Филологические науки/ 7. Язык, речь, речевая коммуникация

The lecturer of foreign languages O.R. Babiy

Bukovinian State Medical University

The Theory and the Types of Politeness

The theory of linguistic politeness has been in the focus of linguists for more than three decades and is separated as an independent direction of pragmalinguistics. Politeness is understood as a strategy of verbal behavior, which is appropriate in a particular speech situation in accordance with norms, and cultural features of a particular society. The theory of politeness has already been investigated by many foreign and Ukrainian scientists with the aim of defining different aspects of politeness (G. Lakoff, John. Leach, G. Kasper, P. Brown and S. Levinson, A. Vezhbytska, A. Meyer, R. Marquez, LA Aznabayeva, YD Apresyan, VN Arinshteyn, NS Aristova, LI Baykova, AV Bessarabenko, SY Glushkov, YB Kuzmenkova, TV Larin, MV Lisyenko, NP Savoyskaya and others). A lot of ideas about the concept of "politeness" existed in the different historical period. Science of the 20th century comes to an understanding that politeness as verbal and nonverbal behavior is used to create a favorable tone of communication, to demonstrate a desire to establish friendly relations or to develop which are existed, to prevent or resolve the conflict situations [4, c. 97]. Therefore, politeness allows us to be in harmony with each other, which is very important in every human community. Politness also can be seen as a social norm imposed by society and some persons are forced to demonstrate their civilization and culture. Also the contrast between private and social is very important: those actions which a person can do in his private life may be unacceptable in social life [4, c. 97]. Politeness is very universal and can be observed as the norm in all cultures. But it is very important to say that despite of this university the displays of politeness and the ways of its realization are different. In general, for the English culture and the Western world politeness is closely related to behavior typical of a particular social location and a particular social group: being polite is to live by following generally accepted norms of behavior [4, c. 97]. So, as an ethical category politeness is considered as: 1) a social phenomenon; 2) social norms, conventions which are imposed on society and forces its members to demonstrate their civilization and culture. The definition of politeness in linguistics is very actual nowadays. Richard James Watts devoted a lot of his works for deeply studying of this category. He developed the theory of politeness, according to which he delineated the concept of politic behavior («reasonable behavior" - appropriate, expected in this situation), which he built by himself, and politeness (actually "courtesy"). For example as members of verbal interaction, we are able to determine what behavior at given moment interaction is relevant, and we tend to play it in the right context. According to Watts, in a situation where other people have taken the place specified in our tickets, most of us start a conversation with them saying, for example, such words: “Excuse me. I think you're sitting in our seats.” This speech can be considered polite behavior, but on the other hand, it is expected and appropriate in this situation, unlike the polite: “I'm sorry to bother you, but would you very much mind vacating our seats?” Thus, politic behavior is that behavior which the participants construct as being appropriate to the ongoing social interaction [5, с. 257]. Today, not only the definition of linguistic politeness, but also its typology are discussed. There are such types of politeness on the typological level (the terms in English provided by P. Brown and S. Levinson [1; 2]): – Bald On-record politeness – this strategy is used in the situations where people know each other and in the emergencies. In these cases, to save face is not a priority. The interviewer may shout, make noise if he sees that someone is in danger. In addition, this strategy characterizes everyday conversation. – Off-record politeness – this type of politeness is more indirect. Speaker does not impose his point of view to the interlocutor. As a result, there is no direct threat to the face. This strategy often requires the listener's interpretation of the words of the speaker. – Positive politeness – this strategy attempts to minimize the threat to the positive face of the audience. This can be done by showing attention to the needs of the audience, speaking indirectly and avoiding disagreement using humor and optimism, offering and promising. It is connected with the expression of solidarity, the inclusion of the interlocutor and other people in one group with speaker, informal appeal, the use of jargon, slang, code switching, ellipsis. – Negative politeness – this strategy attempts to minimize the threat to the negative face of the audience. An example of negative politeness: the speaker requires something from the listener, but tries to keep his right to refuse. This can be achieved through the indirect requests, indirect answers, apologies and to minimize an imposition. Everything is done for the demonstration of respect, independence and the desire to avoid conflict. So, Negative politeness is avoidance-based and Positive politeness is approach-based [1]. Positive politeness is associated with linguistic expression of solidarity, including the interlocutor and other people in the same group, while negative is associated with the desire to avoid conflict. Each of these strategies of politeness is a system by which the objectives of polite communication can be achieved. Different types of strategies are associated with different speech acts. Thus, positive politeness strategies are associated primarily with expressive (congratulations, gratitude, evaluation, compliment etc.). Negative politeness strategies are closely related to the speech acts in which the speaker performs communicative pressure on the interlocutor. Among the facilities of negative politeness P. Brown and S. Levinson singularize the apology, linguistic and non-linguistic respect, softening of the tone and mechanisms of depersonalization. J. Felix-Brasdefer distinguishes two types of politeness: first-order politeness or politeness 1 and the second order politeness or politeness 2. First order politeness is defined as a politeness, that is perceived by the members of different cultural groups, and the 2^nd order politeness - as a theoretical construct or scientific conceptualization of the politeness 1 [3, с. 10]. 1^st order politeness consists of three types: 1) expressive politeness 1 - a linguistic speaker’s politeness. It is fixed in the language, reflecting the polite intents of the communicators and can be realized through the use of specific applications, means of expressing the respect, conventional formulas like 'thank you', 'excuse me', 'please' and various linguistic means ('please', conditional sentences ) for example, to mitigate the direct illocutionary power of the request or to reduce the negative effect of failure; 2) classificational politeness 1 - refers to the understanding of politeness as a categorical instrument, it covers the judgments about the polite / impolite behavior of the listeners and others; 3) metaphorical politeness 1 - refers to that how people talk about politeness in everyday communication and what they perceive as politeness in different practices of the interaction. Politeness 2 refers to scientific conceptualization of politeness 1and is the theory of the universal principles that govern human interaction [3]. The topicality of this article is stipulated by the orientation of modern linguistics to the problems of pragmalinguistics and especially to the theory of communication. A person is a social creature, that’s why communication, especially verbal, is very important. Politeness is that characteristic of human speech that guarantee the peaceful coexistence of individuals in society.

Bibliography:

1. Brown P. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage / P. Brown, S. Levinson. – Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1987. – 345 p.

2. Brown P. Universals in language usage : Politeness phenomena / P. Brown, S. Levinson // Questions and Politeness: strategies in social interaction; ed. by E.N. Goody. – Cambridge : CUP. – 1978. – P. 59–290.

3. Felix-Brasdefer J. C. Politeness in Mexico and the United States: a contrastive study of the realization and perception of refusals / J. Cesar Felix-Brasdefer. – Amsterdam : John Benjamins, 2008. – 195 p.

4. Huang Y. Politeness Principle in Cross-Culture Communication / Yongliang Huang // English language Teaching. – 2008. – Vol. 1, No. 1. – P. 96–101.

5. Watts R. J. Рoliteness / R. J. Watts. – Cambridge : CUP, 2003. – 318 p.