ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

The culture of contemporaneity presents itself through various concepts and discourses that constitute the category of everyday life, which they reveal and portray. In linguistic terms, the category of everyday life is manifested in different forms of communication, and first of all in the system of norms and models of speech behavior, known as speech etiquette. The goal of the article is to analyze the use of some models of English speech etiquette, specifically the use of politeness forms typical of the English. Politeness strategy presents itself in various types, as absolute, relative, negative or positive politeness. The type of politeness presupposes a definite form of etiquette speech act. Politeness strategy is analyzed in speech acts of apologies and condolences, through their pragmatic structures.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
1877-0428 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of LKTI 2015.
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.033
ScienceDirect
XV International Conference "Linguistic and Cultural Studies: Traditions and Innovations”,
LKTI 2015, 9-11 November 2015, Tomsk, Russia
Politeness Strategy in Everyday Communication
Marina Ryabova
*
Kemerovo State University, 6 ul. Krasnaya, Kemerovo, 650043, Russia
Abstract
The culture of contemporaneity presents itself through various concepts and discourses that constitute the
category of everyday life, which they reveal and portray. In linguistic terms, the category of everyday life is
manifested in different forms of communication, and first of all in the system of norms and models of speech
behavior, known as speech etiquette. The goal of the article is to analyze the use of some models of English
speech etiquette, specifically the use of politeness forms typical of the English.
Politeness strategy presents itself
in various types, as absolute, relative, negative or positive politeness. The type of politeness presupposes a
definite form of etiquette speech act. Politeness strategy is analyzed in
speech acts of apologies and condolences,
through their pragmatic structures.
©
2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of LKTI 2015.
Keywords: Everyday life; culture; communication; speech etiquette; politeness rules.
1. Introduction
The culture of contemporeneity, reflected in discourse practices of daily communication, functioning in
various forms, ways and genres, correlates with the category of everyday life, which in its turn, generates
discourses and their concepts. Thus, the analysis and description of the category of everyday life through
analyzing its discourses and concepts, enables to better understand the nature of today’s language culture, the
nature and tendencies in the developments of culture in general.
The culture of everyday life includes the whole complex of human relations: the culture of communication and
behavior, the culture of mass media communication and the culture of life styles. In linguistic terms, the category
of everyday life presents a system of all processes of language functioning, all forms and types of communication,
manifested in forms of individual or collective discourses.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mriabova@inbox.ru (M. Ryabova).
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of LKTI 2015.
91
Marina Ryabova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
The interest of modern science to the problem of everyday life is connected with such questions as: perception
of world picture by naïve consciousness, archetypes of mass communication as a regulatory system of human
behavior, as a correlation of high and everyday forms of culture.
Everyday life in a form of common opinion reveals itself specifically in an ability to learn some cultural codes
that allow raising
a personal social status. A system of fixed behavioral reactions to the environment presents
itself in the existence of various cultural codes of behavior, which exist in a language as a special set of speech
formulae of social etiquette, regulating the choice of communicative forms, structures and set phrases. In this
respect it is interesting to analyze communicative behavior of the people of Great Britain, which is regulated by
the so called speech etiquette.
2. Speech etiquette and language norm
Speech etiquette is an essential part of culture, behavior and human communication. Social relationships and
norms of behavior are fixed in speech etiquette formulae. Etiquette norms are encoded in sayings, proverbs,
idioms, set phrases such as: Welcome! How do you do! Farewell! Thank you! etc. Being an element of national
culture, speech etiquette has a clear national coloring.
In linguistics etiquette is understood as a system of rules and conventions that regulates social and professional
behavior. In any social unit there are accepted rules of behavior upheld and enforced by legal codes, or by
customs and enforced by group pressure. Regardless of the type of national culture, any society possesses the
etiquette, and every person knows the behavior expected from him towards others and from others toward himself
(Etiquette, 2015).
The word “etiquette” came from French and entered the English language about 1740-1750. In French it meant
memorandum, derivative of étiqu(i)
(- to attach, stick) (op.cit.). The sense developed in French from small cards
written or printed with instructions how to behave properly at court and/or from behavior instructions written on a
soldiers billet for lodgings.
