Chapter 9:

LANGUAGE, CULTURE,
AND
POLITENESS

JESSICA I. LAXAMANA
WHAT IS LANGUAGE?
 The terms ‘language’ and ‘culture’
are often used in politeness research
as if they were synonyms.

 Discursive approach to politeness

which tries to develop a more
context-based approach
Introduction
Different cultures have been
described in relation to politeness
norms, where certain cultures have
been labelled as collectivist or
individualist cultures, positive or
negative politeness cultures, and
discernment and volition-based
cultures.
Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness
Brown and Levinson proposed that
politeness is largely strategic, a calculation
that speakers make when interacting with
others about the social distance from the
other person, the power relation between
them and the ‘cost’ of the imposition on
the other (if, say, for example, the speaker is
requesting something from the hearer).
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness
Face threatening acts (FTAs) are classified
as any actions which potentially disturb the
balance of face maintenance among
interactants.

For example, requests can be categorized

as face threatening as they may put the
interlocutor into a difficult position, if they
wish to refuse the request.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness
Brown and Levinson proposed that
politeness is largely strategic, a calculation
that speakers make when interacting with
others about the social distance from the other
person, the power relation between them
and the ‘cost’ of the imposition on the other
(if, say, for example, the speaker is requesting
something from the hearer).
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness

Brown and Levinson

characterize politeness as
consisting of two elements:

a. negative and
b. positive politeness.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness
1. Negative politeness
largely concerned with not imposing on the
other person, and indicating deference and
respect towards them.

Ex. Apologizing would be categorized as

negative politeness, as it is seen to be
recognizing the needs and wishes of the other
person, putting that other person first and
stating that the other person will not be
imposed upon.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.1 Traditional approach to the
analysis of politeness
2. Positive politeness
concerned with stressing the closeness between the
speaker and the hearer and indicating that the needs
of the hearer and the speaker are very similar.

Ex. Paying someone a

compliment or telling them a joke is characterized
as positive politeness, as both of these are seen to be
concerned with stressing the closeness of the
relationship between interactants.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2 Problems with the traditional
approach to the analysis of politeness

Universalism
the relation between indirectness and politeness
and context Brown and Levinson claimed that
their model was a universal description of
politeness, that is, that it could describe politeness
in all languages.

All languages subscribed to the same system of

politeness.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2 Problems with the traditional
approach to the analysis of politeness
Universalism
The relation between indirectness and politeness and
context
• Brown and Levinson claimed that their model was a
universal description of politeness, that is, that it
could describe politeness in all languages.

• They argued that individual language groups differed

in the extent to which they used positive or negative
politeness, but that in essence, all languages subscribed
to the same system of politeness.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2 Problems with the traditional approach to
the analysis of politeness

Ide (1989) put forward a distinction between discernment

and volition to describe these two opposing concerns.

Discernment (wakimae) is the concern with marking the

awareness of one’s social position and one’s relationship with
the interlocutor.

Volition is the type of politeness where speakers decide on

the shape and form of the utterance, and tailor it themselves
to what they see as the demands of the context and
interlocutor.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.1 The relation between
indirectness and politeness

Brown and Levinson argued that there

is a scale of politeness, ranging from
indirectness and avoidance of speaking to
the directness of bald-on record
utterances;
indirectness for them is seen to be the
most polite form.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.1 The relation between
indirectness and politeness

For them, when someone is indirect, for

example when requesting something, the
person gives the interlocutor the option of
not recognizing or acknowledging the
request, and therefore indirect forms allow
the hearer some freedom of action.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.1 The relation between
indirectness and politeness

Indirectness is not an agreed upon

term in all languages; thus, what counts
as indirect in English (for example,
conventional indirectness, such as
‘Could you open the window?’) might
not be seen as indirect at all in some
languages (Wierzbicka, 1999).
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.1 The relation between
indirectness and politeness
Thus, indirectness should be seen
to have a complex relationship with
politeness, and it is clear that
particular languages do not
necessarily view or use indirectness
in the same way as it is interpreted
in English.
Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.2 Context

Brown and Levinson, while

arguing for the importance of
context, largely focused on
single sentence utterances as
indicating politeness or
impoliteness.
Politeness and Impoliteness
2.2.2 Context
Bousfield (2008) has argued that it is
important to focus on the way that
impoliteness builds up over a long
stretch of conversation, rather than
assuming that it is somehow
‘contained’ within one utterance.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.3 Discursive approach to the
analysis of politeness

