As well as being an important social and cultural phenomenon, politeness may also be regarded as a function of speech, i.e. a set of principles, rules or maxims governing a competent speaker's use of language. Although this is clearly manifested in the structure and actual use of utterances
in a given conversation context, far mote than Saussure's langue and parole arc involved in that historical, sociological and psychological aspects have to be taken into account. Thus, in analysing politeness in a fictional text it is essential to establish the historical setting as well as
to examine the social hierarchy and valid conventions; as far as psychology is concerned, a scrutiny of the characters is necessary. Moreover, the course their interaction takes is crucial:
"Every choice A makes affects the force of B's options, and vice versa, so even politeness is determined jointly" (Clark 1996: 316). These methodological premises imply that, even though the emphasis in this paper is on linguistic results, external factors cannot be ignored without distorting the outcome. However, it seems legitimate to integrate these factors only to the degree
to which they contribute to the linguistic enterprise undertaken here. As to the theories of politeness that are utilized, it must be noted that they all fall short of explaining the evidence satisfactorily, but they nevertheless allow for interesting inferences and are therefore useful
heuristic tools. 1
[...]
Table of Contents
1. Politeness - a fuzzy concept and its linguistic repercussions in fiction
2. Theories of politeness
2.1 Lakoff s rule-guided approach
2.2 Leech's Politeness Principle and its maxims
2.3 Brown and Levinson's constructivist theory
2.4 Projecting politeness theories onto Shakespeare's dramatic works
3. Shakespeare's use of politeness - a linguistic analysis
3.1 Bald on record and off record
3.2 Positive Politeness
3.3 Negative Politeness
3.4 Forms of address
4. Context, register and the purposes of courteous speech
5. Concluding remarks: Elizabethan vs. modern politeness
Objectives and Thematic Focus
This paper aims to apply modern pragmalinguistic theories of politeness to Shakespeare's dramatic works to analyze how characters utilize linguistic strategies to achieve their goals within a hierarchical social framework.
- The linguistic analysis of politeness strategies (positive and negative) in Shakespearean drama.
- Evaluation of theoretical models by Lakoff, Leech, and Brown/Levinson within a fictional context.
- The impact of social hierarchy, context, and register on character interactions.
- The dichotomy between superficial politeness and underlying motives like deception or hypocrisy.
- Comparison between Elizabethan interactional styles and modern social norms.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 Lakoff s rule-guided approach
In her slightly simplistic account of politeness, Lakoff (1973) postulates three subordinate rules for the second rule of pragmatic competence - Be polite :
(1) Do not impose. This means both preserving a minimal distance with regard to others and avoiding intruding into their business, as when ego asks alter for permission.
(2) Give options. The addressee has to be given options in order to take his or her own decisions. These two rules can both be exemplified in Osric's utterance directed to Hamlet:"Sweet lord, if your friendship were at leisure, I should impart a thing to you from his majesty." {Hamlet 5.2.91-92) Whereas the forms of address -"sweet lord", "your friendship" and "you" rather than "thou" create distance, the conditional along with its hypothetical condition leaves several options open to Hamlet.
(3) Make alter feel good - be friendly. This is intended to produce some kind of solidarity or even rapport between speaker and addressee, as is evident in Romeo's valediction:"Sleep dwell upon thine eyes, peace in thy breast" (Romeo and Juliet 2.1.231). The optative expresses a wish the fulfilment of which would be for Juliet's good, but the utterance makes her feel good by its own virtue, simply because Romeo has chosen to make it. It is a typical feature of polite utterances that it is crucial to make them in specific situations, as when parting from a person who is close' to the speaker, no matter whether the propositional content is actually true or may become so. The only prerequisite - or, in the case of performatives, the essential felicity condition - is that the addressee be convinced of the speaker's sincerity. Unless this is stipulated, ironic utterances or those that are not interpreted as polite although they appear to be so cannot be excluded. Whether the speaker is being genuinely honest in adhering to principles of politeness is a further question which, however, does not have any bearing on the outcome as long as it is achieved, i.e. as long as alter does feel good due to an utterance in accordance with rule 3.
Summary of Chapters
1. Politeness - a fuzzy concept and its linguistic repercussions in fiction: Defines politeness as a function of speech and establishes the methodological need to consider historical and social factors in fictional text analysis.
2. Theories of politeness: Outlines the theoretical foundations provided by Lakoff, Leech, and Brown/Levinson, which serve as the analytical framework for the corpus.
3. Shakespeare's use of politeness - a linguistic analysis: Examines specific strategies like 'bald on record', positive and negative politeness, and forms of address within various Shakespearean plays.
4. Context, register and the purposes of courteous speech: Discusses how social context and character intentions influence the use of polite language, often highlighting themes of hypocrisy and calculation.
5. Concluding remarks: Elizabethan vs. modern politeness: Summarizes the differences between Elizabethan and contemporary British interactional styles, noting the shift toward negative politeness in modern society.
Keywords
Politeness, Shakespeare, Pragmatics, Speech Acts, Face-Threatening Acts, Social Hierarchy, Elizabethan Society, Lakoff, Leech, Brown and Levinson, Positive Politeness, Negative Politeness, Forms of Address, Linguistic Analysis, Dramaturgy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines the manifestation of politeness strategies in the dramatic works of William Shakespeare through the lens of modern linguistic pragmatics.
Which theoretical approaches are central to the analysis?
The study primarily utilizes the theories of Lakoff (rule-guided approach), Leech (Politeness Principle), and Brown and Levinson (constructivist theory of face and strategies).
What is the main research goal?
The goal is to determine how characters in Shakespeare's plays use politeness not just for courteous interaction, but as a calculated tool reflecting the social hierarchies and dramatic needs of the Elizabethan period.
What methodology is employed?
The author performs a linguistic analysis by applying established pragmalinguistic theories to a corpus of selected texts from Shakespeare's tragedies and comedies.
What does the main body of the paper cover?
The main body classifies character behavior into specific strategies: bald on record, positive politeness, negative politeness, and formal address, while discussing the impact of context and register.
Which keywords best describe the paper's scope?
Key terms include Politeness, Shakespeare, Pragmatics, Face-Threatening Acts, and Social Hierarchy.
How does Shakespeare handle the conflict between politeness and sincerity?
The paper argues that Shakespeare often presents a pessimistic view where politeness is frequently linked to hypocrisy, cunning, or ulterior motives, particularly in plays like Hamlet and King Lear.
How does the author distinguish between Elizabethan and modern politeness?
The author notes that Elizabethan society exhibited a higher frequency of positive politeness, whereas modern British culture tends to lean more towards negative politeness and social distance.
- Citar trabajo
- Dr. Martin Holz (Autor), 1999, Manifestations of politeness in Shakespeare's dramatic works, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/114559
