Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
POLITENESS THEORY & COMMUNICATION - Coggle Diagram
POLITENESS THEORY & COMMUNICATION
SPEECH ACTS (Direct vs. Indirect)
Direct Speech Acts
Statement of fact (e.g., "Звонят" - Someone's at the door)
Literal meaning = intended meaning
Indirect Speech Acts
Request/Command (e.g., "Открой дверь" - Open the door)
Literal meaning ≠ intended meaning (requires interpretation)
Communication Effectiveness
Successful: Expected action occurs (door opens)
Failed: No expected reaction (door stays closed)
GRICE'S COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE (1975)
Core Idea: Communication requires mutual cooperation
Four Conversational Maxims:
MAXIM OF QUALITY (Truth)
Don't say what you believe is false
Don't say what you lack evidence for
Violation example: Lying to parents about smoking
MAXIM OF QUANTITY (Information)
Give as much information as needed
Don't give more information than needed
Violation examples:
Too much: Over-explaining when asked "How are you?"
Too little: Vague answers requiring interpretation
MAXIM OF RELATION/RELEVANCE
Be relevant to the conversation topic
Violation example: Talking about weather when asked about grades
MAXIM OF MANNER (Clarity)
Avoid ambiguity & obscurity
Be brief & orderly
Violation example: Unclear, disorganized explanations
Flouting vs. Violating Maxims
Violating: Unintentional (lying, confusing listener)
Flouting: Intentional (irony, sarcasm, metaphors)
Example: "What great weather!" (when it's raining) → Irony
BROWN & LEVINSON'S FACE THEORY (1987)
Concept of "FACE" (Public Self-Image)
Positive Face: Desire to be approved, liked, valued
Negative Face: Desire to be autonomous, unimpeded
Face-Threatening Acts (FTA)
Threatening Speaker's Face
Apologizing (threatens own positive face)
Accepting thanks (threatens own negative face)
Threatening Listener's Face
Orders/Commands (threatens negative face)
Criticism (threatens positive face)
Interruptions (threatens negative face)
Mitigation Strategies
Indirect requests ("Could you...?" vs. "Do this!")
Hedging ("I might be wrong, but...")
Passive voice (depersonalization)
Politeness markers ("please", "thank you", "sorry")
LEECH'S POLITENESS MAXIMS (1983)
TACT MAXIM
Minimize cost to other
Maximize benefit to other
Example: "Sit down, I'll do the dishes"
GENEROSITY MAXIM
Minimize benefit to self
Maximize cost to self
Example: Inviting someone (you bear the cost)
APPROBATION MAXIM
Minimize dispraise of other
Maximize praise of other
Example: Complimenting friend's karaoke performance
MODESTY MAXIM
Minimize praise of self
Maximize dispraise of self
Example: "I'm such an idiot, I didn't understand anything"
AGREEMENT MAXIM
Minimize disagreement
Maximize agreement
Example: Acknowledging parent's view before stating your own
SYMPATHY MAXIM
Minimize antipathy
Maximize sympathy
Example: Expressing concern in difficult situations
CULTURAL VARIATIONS IN POLITENESS
DISTANCE-ORIENTED CULTURES
Examples: UK, Japan
Features: Strong boundaries, territorial behavior
Examples:
Japanese: Honorific suffixes show status/age
British Pub Rules:
Standing at bar = open to socialization
Sitting at table = private, don't approach
Invisible queue system (mental ordering)
Eye contact = signal readiness to order
STATUS-ORIENTED CULTURES
Examples: China, Korea
Features: Hierarchy, positive face emphasis
Consequences: Loss of face = severe social impact
Example: Chinese students failing abroad → extreme reactions
SOLIDARITY CULTURES
Examples: USA, Spain, Italy, Australia
Features: More direct, less formal, physical contact acceptable
Example: American workplace → personal questions to boss acceptable
KEY CRITICISMS & LIMITATIONS
Western Bias: Theories based on Western individualistic cultures
Not Universal: Don't apply equally to all cultures
Context Dependency: Politeness varies by situation, relationship, status
Modern Applications:
Essential for: Journalists, teachers, diplomats, linguists
Cross-cultural communication
Understanding indirect communication patterns