본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

TOEIC의 간접 발화 영역에 반영된 폴라이트니스 고찰: Brown & Levinson의 체면 위협 행위와 Leech의 가치 거래 개념의 비교를 중심으로

A Study on Linguistic Politeness Reflected in the Indirect Utterance Part in TOEIC: Comparing Brown & Levinson’s Theory with that of Leech

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류기타인문학

초록

Politeness is a linguistic strategy used to assign value to a hearer by mitigating the face-threatening acts that a speaker commits to the hearer or lowering the self value of the speaker. Using positive and negative politeness are significant strategies to alleviate face-threatening acts, but are not being applied universally throughout all languages. Maintaining the face of the hearer reflects the individualism and egalitarianism that is aligned with a Western view, so it can be challenging to apply that view to some Eastern languages possessing honorific expressions. This is because communication functions not only to exchange information between individuals, but also serves the important role of complying with the order and the roles assigned to each individual in a society. Therefore, certain utterances may be decoded differently according to one's cultural background, or to the extent to which they may offend the hearer. Politeness as a value transaction overcomes the limits of the concept of politeness of face. The most coherent answer to questions in TOEIC's indirect utterance type is not approached from the viewpoint of the speaker-listener's face-threatening level, but from the view of the value of the requested information. Although the correct answer does not seem to consider the speaker’s face, it plays a sufficient role if minimum value to the required information in each question is provided. In this way, politeness can be recognized as a useful device for people from different cultural backgrounds beyond only the problem of courtesy.

Abstract

Politeness is a linguistic strategy used to assign value to a hearer by mitigating the face-threatening acts that a speaker commits to the hearer or lowering the self value of the speaker. Using positive and negative politeness are significant strategies to alleviate face-threatening acts, but are not being applied universally throughout all languages. Maintaining the face of the hearer reflects the individualism and egalitarianism that is aligned with a Western view, so it can be challenging to apply that view to some Eastern languages possessing honorific expressions. This is because communication functions not only to exchange information between individuals, but also serves the important role of complying with the order and the roles assigned to each individual in a society. Therefore, certain utterances may be decoded differently according to one's cultural background, or to the extent to which they may offend the hearer. Politeness as a value transaction overcomes the limits of the concept of politeness of face. The most coherent answer to questions in TOEIC's indirect utterance type is not approached from the viewpoint of the speaker-listener's face-threatening level, but from the view of the value of the requested information. Although the correct answer does not seem to consider the speaker’s face, it plays a sufficient role if minimum value to the required information in each question is provided. In this way, politeness can be recognized as a useful device for people from different cultural backgrounds beyond only the problem of courtesy.

참고문헌 (16)

  1. 안성조, "법학에서의 인간상과 팃포탯", 인간연구, (28), pp.97~126 (2015), 인간학연구소
  2. 조준학, "영어와 국어의 honorifics 비교서설", 영어영문학, 72, pp.325~340 (1979)
  3. 조준학, "화용론과 공손의 규칙", 어학연구, 16(1), pp.1~11 (1980)
  4. 조준학, "공손의 조건", 영어영문학, 32(2), pp.297~316 (1986)
  5. Brown, P., "Politeness: some universals in language usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
  6. Culpeper, J., "The Principle of (Im)politeness Reciprocity", Journal of Pragmatics, 175, pp.146~164 (2021)
  7. Goffman, E., "상호작용 의례 : 대면 행동에 관한 에세이" (2013), 아카넷
  8. Gretenkort, T., "The dynamics of politeness: An experimental account", Journal of Pragmatics, 185, pp.118~130 (2021)
  9. Gu, Y, "Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese", Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies, 14(2), pp.237~257 (1990)
  10. Ide, S, "Formal forms and discernment: two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness", Multilingua, 8(2, pp.3) (1989), 223~248
  11. Leech, G. N, "Principles of pragmatics" (1983), Longman
  12. Leech, G. N, "The pragmatics of politeness" (2014), Oxford University Press
  13. Yamamoto, S., "How did altruism and reciprocity evolve in humans?:Perspectives from experiments on chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)", Interaction Studies, 10(2), pp.150~182 (2009)
  14. Dunbar, R, "Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language" (1996), Harvard University Press
  15. Goffman, E, "Interaction ritual : essays on face-to-face behavior" (1967), Doubleday
  16. Ide, S, "Japanese Sociolinguistics: Politeness and Women's Language", Lingua, 57(2-4), pp.357~385 (1982)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (17건)