At the beginning of the XVIII century etiquette norms were mostly written in periodicals such as The Spectator,
The Tattler, where readers could learn what kind of conversations to have and what subjects to talk about, if they
wanted to look like educated gentlemen of a society. Henry Hitchings, a famous British writer, critic and
researcher assumes, the first appearance of the word “etiquette” can be found in the collection of letters written by
the fourth earl of Chesterfield Philip Stanhope to his son, in which he gave instructions how to become a
gentleman
(Hitchings, 2013). As Hutchings put it, the word “etiquette” was then understood as a code of conduct,
as an idea of self
-control, as a virtue.
Manners are different from etiquette: etiquette in this modern age is a quaint set of rules for the socially
insecure
as old-fashioned as debutantes. Manners, conversely, might be taken to mean natural grace, and
treating all with equal consideration. Hitchings sees it more formally: manners, a word suggesting broad
principles of behavior, and ‘etiquette’, which denotes the actions that articulate those principles
(McKay, 2013).
Speech etiquette in a narrow meaning of the term can be defined as a system of language means where
etiquette relationships are revealed. The elements of this system can be actualized at various linguistic levels. At
the lexical level etiquette relationships are marked with the help of special expressions and set phrases (Thank you;
Please; excuse me; Good
-bye; etc.), special forms of address (Mr., Miss, Mrs., Madame, Ms, etc). At the level of
grammar organization it is supported by polite forms of the language (the use of pronouns in plural form:
vous,
вы); the use of interrogative sentences instead of imperative ones (Could you possibly help me?)
At stylistic level
it is expressed in the use of literary high flown language forms of official standard, and the ban of obscene lexis
which are replaced by euphemisms
(Ryabova, 2013). Etiquette is also marked at phonetic and prosodic levels of
language which means that a special intonation is used (of polite model). At the communicative level it
presupposes a prohibition to interfere into a conversation or to interrupt it, etc.
Speech etiquette can be analyzed from the point of view of language norm. Thus, understanding of right
cultural normalized types of speech includes in itself the definite speech etiquette.
92 Marina Ryabova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
Specification of speech etiquette means that it does not only characterize everyday life practices, but also it
determines speech norms. Elements of speech etiquette are present in everyday discourse practice of any person,
who
easily recognizes these norms and expects from the communicator to use them in special contexts. Elements
of speech etiquette are set so deep that they are perceived by naive consciousness
as a part of everyday natural
behavior. If a person doesn’t know these norms or deliberately breaks them, it is interpreted as a wish to insult
somebody, or as a breach of breeding, or as his/her attribution to other culture, or to a different social class.
On the other hand, speech etiquette can be assessed in the aspect of language norm. E.g., every person whose
native language is English, knows
some conversational formulae, expressing excuse; though some expressions
are regarded as language norm (sorry, excuse me), while others are rejected, like for e.g. “pardon”. The fact of
avoidance of some expressions from language use can already be regarded as an object of standardization: e.g.
formulae of excuse are adequate when the speaker disturbs his conversational partner, though to ask for an excuse
too often is not advisable, since the partner is put in an awkward position by this. Besides, the breach of norms
and rules of literary language, when it looks like carelessness, is a breach of etiquette in itself.
The borderline between an everyday speech discourse and a norm in speech etiquette is flexible. Practical
implementation of speech etiquette usually differs from standard models not only because of non
-acquaintance of
the communicants with the rules. The deviation from the rule as well as strict adherence to it can testify the
speaker's attitude to the hearer or his/her perception of a situation
.
3. Socio-pragmatic conditions of etiquette rules
Speech etiquette is tied with the communicative situation as such and with its parameters: personality, time,
place, theme and motive of communication and its purpose. Speech etiquette presents a complex
of linguistic
phenomena that
is connected with the addressee, though the speakers personality is also important. This can be
illustrated by the tu
vous forms of address. A general rule says that vous-forms are used as a sign of respect and
greater formality of communication, while tu
-forms are a sign of less formal style of communication, a
communication between equals. Though realization of this principle can be actualized in different variants
depending on the age, race, or rank factors, or whether communicants are relatives, friends, or of the same or
different social status.
