Google Scholar]
  29. Hofstede, Geert
    (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. House, Juliane
    (2010) Impoiteness in Germany: Intercultural encounters in everyday and institutional talk. Intercultural Pragmatics 7.4: 561-595. doi: 10.1515/iprg.2010.026
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2010.026 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kádár, Dániel Z
    (2010) Reflections on the critical turn: A research report. research.shu.ac.uk/politeness/meetingdec09.html. (accessed on4 May, 2011)
  32. Kádár, Dániel Z. , and Sara Mills
    (2011) Introduction. In Dániel Z. Kádár , and Sara Mills (eds.), Politeness in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-14. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511977886.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.003 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kecskes, Istvan
    (2012) Sociopragmatics, cross-cultural and intercultural studies. In Keith Allan , and Kasia M. Jaszczolt (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 599-616. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139022453.033
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022453.033 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kienpointner, Manfred
    (2008) Impoliteness and emotional arguments. Journal of Politeness Research 4.2: 243-265.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Leech, Geoffrey
    (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Locher, Miriam A
    (2004) Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110926552
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110926552 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2006) Polite behavior within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multilingua 25.3: 249-267. doi: 10.1515/MULTI.2006.015
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2006.015 [Google Scholar]
  38. Locher, Miriam A. , and Richard J. Watts
    (2005) Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research1.1: 9-33.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Locher, Miriam , and Derek Bousfield
    (2008) Impoliteness in Power in Language. In Derek Bousfield , and Miriam A. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1-13.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Mills, Sara
    (2003) Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511615238
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615238 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2009) Impoliteness in a cultural context. Journal of Pragmatics41: 1047-1060. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.014
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.014 [Google Scholar]
  42. Miyake, Kazuko
    (2011) Nihongo no Taijinkankei Haaku to Hairyo Gengokoudou [A proper understanding of interpersonal relationships in Japanese and linguistic behavior of consideration]. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Murphy, Brona
    (2010) Corpus and Sociolinguistics: Investigating Age and Gender in Female Talk. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/scl.38
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/scl.38 [Google Scholar]
  44. Nishimura, Yukiko
    (2010) Impoliteness in Japanese BBS interactions: Observations from message exchanges in two online communities. Journal of Politeness Research 6.1: 33-55.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Overstreet, Maryann
    (2010) Metapragmatics. In Louise Cummings (ed.), The Pragmatics Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, pp. 266-268.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Pan, Yuling , and Dániel Z. Kádár
    (2011) Politeness in Historical and Contemporary Chinese. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pinto, Derrin
    (2011) Are Americans insincere? Interactional style and politeness in everyday America. Journal of Politeness Research 7.2: 215-238.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Riley, Philip
    (2007) Language, Culture and Identity. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Sifianou, Maria
    (1993) Off-record indirectness and the notion of imposition. Multilingua 12.1: 69-80. doi: 10.1515/mult.1993.12.1.69
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.1993.12.1.69 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2012) Personal communication (An e-mail message to Saeko Fukushima, 14February 2012).
  51. Sifianou, Maria , and Angeliki Tzanne
    (2010) Conceptualizations of politeness and impoliteness in Greek. Intercultural Pragmatics7.4: 661-687. doi: 10.1515/iprg.2010.029
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2010.029 [Google Scholar]
  52. Spencer-Oatey, Helen
    (2000) Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures. London: Continuum, pp. 11-46.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. (2002) Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations. Journal of Pragmatics 34.5: 529-545. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(01)00039‑X
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00039-X [Google Scholar]
  54. (2005) (Im)politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research 1.1: 95-119.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. (2008) Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory. London: Continuum, pp. 11-47.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. (2011) Conceptualising ‘the relational’ in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics43: 3565-3578. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009 [Google Scholar]
  57. Spencer-Oatey, Helen , and Peter Franklin
    (2009) Intercultural Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230244511
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244511 [Google Scholar]
  58. Sugito, Seijyu
    (2005) Nihonjin no gengo koudou: Kikubari no kouzou [Linguistic behavior by the Japanese people: The structure of attentiveness]. In Akira Nakamura , Masaaki Nomura , Mayumi Sakuma , and Chizuko Komiya (eds.), Hyogen to Buntai [Expressions and styles]. Tokyo: Meiji Shoin, pp. 362-371.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Terkourafi, Marina
    (2008) Toward a unified theory of politeness, impoliteness and rudeness. In Derek Bousfield , and Miriam A. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness and Power: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 45-74.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. (2011) From Politeness1 to Politeness2: Tracking norms of im/politeness across time and space. Journal of Politenss Research 7.2: 159-185.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. (2012) Politeness and pragmatics. In Keith Allan , and Kasia M. Jaszczolt (eds.), CambridgeHandbook of Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 617-637.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Ting-Toomey, Stella
    (2009) Facework collision in intercultural communication. In Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini , and Michael Haugh (eds.), Face, Communication and Social Interaction. London: Equinox, pp. 227-249.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Tracy, Karen
    (2008) Reasonable hostility: Situation-appropriate face-attack. Journal of Politeness Research 4.2: 169-191.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Verschueren, Jef
    (1999) Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. (2000) Notes on the role of metapragmatic awareness. Pragmatics 10.4: 439-456.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Watts, Richard J
    (2003) Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
     https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]
  67. (2005) Linguistic politeness research: Quo vadis?In Richard J. Watts , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich (eds.), Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. xi-xlvii. doi: 10.1515/9783110199819
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819 [Google Scholar]
  68. (2008) Rudeness, conceptual blending theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research 4.2: 289-317.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Watts, Richard J. , Sachiko Ide , and Konrad Ehlich
    (eds.) (1992) Politeness in Language: Studies in its History, Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Yamaguchi, Susumu
    (1994) Collectivism among the Japanese: A perspective from the self. In Uichol Kim , Harry C. Triandis , Çığdem Kâğitçibaşı , Sang-Chin Choi , and Gene Yoon (eds.), Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 175-188.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/prag.23.2.04fuk
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): (Im)politeness; Americans; Attentiveness; Evaluation; Generation; Japanese

Most Cited

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