Face - Deconstruction in Web Logs

Table of Contents

1) Introduction

2) Setting Up the Framework
2.1) A Definition of “Web Log”
2.2) The Object of Investigation
2.3) Scope of Investigation
2.4) Time Range of Investigation
2.5) Verification of Democracy in America

3) Provision of Concepts, Ideas and Key-words
3.1) Computer-Mediated Communication
3.2) Politeness
3.3) Linguistic (Im)politeness
3.4) Face
3.5) Hedge

4) The Development of a Line of Thought
4.1) The Line of Thought
4.2) The Taxonomy
4.2.1) The Maxim of Tact
4.2.2) The Maxim of Generosity
4.2.3) The Maxim of Approbation
4.2.4) The Maxim of Modesty

5) Application to the Set of Data
5.1) Violations of the Tact Maxim
5.2) Violations of the Generosity Maxim
5.3) Violations of the Approbation Maxim
5.4) Violations of the Modesty Maxim

6) Conclusion

7) References

8) Endnotes

9) Appendix
9.1) Reproduction of The Palin effect
9.1.1) Comments on The Palin effect
9.2) Reproduction of How not to repair the economy
9.2.1) Comments on How not to repair the economy
9.3) Reproduction of First we take Salt Lake City
9.3.1) Comments on First we take Salt Lake City
9.4) Reproduction of Art for art’s sake
9.4.1) Comments on Art for art’s sake

1) Introduction:

In this paper, I will attempt an investigation of the rules of communication that count for web logs. To be more specific, I will concentrate on how face-deconstruction is organized within web logs.

To facilitate cognition, research project and paper are organized along the following lines:

First, I will set up a framework for the research project. In other words, I will provide a suitable definition for the object of investigation. Furthermore, I will state on which web log I concentrate on. I will also describe this particular web log and clarify whether this web log is fit for investigation or not. Moreover, I will determine time range and the scope of investigation.

Secondly, I will provide the necessary concepts, ideas and define the relevant key-words.

Thirdly, I will develop a line of thought and a taxonomy which allows the classification of different types of face-deconstruction.

Step four consists of an application of this taxonomy to the corpus of data.

Finally, I will conclude this paper with a short summary of my findings.

The appendix I intend to provide contains the examples that were relevant to this research project and which thus show how face-deconstruction is organized within web logs.

2) Setting Up the Framework:

As already indicated in the introductory section, my first steps will be the provision of a definition, which adequately describes the research object; the statement of the web log on which this study concentrates on; the statement of both, scope and time range of investigation and, finally, a comparison of the research object with the definition provided under 2.1 in order to determine whether the web log that was chosen is fit for research or not.

2.1) A Definition of “Web Log”:

A “web log” is, simply put, an internet site – either maintained by an individual or a group of individuals – which contains regular entries or commentaries on a particular subject. Descriptions of events or other, more graphic material may be added. Entries are made by the owner(s) of or those who maintain the internet site and are displayed in reverse-chronological order. Usually, such an entry bears a timestamp.

A typical web log combines text, images and, quite importantly, provides readers with the opportunity to comment on a particular entry of the web log. Usually, these comments follow immediately the basic entry and provide information such as the nickname of the author and when the comment was posted.

In case authors resort to the option of commenting on such an entry, attempts of face-deconstruction may be observed – either, as the following example may illustrate, on the side of the author of a particular comment or by one of the writers who comment on this author’s comment:

... She's a petty, ignorant, spiteful, lie through her teeth, pandering politician. There are way more competent Republican women politicians than her... The fact that McCain chose her shows that he's as reckless and irresponsible as she is (See appendix, page 28).

[...]