Rules of etiquette can vary depending on the fact whether the theme of conversation is a sad event or a happy
one. There are special rules of speech behavior connected with the place of conversation (dinner, office, business
meeting). Speech etiquette has different functions such as: establishing contact between people; attracting
attention to the hearer; individualization of a communicant; expressing reverence to a communicant; revealing the
status of the event (friendly, official, businesslike, etc.); forming a favorable atmosphere to a conversation; paying
a positive influence on a communicant, etc.
4. Politeness strategies in communication
A lot of researchers of the English communicative behavior assume, that politeness is, evidently, a most
typical feature of their behavior. As a famous English social anthropologist Kate Fox remarked, although many of
the foreign visitors complained about English reserve, they all tended to be impressed by our courtesy
(Fox,
2004).
The author gave a detailed description of English politeness which the English demonstrate in the road, in
transport, on the way. The etiquette regulating this behavior is called the negative politeness rule, meaning that it
is concerned with other people’s need not to be intruded or imposed upon (as opposed to positive politeness,
which is concerned with their need for inclusion and social approval). The restraint, cautiousness and contact
-
avoidance of English public-transport passengers the stand-offishness that foreigners complain about are all
characteristic features of negative politeness. What looks like unfriendliness is really a kind of consideration: they
judge others by themselves, and assume that everyone shares their obsessive need for privacy
so they mind their
own business and politely ignore them
(Hitchings, 2013).
93
Marina Ryabova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
The rule of negative politeness is part of a general communicative strategy of politeness or tact maxim, which
means that the communicant respects the desire of the other not to communicate, not to interfere. Consequently,
the speaker prefers to use indirect speech acts, allowing “to keep the face”, i.e. instead of the forms of imperative
mood interrogative constructions are preferred, or declarative statements, that express requests implicitly. For e.g.
instead of strict order in the form of imperative mood “Shut the door”,
the preference will be given to
interrogative constructions with “please”: “Will you shut the door, please?”
The degree of politeness can be
higher with the usage of subjunctive mood forms: “Would you shut the door, please?”
“Could you shut the door
please?” The highest form of negative politeness is a form of implicit request in an affirmative statement:
There's a draught here”, expressing a presupposition “Shut the door, please”.
Together with the negative politeness rule the English use the positive politeness rule in their communicative
behavior, which means that the speaker shows to the hearer that he understands
his interests, approves and shares
his needs and goals. The form of this strategy is the use of inclusive pronoun “we”: “Let's shut the door”. Or “We
really should close the door”. Inclusive we”
can be used in speech acts of prohibition: “We don't want to park
here, do we?”
As positive politeness the plural form of pronoun, denoting address can be used: “Give us a hand,
son
(Renkema, 1993).
The politeness principle of communication can be actualized either as absolute politeness or as relative
politeness. Absolute politeness in terms of Geoffrey Leech can be associated with a scale, or a set of scales,
having a negative and a positive pole. Negative politeness consists in minimizing the impoliteness of impolite
illocutions (e.g. orders), and positive politeness consists in maximizing the politeness of polite illocutions.
As for relative politeness, it can be stated that people can be polite relative to some norms of behavior, which
for a particular culture they regard as typical. For example, it is commonly said that Japanese and Chinese are
very polite in comparison with Europeans. So the norm of politeness for a particular culture, and particular
illocution type is different, i.e. relevant. Thus, it is known that the British are excessively polite (and perhaps
insincere), when asking favors of others. A further norm is one for a particular category of person, according to
sex, age
-group, social status or class. Relative politeness is variable on many dimensions, according to the
standard or set of standards
(Leech, 1996, p. 84).
When the English bump into each other they automatically say “sorry”, no matter whose fault was that. The
older people were slightly more likely to apologize than younger people. Fox explains this phenomenon as the
reflex apology:
a reflex an automatic, knee-jerk response, not a considered admission of guilt. This is a deeply
ingrained rule: when any inadvertent, undesired contact occurs (and to the English, almost any contact is by
definition undesired), they say ‘sorry’.
In fact, the English, due to Fox, think that any intrusion, impingement or imposition of any kind, however
minimal or innocuous, generally requires an apology. They use the word ‘sorry’ as a prefix to almost any request
or question: ‘Sorry, but do you know if this train stops at Banbury?’ ‘Sorry, but is this seat free?’ ‘Sorry
do you
have the time?’ ‘Sorry, but you seem to be sitting on my coat.’ They say ‘sorry’ if an arm accidentally brushes
against someone else’s when passing through a crowded doorway; even a ‘near miss’, where no actual physical
contact takes place, can often prompt an automatic ‘sorry’ from both parties. They often say ‘sorry’ when they
mean ‘excuse me’ (or ‘get out of my way’), such as when asking someone to move so they can get past them.
