Almo st all linguistic research views politeness as a universal feature of civilized societies, regardless of their background culture, or their language. Politeness is thus seen as an important social or ‘urbane’ value, inherent to successful communication, although its realization may vary across the different speech communities. Politeness offers a good way of emotional control of the individual (House and Kasper, 1981: 158), and is typically means of preserving and maintaining good social relationship between the speakers of one or more cultures. Polite behaviour generally protects the individual, as well as their addressee, and often becomes subject matter of self- help books on etiquette, especially in cases when people belong to a specific hierarchy (roya l court, business company etc).
The verbal realization of politeness poses even greater problems when the interlocutors belong to different cultures and try to communicate, transferring their pragmatic knowledge of polite behaviour into the foreign langua ge. Lack of practice and the learners’ concern with rendering correctly the foreign language’s grammatical structures in the first place often lead to misunderstandings, or the so-called ‘socio-pragmatic failures’ (Thomas, 1983)- ‘ errors resulting from no n- native speakers not knowing what to say or not saying the appropriate things as a result of transferring incongruent social rules, values and belief systems from their native languages and cultures’. These types of errors are likely to cause a downright insult for both the non- native and the native speakers of a certain language, the native speakers misunderstanding and misinterpreting the intentions of the non- native speaker, and the nonnative speakers being over-sensitive to ‘distinctions of grammatical form’ (Brown and Levinson 1996: 35), in a way the native speakers are not. In any case, being polite is essential to maintaining healthy social relations within a specific culture, and even more so, for the communication across cultures.
Cross-cultural communication offers a wide field for research, as the socio-pragmatic failure of one speaker of a certain community tends to be stereotyped for the whole community (Knapp-Potthoff 1992: 203), consequently labeling a nation as rude, over-polite, insincere etc.
[...]
Table of Contents
1. Introduction- Why be polite? Problems in cross-cultural communication
1.1. The popular view- cultures and prejudices, relative vs. absolute politeness
2. The linguistic view- Theoretical Framework
2.1. Leech’s Interpersonal Rhetoric
2.2. The concept of face, positive and negative politeness strategies
3. Realising Politeness in German and English
3.1. Comparing all-German and all-English interaction: requests and complaints
3.2. Mediated German- English requests and complaints
3.3. Politeness markers in academic texts of German and English
4. Conclusion (some personal remarks)
5. Works Cited
Objectives and Research Focus
This study aims to perform a contrastive analysis of politeness practices within German and English speech communities. The central research question explores how cultural norms and language systems influence the realization of politeness in spoken discourse and academic texts, seeking to identify whether observed differences in directness and modality usage imply varying levels of inherent politeness or merely reflect distinct socio-pragmatic systems.
- Cross-cultural communication and socio-pragmatic failure.
- Theoretical foundations of politeness (Leech’s Interpersonal Rhetoric and Brown & Levinson’s face-work).
- Contrastive analysis of speech acts (requests and complaints) in German and English.
- Mediated politeness in non-native cross-cultural interaction.
- Discourse markers and interpersonality in academic writing.
Excerpt from the Book
1. Introduction- Why be polite? Problems in cross-cultural communication
Almost all linguistic research views politeness as a universal feature of civilized societies, regardless of their background culture, or their language. Politeness is thus seen as an important social or ‘urbane’ value, inherent to successful communication, although its realization may vary across the different speech communities. Politeness offers a good way of emotional control of the individual (House and Kasper, 1981: 158), and is typically means of preserving and maintaining good social relationship between the speakers of one or more cultures. Polite behaviour generally protects the individual, as well as their addressee, and often becomes subject matter of self-help books on etiquette, especially in cases when people belong to a specific hierarchy (roya l court, business company etc).