The discursive approach to the

analysis of politeness developed
because of a dissatisfaction with
many aspects of Brown and
Levinson’s theorizing and
analysis.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.3 Discursive approach to the
analysis of politeness
Instead of making universal statements
about politeness use, and developing a
global model for the analysis of politeness,
the discursive approach focuses on the way
that context, resources and social forces
/ideologies determine the possible
meanings and interpretations of politeness.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
2.3 Discursive approach to the
analysis of politeness

The discursive approach focuses

on language use in detail, in much
the same way that traditional
approaches have, but
interpretation, judgement and
context are considered crucial
(Mills, 2011).
Politeness and Impoliteness
2.3 Discursive approach to
the analysis of politeness
Culpeper (2011) also considers the
question of whether in army training, the
language used by sergeants towards their
trainees is impolite, since none of the
trainees displays in their responses to the
sergeants any indication that they consider
the language inappropriate or offensive.
Politeness and Impoliteness
2.3 Discursive approach to the
analysis of politeness
Discursive approaches to the analysis
of politeness and impoliteness focus
more on the evaluation of acts as
polite within particular contexts,
rather than retaining any sense that
language items are intrinsically polite or
impolite .
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3 Conventional approach to
culture and language
Conventional linguistic approaches
to politeness and culture have
tended to assume that different
cultures.

Ex. Arab cultures or English culture,

are fairly homogeneous.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3 Conventional approach to
culture and language
Hofstede (1984: 8) argues that
‘culture is composed of many
elements which may
beclassified into four categories:
symbols, heroes, rituals and
values’.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3 Conventional approach to
culture and language

Damen (1987: 367) argues that

culture is ‘learned and shared
human patterns and models for
living, day to day living
patterns’.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3 Conventional approach to
culture and language
Cultures are believed to be more or less
patriarchal, conservative, upholding or
challenging certain ideologies about language,
encouraging respect for the elderly,
encouraging individual self- fulfilment, and so
on. But the important thing to recognize is that
these are ideological beliefs about the culture,
rather than being statements of facts about a
culture.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.1 Collectivist and
individualism

Collectivist cultures are

those where the group is
seen to be at the fore and the
individual is not seen to be
of the greatest value.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.1 Collectivist and
individualism
Triandis et al. (1990) argue, the
group has primacy and individuals
give up their personal autonomy to the
group. Individuals are not seen and do
not see themselves as isolated but
rather solely as part of a social whole.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.1 Collectivist and
individualism

Collectivist cultures emphasize

adhering to cultural norms and
harmony. One’s position within
a grouping is at the core of
one’s value and status.
Politeness and Impoliteness
3.1 Collectivist and individualism

Status is derived from one’s

own strivings and it is one’s
own individual efforts to
achieve status for oneself which
is of prime importance.
2 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.1 Collectivist and individualism

Individualist societies are those

where the freedom of the individual
from the constraints of the group are
paramount, and these cultures may be
classified as relatively liberal in
relation to the rights of the
individual.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.2 Positive politeness and
negative politeness cultures

Brown and Levinson (1978/1987) argued

that cultures tend towards either positive
politeness cultures (camaraderie) which
stresses the social closeness amongst
individuals, or negative politeness cultures
(deference) which tend to emphasize
distance and respect between individuals.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.2 Positive politeness and
negative politeness cultures
In cultures such as Japan or Britain, it
is asserted that deference and respect
(negative politeness) characterize
interaction, so individuals apologize more
in negative politeness cultures and do not
tend to impose on, or even talk to,
strangers.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.3 Discernment and volition
cultures

Ide developed the notion of

discernment and volition to describe
tendencies within cultures towards
concern for the group as a whole and
concern for the individual
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.3 Discernment and volition
cultures

Honorifics, a set of linguistic

forms, which are often, but not
exclusively, associated with
deference and politeness, are here
elided with the cultural values of
the elite.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.3 Discernment and volition
cultures
Japanese should not necessarily be
seen as a culture which stresses the
importance of the group, and the
Japanese language should also not be
seen as a language which only stresses
deference and respect in honorifics use.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.3 Discernment and volition
cultures
Cultures are not homogeneous,
and languages are much richer
and more diverse than many
politeness theorists are willing to
acknowledge.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.4 Discursive approach to
languages and cultures
A discursive approach to culture does not
characterize cultures as simply
agglomerations of similar individuals.
Perhaps it is more useful to see cultures
and the behaviours which are associated
with the elite as memes (Blackmore, 2007)
which strive to be copied.
 Politeness and Impoliteness
3.4 Discursive approach to
languages and cultures
The cultural values of the elite groups are
embodied in what we consider to be polite
behaviour (polished, refined, cultured,
civilized). This is the way that the elite groups
distinguish themselves from other groups
within society. These are the values which are
associated with stereotypically polite
behaviour.