An
interrogative ‘sorry?’ means I didn’t quite hear what you said
could you repeat it?’ (or ‘what?’). Clearly, all
these “sorries” are not heartfelt, sincere apologies. Like ‘nice’, ‘sorry’ is a useful, versatile, all
-purpose word,
suitable for all occasions and circumstances. When in doubt, say ‘sorry’. Englishness means always
having to say
you’re sorry
(Fox, 2004).
Politeness principle of communication is also registered in expressive speech acts that function as illocutions
of condoling, used in situations when people want to express their desire to share the sorrow over some sad
events, loss, grief, tragedy, etc. The politeness of such speech acts is relative to the situation, atmosphere of
formality, sincerity of communication, their relationship and social distance. The illocution of condolence speech
acts is to express a psychological state determined by sincerity condition concerning the situation of a certain
proposition, e.g.: Sympathies to your family on the passing of your sister. She will always be in our hearts.
94 Marina Ryabova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
In the sphere of expressive speech acts of condolence we can find at least two groups of utterances: emotive
speech acts and etiquette speech acts. Emotive speech acts are those where sincerity principle and emotional force
of the utterance reveal deeper emotional feelings and truthfulness in saying that people are really very sorry over
the loss of someone, e.g.: Corbin, I’m very sorry to hear about the loss of your father. I know he meant a lot to
you;
I’m really sorry to hear of your recent loss of your dad. I extend my sincere sympathy to all of you at what I
know is very sad and mournful time.
While etiquette speech acts of condolence demonstrate more formal (and less sincere) register of
communication, greater distance (social,
personal or any) between communicants, e.g.:
I want you to know that my thoughts are with you during this difficult time;
I want to condole you and I want you to know that I am here with you through it all if you need me.
It must be added that condolence speech acts actualize politeness principle as a part of Maxim of Sympathy in
communication, due to which the power of the Sympathy Maxim means that the speaker extends condolence as
an expression of sympathy for misfortune, i.e. the event of the proposition is interpreted as unfortunate (such as
death) for the hearer.
The illocution of condolence correlates with a number of psychological states felt by the addressee, such as:
sympathy; sadness: Dear Casey, I am truly saddened by Sandra’s death
;
Grief: Yesterday I learned of the unfortunate death of your son. There are no words to describe the utter grief
that I am feeling now;
Shock: I cannot possibly imagine the shock and sorrow that has been thrust on your family;
Pain: How your heart must ache for him!
M
issing: He was always such a fun person to be around and we will miss his great wit and charm.
The perlocution effect of condolence speech acts, felt by the hearer, can possibly be as such:
consolation: It is little consolation at this sad time, it should be of some satisfaction to know that in his passing
you can celebrate the end of a very long and productive life;
good memories: I can tell you though that the very best way to mark his passing is by filling your mind with all
of the wonderful memories you
have of happier times;
peace and comfort: You find peace and comfort in knowing that his loss is felt by all who knew and loved him.
The act of condolence usually is performed orally, but if it is not possible for any reason, it can be sent via a
letter of condolence. A condolence letter is an etiquette form of expressing feelings of sympathy over a tragic or
sad event. Being a strictly standardized form of etiquette communication, a condolence letter has a rigid text
structure. The structure consists of the following parts: (i) a direct address or greetings; (ii) a motive, containing
an information about a sad event; (iii) the expression of condolence as such, i.e. feelings or emotions experienced
over the loss; (iv) words about the deceased with good memories about him/her; (v) words addressed towards the
mourning persons; (vi) words offering any help; (vii) signature. For example:
(i) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sanborn, (ii) yesterday I learned of unfortunate and untimely death of your son and my
friend Jacob, (iii) there are no words to describe the utter grief that I am feeling now, (iv )he will long be
remembered as the hard working, intelligent and loving man that he was, (v) may God bless you and your family
at this time, (vi) if there is anything that I can do to help you in anything, please do not hesitate to call me at
anytime, (vii) sincerely, Mrs. Preston.
