Notes on Face & PolitenessNotes on Face & Politeness

Face and FaceworkGoffman Face: The positive social image we seek

to maintain during interaction.Why is Goffman’s perspective considered to

fall within the perspective of Symbolic Interactionism?

What does it mean to say that even the “private self” is a symbolic construction?

The Dramaturgical PerspectiveInteraction = Performance

LinesPropsAudienceFront Stage & Back Stage

Can be in Wrong Face and be Out of FaceCan be Heartless or Shameless

Fact Threat/Loss SequencePREVENTIVE CORRECTIVE FACEWORK FACEWORK

Disclaimers Apology Tact Account Excuse

JustificationRemediationHumorAvoidanceAggression

Face ThreatFace Loss

FaceRestored

Interaction continues

Critique

• What are the strengths and limitations of face theory? – Criteria• Scope?• Heurism?• Parsimony?

Brown & Levinson’s Politeness Theory

• Brown & Levinson are socio-linguists• Extend Goffman’s notion of face–Positive face–Negative face

• And focus only on preventive facework• And face needs (positive and negative)

SequencePREVENTIVE FACEWORK

Positive Politeness Negative Politeness

Face Threat Interaction

continues

Positive FacePositive Face (the dog) is the desire to be valued

and included by relevant or significant others

Negative Face (the cat) is the desire to be free from imposition and restraint and to have control of our time, property, space, and resources

Negative Face

Threats to Pos./Neg. Face• Social connections make threat to positive

and negative face inevitable.• We need to give orders, ask favors, deny

favors, give feedback, etc.• When part of a job requirement, threats are

not problematic• During social interaction, threats are

problematic and should be prevented.

Severity of Face Threatening Acts (FTAs)

• Severity = Power, Distance, Rank (PDR)• Power of speaker over hearer• Distance between hearer and speaker

(close or distant)• Rank of imposition– Both social/conventional ranking of threat – And idiosyncratic/relational ranking of threat

STRATEGIES FOR DOING FTAs1. Without redressive action(bald on record)

2. Positive Politeness (redressive action)

3. Negative Politeness (redressive action)

4. Off record (hinting)

5. Don't do the FTA

Very Efficient

Very Polite

POSITIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES Convey X is admirable/interesting

> Notice, attend to X’s interests, needs, etc.> Exaggerate interest, approval, etc.

Claim in-group membership with X> Use in-group markers (we, us)

Claim common point of view, attitude, opinions, knowledge, empathy > Give agreement and avoid disagreement> Joke

Indicate you are taking X’s interests or needs into accountGive reasonsGive gifts to X

NEGATIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIESDon’t assume X is willing or able to perform the action

> Question, hedgeDon’t try to coerce XGive X option not to act

> Be indirect> Assume X is not likely to do the action (Be pessimistic)

Minimize threat> Minimize imposition> Give deference> Apologize> Go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H

Complications• As evident in the politeness strategies, the

interaction is complicated by the fact that– Some FTAs threaten both pos. and neg. face so a

particular message might contain both types of strategies.• Consider a complaint

– Some politeness strategies threaten the speaker’s positive or negative face while addressing the hearer’s face• Consider an apology