Bulletin of BSU. Philology
Bibliographic description:
THE CATEGORY OF POLITENESS IN MODERN LINGUISTICS // Bulletin of BSU. Philology. - 2024. №1. . - С. 28-35.
Title:
THE CATEGORY OF POLITENESS IN MODERN LINGUISTICS
Financing:
Codes:
Annotation:
The article examines common theories of politeness that differ from the classical one. Based on the comments on these theories of politeness provided in the article, it can be concluded that there is still no perfect and effective theory of politeness that can be successfully applied in practice. However, we believe that it is possible to construct a predictive the-ory of politeness, as there is an empirical basis in our consciousness preceding our evaluations of politeness; however, we do not support prescriptive theories of politeness, but aim to develop a theory of politeness "from the bottom up", based on the data obtained. We agree with J. Lich's point of view that any polite communication implies that the speaker takes into account both individual and group values. Therefore, we are optimistic about the creation of a universal model of politeness and believe that the future direction of theoretical develop-ment will be the integration of theories that have advantages of both classical theory and dis-cursive methods.
Keywords:
theory of politeness, different views on politeness, discursive approach to politeness, M. Terkurafi's frame approach, development of politeness theory in the future
List of references:
1. Власян Г. Р. Различные подходы к определению лингвистической вежливости // Вестник Нижневартовского государственного университета. 2010. № 3. С. 29–39. Текст: непосредственный.
2. Ерзинкян Е. Л. Лингвистическая категория вежливости: семантика и прагматика. Ереван: Изд-во ЕГУ, 2018. 410 с. Текст: непосредственный.
3. Карасик В. И. Язык социального статуса. Москва: Гнозис, 2002. 334 с. Текст: непосредственный.
4. Ларина Т. В. Категория вежливости и стиль коммуникации: сопоставление английских и русских лингвокультурных традиций. Москва: Рукописные памятники Древней Руси, 2009. 508 с. Текст: непосредственный.
5. Формановская Н. И. Способы выражения просьбы в русском языке (прагматический подход) // Русский язык за рубежом. 1984. № 6. С. 67–72. Текст: непосредственный.
6. Culpeper J. 13. Politeness and impoliteness. Pragmatics of society. 2011: 393–434.
7. De Kadt E. The concept of face and its applicability in the Zulu language. Journal of Prag-matics. 1998; 29: 173–191.
8. Dimitrova-Galaczi E. Issues in the Definition and Conceptualization of Politeness. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL. 2002; 2, 1: 1–20.
9. Eelen G. A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. 2001. 280 p.
10. Fraser B. Perspectives on politeness. Journal of pragmatics. 1990; 14, 2: 219–236.
11. Gu Y. Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics. 1990; 14, 2: 237–257.
12. Haugh M. The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research. 2007: 295–317.
13. Ide S. Formal forms of discernment: Two neglected aspects of linguistic politeness. Multilingua. 1989; 8: 223–248.
14. Janney R. W., Arndt H. Politeness revisited: Cross-modal supportive strategies. Interna-tional Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 1985; 23: 281–300.
15. Kasper G. Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics. 1990; 14: 193–218.
16. Leech G. Politeness: is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research. 2007; 3, 2: 167–206.
17. Locher M. A., Watts R. J. Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research. 2005: 9–33.
18. Locher M. A. and R. J. Watts. Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behavior. In Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008: 77–99.
19. Mao L. R. Beyond Politeness Theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics. 1994; 21: 451–486.
20. Meier A. J. Defining politeness: Universality in appropriateness. Language sciences. 1995; 17, 4: 345–356.
21. Sifianou M., Tzanne A. Conceptualizations of politeness and impoliteness in Greek. Intercultural Pragmatics. 2010; 7, 4: 661–687.
22. Spencer-Oatey H. Rapport management: A framework for analysis. Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures. 2000: 11–46.
23. Spencer-Oatey H. Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures (2nd edn). London and New York: Continuum, 2008. 372 p.
24. Terkourafi M. Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research. 2005; 1, 2: 237–263.
25. Watts Richard J. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 308 p.
26. Чэнь Жун. Вежливый язык в английском языке // Иностранный язык. 1989. № 6. С. 23–28.陈融. 英语的礼貌语言 // 外国语. 1989. № 6. 23–28页. (Chen Rong. Ying yu de li mao yu yan. wai guo yu. 1989. № 6. P. 23–28).
2. Ерзинкян Е. Л. Лингвистическая категория вежливости: семантика и прагматика. Ереван: Изд-во ЕГУ, 2018. 410 с. Текст: непосредственный.
3. Карасик В. И. Язык социального статуса. Москва: Гнозис, 2002. 334 с. Текст: непосредственный.
4. Ларина Т. В. Категория вежливости и стиль коммуникации: сопоставление английских и русских лингвокультурных традиций. Москва: Рукописные памятники Древней Руси, 2009. 508 с. Текст: непосредственный.
5. Формановская Н. И. Способы выражения просьбы в русском языке (прагматический подход) // Русский язык за рубежом. 1984. № 6. С. 67–72. Текст: непосредственный.
6. Culpeper J. 13. Politeness and impoliteness. Pragmatics of society. 2011: 393–434.
7. De Kadt E. The concept of face and its applicability in the Zulu language. Journal of Prag-matics. 1998; 29: 173–191.
8. Dimitrova-Galaczi E. Issues in the Definition and Conceptualization of Politeness. Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL. 2002; 2, 1: 1–20.
9. Eelen G. A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. 2001. 280 p.
10. Fraser B. Perspectives on politeness. Journal of pragmatics. 1990; 14, 2: 219–236.
11. Gu Y. Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics. 1990; 14, 2: 237–257.
12. Haugh M. The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research. 2007: 295–317.
13. Ide S. Formal forms of discernment: Two neglected aspects of linguistic politeness. Multilingua. 1989; 8: 223–248.
14. Janney R. W., Arndt H. Politeness revisited: Cross-modal supportive strategies. Interna-tional Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 1985; 23: 281–300.
15. Kasper G. Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics. 1990; 14: 193–218.
16. Leech G. Politeness: is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research. 2007; 3, 2: 167–206.
17. Locher M. A., Watts R. J. Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research. 2005: 9–33.
18. Locher M. A. and R. J. Watts. Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behavior. In Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008: 77–99.
19. Mao L. R. Beyond Politeness Theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics. 1994; 21: 451–486.
20. Meier A. J. Defining politeness: Universality in appropriateness. Language sciences. 1995; 17, 4: 345–356.
21. Sifianou M., Tzanne A. Conceptualizations of politeness and impoliteness in Greek. Intercultural Pragmatics. 2010; 7, 4: 661–687.
22. Spencer-Oatey H. Rapport management: A framework for analysis. Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures. 2000: 11–46.
23. Spencer-Oatey H. Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures (2nd edn). London and New York: Continuum, 2008. 372 p.
24. Terkourafi M. Beyond the micro-level in politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research. 2005; 1, 2: 237–263.
25. Watts Richard J. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 308 p.
26. Чэнь Жун. Вежливый язык в английском языке // Иностранный язык. 1989. № 6. С. 23–28.陈融. 英语的礼貌语言 // 外国语. 1989. № 6. 23–28页. (Chen Rong. Ying yu de li mao yu yan. wai guo yu. 1989. № 6. P. 23–28).
Article.pdf