So a condolence letter has a close text structure, being a form of a ritualized discourse and it doesn’t allow any
variations, because of strict etiquette rules and norms accepted in the society, demanding to say politely only
good thing of the deceased.
5
. Conclusion
Thus, etiquette norms in speech behavior of the English is a characteristic feature of their communicative
culture, that determines the choice of formulae and models of their everyday communication, revealing their class
and social status and operating within politeness strategy of socio
-pragmatic conditions.
95
Marina Ryabova / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 206 ( 2015 ) 90 – 95
References
Etiquette (2015). http: //dictionary.com.reference.com/browse/etiquette.
Fox, K. (2004). Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behavior. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Hitchings, H. (2013). Sorry! The English and Their Manners. London: Farrar Straus and Giroux.
Leech, G. (1996). Principles of Pragmatics. London, N.Y: Longman.
McKay, Sinclair (2013). Sorry. The English and Their Manners. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/bookreviews/9793044/Sorry-The-
English-and-their-Manners-by-Henry-Hitchings-review.html.
Renkema, J. (1993). Discourse Studies: an Introductory Textbook. Amsterdam: John Benjamin’s Publishing Co.
Ryabova, M. (2013). Euphemisms and Media Framing. European Scientific Journal, 9(32), 33-45.
... In the current study, we examine a particular term of address cue: T/V distinction or Tu/Vous distinction (40), which refers to the use of different second-person pronouns ("You") in some languages, denoting a combination of less (T form) or more (V form) formality, distance, or emotional detachment (41). Arising originally from the Latin pronouns "Tu" and "Vos" (becoming "Thou" and "You" in English), T/V distinction is widely used in Indo-European languages (42), for example, "du" and "Sie" in German, "tu" and "vous" in French, "tú" and "vosotros/vosotras/usted(es)" in Spanish, with similar use in other non-Latin related languages such as Chinese, Malaysian, and Korean (43). ...
... Arising originally from the Latin pronouns "Tu" and "Vos" (becoming "Thou" and "You" in English), T/V distinction is widely used in Indo-European languages (42), for example, "du" and "Sie" in German, "tu" and "vous" in French, "tú" and "vosotros/vosotras/usted(es)" in Spanish, with similar use in other non-Latin related languages such as Chinese, Malaysian, and Korean (43). T/V distinction is said to encode interactional meanings and shape normative expectations (44), such as politeness etiquette (41,45,46), which when breached by a communication partner may disrupt the cultural script in play (44), and be perceived as an insult (41), membership of a different social class (47), affiliation with another culture or grouping (48), and lead to outcomes such as customer dissatisfaction (43,49,50). ...
... Arising originally from the Latin pronouns "Tu" and "Vos" (becoming "Thou" and "You" in English), T/V distinction is widely used in Indo-European languages (42), for example, "du" and "Sie" in German, "tu" and "vous" in French, "tú" and "vosotros/vosotras/usted(es)" in Spanish, with similar use in other non-Latin related languages such as Chinese, Malaysian, and Korean (43). T/V distinction is said to encode interactional meanings and shape normative expectations (44), such as politeness etiquette (41,45,46), which when breached by a communication partner may disrupt the cultural script in play (44), and be perceived as an insult (41), membership of a different social class (47), affiliation with another culture or grouping (48), and lead to outcomes such as customer dissatisfaction (43,49,50). ...
