Politeness Principle and its Use to Save Face

Abstract:Politeness is of special importance in social communication and is gaining more and more significance in the study of pragmatics over the recent years. This paper starts from the very element of the Politeness Principle， proposed by G. Leech in 1983， and it mainly concentrates on the six maxims of the Politeness Principle. Then， it studies the communicative effect of the six maxims in real situation respectively. And from the problem in Politeness Principle， it draws forth to the face theory， put forward by R. Brown and S. Levinson in 1987. With the analysis of various kinds of Face Threatening Act， FTA for short， it comes to the question: how to save face in the aid of speech strategies of Politeness Principle. With careful observation of conversations in life and plenty of reading in regard of Politeness Principle， I conclude some practical speech strategies as face saving acts.

Key Words:Politeness Principle， Face Theory， Face Threatening Act， Speech Strategies

1、Politeness Principle

Leech studies Politeness Principle through two aspects， which are the content of the conversations/utterances (cost and benefit) and the manner of the conversations/utterances (direct or indirect); the two may be in function alone or together. The six maxims of Leech’s PP are:

Ⅰ. Tact Maxim

By Tact Maxim， Leech actually means that people tend to regard an utterance as polite if it minimizes cost to other; maximizes benefit to other.

Ⅱ. Generosity Maxim

According to Leech， the generosity maxim is summarized as: minimize the benefit to self; maximize cost to self. In practice， the generosity maxim always overlaps the tact maxim， for them both concern the cost and benefit of an action， with the former concentrating on speaker and the latter concentrating on hearer.

Ⅲ. Approbation Maxim

The Approbation Maxim is summarized as: minimize dispraise of other; maximize praise of other. Usually it makes no harm to the speaker and the hearer. The word “flattery” is just too one-sided.

Ⅳ. Modesty Maxim

The Modesty Maxim is summarized as: minimize praise of self; maximize dispraise of self. The modesty maxim can be linked with the approbation maxim， both concerning the good or bad opinion of utterances， with the former concentrating on the speaker and the latter concentrating on the hearer.

Ⅴ. Agreement Maxim

The Agreement Maxim is to minimize disagreement between the speaker and the hearer; maximize agreement between the speaker and the hearer. It is natural for people to feel glad when their opinions are endorsed; otherwise they feel discouraged.

Ⅵ. Sympathy Maxim

The name of this maxim implies that the speech strategy is useful when we are to show sympathy for others. Usually such situation is related to something unfortunate.

2、Face Theory

2.1 From PP to “Face”

Previously， in discussing the Tact Maxim of Politeness Principle， we’ve mentioned that the relationship between politeness and indirectness is quite complex. Generally speaking， a more indirect request may sound more polite. However， the line is not clearly-cut.

This uncertainty has been solved by R. Brown and S. Levisohn (1978). They proposed the Face Theory and revealed the relationship between PP and Face Theory.

2.2 Types of FTAs

Since PP is to save face， any violations of PP would results in face threatening act. Based on this ground， FTAs can be sub-categorized into ⑴FTAs threatening the Hearer’s face and ⑵FTAs threatening the Speaker’s face.

⑴FTAs threatening the Hearer’s face

a. FTAs threatening the Hearer’s Positive face

This kind of FTAs include expressions/utterances which have negative evaluation of the hearer’s positive face (Leech 76).

b.FTAs threatening the Hearer’s Negative face

This kind of FTAs include utterances which predicate a future act of the hearer (Leech 76).

⑵FTAs threatening the Speaker’s face

a.FTAs threatening the Speaker’s Positive face

FTAs threatening the Speaker’s Positive face include apologies， confession， self-humiliation， etc (Leech 78).

b. FTAs threatening the Speaker’s Negative face include the expression of thanks， excuses (Leech 78).

3、Face-saving Function of PP

3.1 Positive Politeness and Negative Politeness

In this part， we will explore how to save face in the means of politeness. The face wants include positive face and negative face. Then we can see how to use specific speech strategies of positive politeness and negative politeness to save face.

3.2 Speech Strategies of Positive Politeness

When we use positive politeness， we stress our solidarity or shared qualities/goals. Speakers using PP are usually close in social relationship. The strategies they employ are:

a.Shared dialect/Slang expressions

Shared dialect/slang expressions is a frequently used way to emphasize solidarity between speaker and hearer， in the way showing awareness of the hearer’s positive face.

b.Informal pronunciation

Actually， this strategy is similar to the first one， the shared dialect.

c.Reference words

Usually when we tell others to do something or not to do something， we use references words like “we” and “us” which include both the hearer and the speaker.

d.Less indirect request

People of socially close relationships， like friend and families， always show their solidarity or shared common goals through the use of less indirect request.

e.Intimating words

Intimating words like “honey， buddy， love， mate， etc” indicate that the speaker and the hearer share something in common， thus the speaker is showing awareness of the hearer’s positive face.

3.3 Speech Strategies of Negative Politeness

Negative politeness is to preserve the negative face of other people. The speech strategies mentioned in the positive politeness should be avoided， and they include passive voice.

⑴ Passive voice

By using the passive voice， the speaker avoids making a direct apology. It seems that he/she is just stating a fact. In this way， the speaker saves his negative face.

⑵ Mitigating devices

Some words and phrases can be used as buffer to mitigate the possible FTAs and save face. This kind of words and phrases are called mitigating devices.

4、Conclusion

Politeness Principle and the Face Theory are not irrelevant. Actually， people use the Politeness Principle in order to save face. To achieve this aim， different strategies are employed. We can say that the value of PP and the Face Theory lies more in language in use than in textbook.

Another light we can draw from the thesis is that the study of one specific theory in pragmatics can propelled the development of a new and fresh topic. We see that Austin’s speech-act theory gives people a new perspective of pragmatic study. Grice’s CP goes further in this study and the imperfect of CP gives rise to Leech’s PP. No one can confidently say that there would be no further development of PP. The possibility of pragmatic is indefinite.

About the strategies of the politeness we discussed in the essay， they are just tip of the iceberg. More and more exist in real life. Since the strategies are involved in language in actual use， further study can explore different strategies in all works of life， such as politeness language in business， law， education and diplomatic relations. In this way， we can achieve successful social communication and in a deeper sense， have a better relationship with the outside world.

references：

[1]Brown， P. and S. C. Levinson. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. [2]Cambridge University Press. 1978

[3]Channel I， J. Vague Language.Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.2000.

[4]Grice， H. P. Logic and Conversation. Academic Press. 1975

[5]Leech， G. Principles of Pragmatics.Longman.1983

[6]Peccei， Jean.Pragmatics.Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Routledge.2007

[7]Yule，George.Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.1996

[8]陳融．英語的禮貌語言[J]．現代外語，1989年3月

[9]胡壯麟．語言學教程[M]．北京大學出版社，2001

[10]姜望琪．當代語用學[M]．北京大學出版社，2003

[11]何兆雄．新編語用學概要[M]．上海外語教育出版社，2000