The verbal realization of politeness poses even greater problems when the interlocutors belong to different cultures and try to communicate, transferring their pragmatic knowledge of polite behaviour into the foreign language. Lack of practice and the learners’ concern with rendering correctly the foreign language’s grammatical structures in the first place often lead to misunderstandings, or the so-called ‘socio-pragmatic failures’ (Thomas, 1983)- ‘ errors resulting from non-native speakers not knowing what to say or not saying the appropriate things as a result of transferring incongruent social rules, values and belief systems from their native languages and cultures’. These types of errors are likely to cause a downright insult for both the non-native and the native speakers of a certain language, the native speakers misunderstanding and misinterpreting the intentions of the non-native speaker, and the non native speakers being over-sensitive to ‘distinctions of grammatical form’ (Brown and Levinson 1996: 35), in a way the native speakers are not. In any case, being polite is essential to maintaining healthy social relations within a specific culture, and even more so, for the communication across cultures.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction- Why be polite? Problems in cross-cultural communication: Defines politeness as a universal social value and introduces the concept of socio-pragmatic failure in cross-cultural interactions.
1.1. The popular view- cultures and prejudices, relative vs. absolute politeness: Discusses public perceptions and stereotypes regarding German and English politeness, distinguishing between relative and absolute politeness.
2. The linguistic view- Theoretical Framework: Outlines the academic foundations of politeness, specifically examining linguistic indirectness and civil behavior.
2.1. Leech’s Interpersonal Rhetoric: Explores Geoffrey Leech’s model of communication based on the Cooperative Principle and the Politeness Principle.
2.2. The concept of face, positive and negative politeness strategies: Details the Brown and Levinson model, focusing on face-threatening acts and strategies for positive and negative politeness.
3. Realising Politeness in German and English: Introduces the methodology for the study, utilizing existing linguistic evidence to compare German and English strategies.
3.1. Comparing all-German and all-English interaction: requests and complaints: Analyzes directness levels and the use of upgraders and downgraders in role-play scenarios involving native speakers.
3.2. Mediated German- English requests and complaints: Investigates how non-professional interpreters influence politeness in cross-cultural communication.
3.3. Politeness markers in academic texts of German and English: Examines interpersonality in scholarly writing and how language-specific grammatical choices reflect politeness.
4. Conclusion (some personal remarks): Summarizes the findings, arguing that differences in directness levels are due to distinct language systems and cultural norms rather than varying levels of politeness.
5. Works Cited: Lists the academic sources used for the analysis of linguistic politeness and communication strategies.
Keywords
Politeness, Contrastive Linguistics, Interpersonal Rhetoric, Face, Face-Threatening Acts, Socio-pragmatic Failure, Pragmatics, Requests, Complaints, Modality Markers, Interpersonality, Cross-cultural Communication, Directness, Upgraders, Downgraders
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
This paper focuses on a contrastive analysis of politeness strategies used in English and German. It examines how these two cultures realize polite behavior through spoken interaction and written academic text.
What are the central themes discussed in the work?
The central themes include the linguistic definition of politeness, the impact of culture on speech acts, the role of face-work, and how language-specific grammatical structures influence the perception of politeness.
What is the main goal or research question of this study?
The goal is to determine if perceived differences in politeness between German and English speakers are indicative of actual levels of politeness or if they are simply reflections of different pragmatic strategies and language systems.
Which scientific methodology is used to conduct this study?
The study adopts a qualitative, contrastive linguistic approach by drawing on existing conversational evidence, including role-play data and analyses of academic texts, to compare communication patterns.
What topics are covered in the main body of the text?
The main body covers theoretical frameworks by Leech, Brown, and Levinson, practical comparisons of requests and complaints, the challenges of mediated translation, and a contrastive analysis of interpersonality in academic discourse.
Which keywords best characterize this academic work?
Key terms include Politeness, Contrastive Linguistics, Face-Threatening Acts, Socio-pragmatic Failure, Interpersonal Rhetoric, and Pragmatics.
How does the author characterize the differences between German and English complaints?
The author observes that German speakers tend to utilize higher levels of directness in complaints and requests compared to English speakers, who more frequently employ indirectness and syntactic modal means to mitigate face threats.
Why does the author conclude that it is inaccurate to label one culture as inherently "ruder" than the other?
The author concludes that because each behavior must be measured against its own intra-cultural system, a direct style deemed "rude" in one context may be considered perfectly appropriate and clear within the native behavioral framework of the other.
- Quote paper
- Svetla Rogatcheva (Author), 2003, Politeness in English and German: a contrastive study, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/30085