Full-text available
Article
Background: Conversational agents (CAs) are a novel approach to delivering digital health interventions. In human interactions, terms of address often change depending on the context or relationship between interlocutors. In many languages, this encompasses T/V distinction —formal and informal forms of the second-person pronoun “You”—that conveys different levels of familiarity. Yet, few research articles have examined whether CAs' use of T/V distinction across language contexts affects users' evaluations of digital health applications. Methods: In an online experiment ( N = 284), we manipulated a public health CA prototype to use either informal or formal T/V distinction forms in French (“tu” vs. “vous”) and German (“du” vs. “Sie”) language settings. A MANCOVA and post-hoc tests were performed to examine the effects of the independent variables (i.e., T/V distinction and Language) and the moderating role of users' demographic profile (i.e., Age and Gender) on eleven user evaluation variables. These were related to four themes: (i) Sociability, (ii) CA-User Collaboration, (iii) Service Evaluation, and (iv) Behavioral Intentions. Results: Results showed a four-way interaction between T/V Distinction, Language, Age, and Gender, influencing user evaluations across all outcome themes. For French speakers, when the informal “T form” (“ Tu” ) was used, higher user evaluation scores were generated for younger women and older men (e.g., the CA felt more humanlike or individuals were more likely to recommend the CA), whereas when the formal “V form” (“ Vous” ) was used, higher user evaluation scores were generated for younger men and older women. For German speakers, when the informal T form (“ Du” ) was used, younger users' evaluations were comparable regardless of Gender, however, as individuals' Age increased, the use of “ Du” resulted in lower user evaluation scores, with this effect more pronounced in men. When using the formal V form (“ Sie” ), user evaluation scores were relatively stable, regardless of Gender, and only increasing slightly with Age. Conclusions: Results highlight how user CA evaluations vary based on the T/V distinction used and language setting, however, that even within a culturally homogenous language group, evaluations vary based on user demographics, thus highlighting the importance of personalizing CA language.
... Despite all their differences, the rules of nan ampek foster a sense of politeness and humility across cultures, based on trust in the creator (Efrianto & Afnita, 2019). Nan ampek is an absolute politeness (Ryabova, 2015) for Minangkabau people in their communication. ...
Full-text available
Article
Cross-cultural values are known at a global level and can be explored from unique local life practices such as that of the Minangkabau people. Minangkabau is one of the ethnic groups in Indonesia. The Minangkabau people have a specific value system derived from natural and Islamic values called pepatah adat. Minangkabau people use these values as a code of conduct in intercultural affairs. This study aims at analyzing the values contained in pepatah adat and its relational significance to intercultural values, which affects the attitude of the Minangkabau people when interacting with others. This research used content analysis as the method. The main focus of this research is a selection of proverbs embedded in intercultural values; namely, timbang raso, hukum perdamaian, adab taratik, patuik, merantau, sifat kesayangan, dan saiyo. These seven values are related to three indicators of intercultural maturity: commitment, sobbing, and fairness. The results of this study conclude that pepatah adat contains intercultural values which contribute to the formation of self-identity of Minangkabau people, signified by someone having a moral commitment, being open-minded, and being honest.
... Similar studies were conducted, but with different contexts and objectives, such as those of Bolkan and Holmgren (2012), Novoselova, Romanov, and Romanova (2015), Ryabova (2015), Karimkhanlooei and Vaezi (2017), Lewis and Yoshimura (2017), and Mirzaei Jegarlooei and Allami (2018), who found that politeness strategies were useful when incorporated within an analytical framework for the study of various types of conversations. Such analytical frameworks were used to determine the etiquette of apology speech acts, speak politely, and condolences, confrontations in everyday life, political debates, and face-to-face communication. ...
Full-text available
Article
Abstract: This study focuses on the spoken conversations between Millennial undergraduates and their lecturers regarding the manner in which the students plead with their lecturers for additional time to complete their assignments. The research aimed to investigate the approaches used by these students through analyses-based politeness strategies and also whether approaches divergent from those strategies have been introduced by the Millennial undergraduates. Ten undergraduates were selected for participation in simulated situations in which their assignments were delayed for submission to their lecturers. The duration of each simulation was 3 minutes, and they were recorded and transcribed with annotations based on transcription notation symbols and coding based on the politeness strategy. The lecturers involved in the study were interviewed to determine their perspectives on the student’s ability to converse courteously and their perceptions of the potential for success in obtaining assignment submission deadline extensions. Apart from findings related to politeness strategies, the research revealed that Millennials also employ approaches such as negative courteousness, positive courteousness, and off-record indirect strategies to achieve their goal of extending the deadline for assignment submission. These Millennials’ use of politeness strategies can therefore be incorporated within (Brown and Levinson 1978) politeness theory as a separate kind of hierarchy of needs. Keywords: Millennial Talk, Undergraduate, Politeness Strategy, Specific Group
... Women, on the other hand, can work in almost any professional field and occupy positions equal to those of men. Language helps people to express their identity and their sexual characteristics, therefore, with the changes in ideas about "masculinity" and "femininity", the language of cultural representatives is also transformed (Ryabova, 2015;Jansen & Janssen, 2010;Swann & Deumert, 2018). ...
