Politeness Theory

  • This theory is a practical application of Goffman's thoughts on face work.
  • See WikiPedia:Erving_Goffman
    • His wrote about The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life and Interaction Ritual, and argued that human beings' social interaction is like acting in drama -- hence, his idea is called WikiPedia:dramaturgy.
      >> In dramaturgical sociology it is argued that human actions are dependent upon time, place, and audience. In other words, to Goffman, the self is a sense of who one is, a dramatic effect emerging from the immediate scene being presented.2 Goffman forms a theatrical metaphor in defining the method in which one human being presents itself to another based on cultural values, norms, and expectations.

Politeness theory (PT) explains how and why individuals try to promote, protect, or save face, especially when embarrassing or shameful situations arise unexpectedly.

Goffman's first essay, “On Face-work, focused on the concept of face, which is the positive image of self that individuals have when interacting with others. Goffman believed that face “as a sociological construct of interaction, is neither inherent in nor permanent aspect of the person”.5 Once an individual gives out a positive self image of themselves to others they then feel a need to keep or live up to that set image.

Assumptions

  1. Face
    • All individuals are concerned with maintaining face (Brown & Levinson, 1978, 1987).
    • Face refers to the desired self-image that an individual wishes to present to others; face also includes the recognition that one's interactional partners have face-needs of their own.
    2. Positive and negative face
    • Positive face are a person's need to be liked, appreciated, and admired by selected persons. Therefore, maintaining positive face may include one's efforts to ensure that the significant others continue to view him/her in an affirming fashion.
    • Negative face assumes a person's desire to act freely, without constraints or imposition from others.
    It is difficult to achieve (hold, maintain) both faces at the same time.
  2. Rational and goal oriented nature of human being
    • Human beings are rational and goal oriented with respect to achieving face needs (Brown & Levinson, 1978, 1987). Everyone's face depends upon everyone else's face being maintained. Therefore, one's decision in interactions with others often uphold this mutual construction of face.
  3. Face threatening acts
    • Human being's rationale guide them to interact with others for mutual respects (face-saving), some behaviors are fundamentally face threatening. These face-threatening acts include common behaviors such as apologies, compliments, criticisms, requests, and threats (Craig, Tracy, & Spisak, 1993).

Preserving face

To create and maintain face, ones use facework -- specific messages that thwart or minimize face-threatening acts (FTAs).
  1. Preventive facework
    • Preventive facework means one's acts to avert, avoid FTAs.
    • e.g., Avoiding certain topics, changing the subject, or pretending not to notice the occurrence of an !FTA, etc.
  2. Corrective facework
    • Messages of which intention is to restore one's own or others' facework.
    • e.g., Use of strategies such as humor, apologies, accounts or explanation of inappropriate actions and behaviors, and physical remediation for the damage of FTAs.
  3. Conflict between positive and negative facework
    • When your desire to appear unencumbered (having a sort of non-attractive charisma) outweighs your desire to be liked, you might need to engage in a face-threatening act.
  4. Use of five strategies in one's facework
    • Avoidance: people may choose not to communicate in order to save their or their communication partner's face.
    • Going off record: One may subtly hint or indirectly mention the face-threatening topic or situation. Such strategy (hints and indirect mention) leave the message open to interpretation; hence, minimizing face threat (while achieving what the person wants).
    • Negative politeness: Speakers makes an effort to recognize the other's negative face needs -- the receiver's need of freedom and lack of restraint.
      I am so sorry to ask, but I need a huge favor. I know this is last minute, and I really hate to be such a pain, but could you cover my shift this weekend? I know this is really inconvenient and I wouldn't ask if it weren't really important. . . .
      • This statement is my acknowledging the other's discomfort and potentiol restriction while still mangaging a sort of face-threatening act.
    • Positive politeness: The speaker emphasizes the receiver's need for positive face -- the need to be liked. Usually flattery and compliments are involved in the communication. One is camouflage one's face-threatening behavior with flattery and compliments.
      Bill, you are such a reliable colleague, and os well-respected. I feel like I can really count on you. Would you cover my weekend shift?
    • Bald on record: The speaker has no concern for others' face; simply commits the FTA in order to achieve his/her goal.
      Bill, cover my weekend shift.

According to PT, people use the above strategies tactically.
Consideration Prediction
Social distance If someone has more prestige than you (someone with an impressive title or a great deal of money), you will be more polite; if someone hold little or no prestige over you, you need not be so polite.
Power If someone has power over you (your boss, or even your auto mechanic if your car broke down), you will be more polite.
Risk If what you are going to say has a high chance of hurting someone, you will be more polite.
In addition to the above four, choosing FTAs with a different approaches may involve many factors: 1) understanding both positive and negative face, 2) understanding cultural differences or subtlety, 3) understanding the nature of relationship, and 4) understanding the communication partner's characteristics.

Retrieved from http://wiki.commres.org//PolitenessTheory
last modified 2012-05-08 14:46:25