he acquaintanceship between speaker and hearer, the Relative Power of the speaker in relation to the hearer such as the degree of imposition the speaker holds over the hearer and the Absolute Ranking of the imposition within the context of the culture in which the imposition occurs. Brown and Levinson theorise that “the assessment of the seriousness of a face-threatening act involves the following factors in many and perhaps all cultures” (1987, 74). and can ultimately undermine the hearer’s freedom of action whilst criticism and disagreement can lead to a threat on the hearer’s self-image.Īlternatively, acceptance of either apologies or thanks can impact on the speaker’s negative face although issuing an apology or offering a confession can upset the self-image of the speaker. Firstly, the act which threatens the hearer’s negative face can include orders, advice, etc. The face-threatening act, according to Brown and Levinson, exists in four main categories. Positive face is defined simply as ‘self-image’ while negative face refers to the freedom from imposition.
In accordance with the politeness phenomena theory, face exists in both a positive sense and a negative sense. Order custom essay Politeness and Pragmatics in the Context of Cross-Cultural Communication The concept of ‘face’, according to Brown and Levinson, outlines the human desire of avoiding embarrassment or humiliation whilst maintaining a positive representation of themselves. Brown and Levinson’s theory argues that politeness consists of three basic elements of human interaction: the maintenance of personal face, the acts which may threaten the face of either a speaker or hearer and the politeness strategies used within the context of conversation to maintain face. One of the major theories surrounding politeness is that of Brown and Levinson (1978, later revised in 1987). When discussing the notion of politeness, the study of cross-cultural pragmatics as represented by Thomas, Tannen and Wierzbicka provide a deeper understanding of the appropriation of politeness and the difficulties that emerge as a result of cross-cultural misunderstanding. It is for this reason that scholars such as Brown and Levinson have derived theories on politeness and its use within global society, however the seemingly non-existent universal definition of politeness can also be responsible for the criticisms that these theories receive. Within different cultures the definition of politeness may vary substantially and as a result may be appropriated in ways that are largely misunderstood within the context of other cultures. Throughout almost all societies, politeness plays an integral role in the effectiveness of social life and interaction within the context of both inter-cultural and cross-cultural communication.