Full-text available
Article
Quite important for scientists is the question of the place of gender characteristics in the choice of linguistic means, as well as the reflection in the language of stereotypes associated with gender. Each person has his own style of communication, which depends on upbringing, education, age, social status, and gender. In general, men and women speak differently, although each person has a different level of gender speech characteristics.
... Analyzing language politeness means studying the structure of language externally. Research on language politeness has been done a lot, including Xiang et al. (2020), Li et al. (2020), Baider (2020), Alahmad et al. (2020), Wong & Esler (2020), Astia (2020), Darong et al, (2020), Widagdo & Yustanto (2020), Humaizi et al. (2020), Nurjanah et al. (2017), Van Der Bom & Grainger (2015), Kariithi (2016), Hall et al. (2017), Hambali & Novia (2017), Aminah (2017), Dietrich & Haußecker (2017), Jahdiah (2018, Christie (2015), Pramujiono & Nurjati (2017), Eshghinejad & Moini (2016), Ryabova (2015), Solihin et al. (2019), Mahmud (2019), Palupi & Endahwati (2019), Foolen (2019. These researches mostly still focus on the description of the fulfilment and violation of the principle of modesty. ...
Full-text available
Article
This research was based on the reality of the use of Indonesian language on social media that was vulgar, destructive, full of blasphemy, scorn, sarcasm, and tended to be provocative. This condition has destructive power because it spreads very quickly and is capable of arousing very strong emotions. This article aimed at presenting the results of research on the analysis model of impolite Indonesian language use. This model was developed from tracing status on social media which included language impoliteness in 2019. The novelty of this analysis model was that it involved a factor of power that allowed the appearance of such impolite speech. Therefore, this model is composed of several stages. First, presenting text in the form of spoken, written, and visual texts. Second, transcribing texts. Third, interpreting language impoliteness. At the interpreting stage, the impoliteness of the speeches was carried out by: (1) analyzing the contexts, (2) analyzing the power, (3) analyzing the dictions and language styles that contained impoliteness, (4) analyzing ethical speech acts, and (5) manipulating language politeness. From these language manipulation efforts, they were made to habituate language discipline to create a polite language society.
Full-text available
Article
New features of communication technology are gaining much attention in computer-mediated communication in relation to speech acts and conversational implicatures which aim to transcend the conventional and nonconventional meaning of words, phrases, or sentences when an interlocutor conveys messages in varied contexts. By examining 30 exchanges and conducting survey interviews, this study concerns the illocutionary acts of sent and unsent messages both in personal messages and group chats via an online messaging application. The findings show that there are 7 identified meanings of unsent messages; moreover, although there are similarities, the meaning varies depending on the context. The study also shows that students use representatives more frequently than the other illocutionary acts in sent messages both in personal and group chats. It is also noteworthy to point out that students rarely use greeting speech acts in their messages.
Full-text available
Article
New features of communication technology are gaining much attention in computer-mediated communication in relation to speech acts and conversational implicatures which aim to transcend the conventional and nonconventional meaning of words, phrases, or sentences when an interlocutor conveys messages in varied contexts. By examining 30 exchanges and conducting survey interviews, this study concerns the illocutionary acts of sent and unsent messages both in personal messages and group chats via an online messaging application. The findings show that there are 7 identified meanings of unsent messages; moreover, although there are similarities, the meaning varies depending on the context. The study also shows that students use representatives more frequently than the other illocutionary acts in sending messages both in personal and group chats. It is also noteworthy to point out that students rarely use greeting speech acts in their messages.
Article
Background Given the growing significance of conversational agents (CAs), researchers have conducted a plethora of relevant studies on various technology- and usability-oriented issues. However, few investigations focus on language use in CA-based health communication to examine its influence on the user perception of CAs and their role in delivering health care services. Objective This review aims to present the language use of CAs in health care to identify the achievements made and breakthroughs to be realized to inform researchers and more specifically CA designers. Methods This review was conducted by following the protocols of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 statement. We first designed the search strategy according to the research aim and then performed the keyword searches in PubMed and ProQuest databases for retrieving relevant publications (n=179). Subsequently, 3 researchers screened and reviewed the publications independently to select studies meeting the predefined selection criteria. Finally, we synthesized and analyzed the eligible articles (N=11) through thematic synthesis. Results Among the 11 included publications, 6 deal exclusively with the language use of the CAs studied, and the remaining 5 are only partly related to this topic. The language use of the CAs in these studies can be roughly classified into six themes: (1) personal pronouns, (2) responses to health and lifestyle prompts, (3) strategic wording and rich linguistic resources, (4) a 3-staged conversation framework, (5) human-like well-manipulated conversations, and (6) symbols and images coupled with phrases. These derived themes effectively engaged users in health communication. Meanwhile, we identified substantial room for improvement based on the inconsistent responses of some CAs and their inability to present large volumes of information on safety-critical health and lifestyle prompts. Conclusions This is the first systematic review of language use in CA-based health communication. The results and limitations identified in the 11 included papers can give fresh insights into the design and development, popularization, and research of CA applications. This review can provide practical implications for incorporating positive language use into the design of health CAs and improving their effective language output in health communication. In this way, upgraded CAs will be more capable of handling various health problems particularly in the context of nationwide and even worldwide public health crises.
Article
Politeness involves evaluations and attitudes which are closely connected to the assessment of actions. Politeness investigations in presidential debates enables voters to assess the candidates’ behavior to make well-informed decision during the election. The present study investigated politeness strategies in two different presidential debates within the United States electoral context: the Democratic party and the final presidential debates. Data were analyzed by adopting the coding scheme in Brown and Levinson’s frameworks. The overall result indicated that both the presidential debates used more positive politeness strategies than the negative politeness. PPS-10 (offer and promise), PPS-12 (include speaker and hearer in the activity) and NPS-2 (hedge) were more frequently used in both types of debates. PPS-3 (intensify interest to hearer) was frequent in the democratic debate alone. Meanwhile, PPS-15 (give gits to hearer) was frequent in the final presidential debate alone. The findings imply that the use of the politeness strategies can shape the candidates’ positive political images in the presidential debates. HIGHLIGHTS: • Findings show that the selected politeness strategies are to shape candidates’ positive political images in the presidential debates. • Having positive images such as not harsh, having good behavior are considered to be critical importance in determining the winning of the election. • Negative politeness is less preferably used and has been less taken into account as proper rhetorical skills in the debates.
Full-text available
Article
This Study discusses WhatsApp conversations between students and teachers used while learning English used in teaching activities to determine the type of politeness used by students in WhatsApp conversations during English learning at the al-Lutfah Islamic school. This research uses descriptive qualitative as the research method. The research subject is Student and teacher, while the study's object is politeness strategies in conversation WhatsApp that may contain politeness. The data of this research is the WhatsApp conversation of having politeness strategies. It uses observation and takes notes to collect the data. The data analyzing method is metode agih. The participants of this research are teachers and students at Al-Luthfah Islamic school. The transcriptions were analyzed and discussed based on the politeness of Brown and Levinson (1987). This study's findings reveal the kinds of politeness types used by Al-Luthfah Islamic students to encode politeness or politeness. In the form of several messages when replying to several statements in the WhatsApp group. These expressions are in the form of greetings, gratitude, ask questions, express opinions, and several forms of these messages are stages of obtaining data, identifying data, looking for standards, classifying types of politeness, and finding their function of the politeness used. And analyze the data.
Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behavior
  • K Fox
Fox, K. (2004). Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behavior. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Sorry! The English and Their Manners. London: Farrar Straus and Giroux
  • H Hitchings
Hitchings, H. (2013). Sorry! The English and Their Manners. London: Farrar Straus and Giroux. Leech, G. (1996). Principles of Pragmatics. London, N.Y: Longman.
Sorry. The English and Their Manners
  • Sinclair Mckay
McKay, Sinclair (2013). Sorry. The English and Their Manners. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/bookreviews/9793044/Sorry-The-English-and-their-Manners-by-Henry-Hitchings-review.html.
Euphemisms and Media Framing
  • M Ryabova
Ryabova, M. (2013). Euphemisms and Media Framing. European Scientific Journal, 9(32), 33-45.
Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behavior
  • Etiquette
Etiquette (2015). http: //dictionary.com.reference.com/browse/etiquette. Fox, K. (2004). Watching the English: The hidden rules of English behavior. London: Hodder & Stoughton.