The Role of Confucian Scripts in Achieving Linguistic Politeness in Korean Requests
0
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Ever since Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) proposed their politeness formula, a wealth of criticism has been voiced regarding their politeness theory. They acknowledge the possibility of different cultural weight given to the power (P), distance (D), and degree of imposition variables (R) in the choice of polite linguistic forms. However, they are also criticized for under-analyzing generally R. A variety of cultural and contextual factors may influence the extent to which a face-threatening act (FTA) is rated as an imposition, which cannot be sufficiently captured within Brown and Levinson’s framework. This study highlights three important aspects of Korean requests in relation to linguistic politeness. First, Confucian cultural modes as a communication framework penetrate the discourse practices within institutional settings. In essence the functional aspects of Confucian cultural values play a more important role than linguistic forms in the negotiation of successful requests. Second, the functional use of culture- specific ‘discernment’ can also be used as a face redress mechanism, and allows speakers to control imposition and to make successful requests. Third, politeness should be understood from both culture-specific perspectives and linguistic indirectness. Cultural values play a more important role than linguistic forms in situations where the FTAs are very high.
Abstract
Ever since Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) proposed their politeness formula, a wealth of criticism has been voiced regarding their politeness theory. They acknowledge the possibility of different cultural weight given to the power (P), distance (D), and degree of imposition variables (R) in the choice of polite linguistic forms. However, they are also criticized for under-analyzing generally R. A variety of cultural and contextual factors may influence the extent to which a face-threatening act (FTA) is rated as an imposition, which cannot be sufficiently captured within Brown and Levinson’s framework. This study highlights three important aspects of Korean requests in relation to linguistic politeness. First, Confucian cultural modes as a communication framework penetrate the discourse practices within institutional settings. In essence the functional aspects of Confucian cultural values play a more important role than linguistic forms in the negotiation of successful requests. Second, the functional use of culture- specific ‘discernment’ can also be used as a face redress mechanism, and allows speakers to control imposition and to make successful requests. Third, politeness should be understood from both culture-specific perspectives and linguistic indirectness. Cultural values play a more important role than linguistic forms in situations where the FTAs are very high.
참고문헌 (42)
- Blum-Kulka, S, "Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different", Journal of Pragmatics, 11, pp.131~146 (1987)
- Blum-Kulka, S, "You don't Touch Lettuce with your Fingers", Journal of Pragmatics, 14, pp.259~288 (1990)
- Blum-Kulka, S, "The Metapragmatics of Politeness in Israeli Society, In Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory and Practice", pp.255~280 (1992), Mouton de Gruyter
- Bargiela, C. F, "Face, Communication and Social Interaction" (2009), Equinox Publishing Ltd
- Bargiela-C, F, "Politeness across Cultures" (2010), Palgrave Macmillan
- Brown, P, "Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena, In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction", pp.56~311 (1978), Cambridge University Press
- Brown, P, "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press.
- Byon, A, "The Role of Linguistic Indirectness and Honorifics in Achieving Linguistic Politeness in Korean Requests", Journal of Politeness Research, 2, pp.247~276 (2006)
- Cameron, D. E, "Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method" (1992), Routledge
- Eelen, G, "A Critique of Politeness Theories" (2001), St. Jerome Publishing
- Escandell-Vidal, V, "Towards a Cognitive Approach to Politeness", Language Sciences, 18, pp.629~650 (1996)
- Fukada, A, "Universal Politeness Theory: Application to the Use of Japanese Honorifics", Journal of Pragmatics, 36(11), pp.1991~2002 (2004)
- Fukushima, S, "Requests and Culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese" (2000), Peter Lang
- Goffman, E, "Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour" (1967), Doubleday
- Grice, P, "Logic and Conversation, In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts", pp.41~58 (1975), Academic Press
- Haugh, M, "The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative", Journal of Politeness Research, 3(1), pp.295~317 (2007)
- Heritage, J, "Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing Data, In Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice", pp.222~246 (1997), Sage Publications
- Hong, J-O, "A Discourse Approach to Korean Politeness: Towards a Culture- specific Confucian Framework", 박사, pp.2009
- 홍진옥, "Beyond Politeness: A Spoken Discourse Approach to Korean Address Reference Terms", 영어어문교육, 15(2), pp.93~119 (2009), 한국영어어문교육학회
- Hong, J-O, "A Discourse Approach to Korean Request Strategies: Towards a Culture-specific Confucian Framework", Proceedings of the 12th International Pragmatics Conference, University of Manchester, UK (2011)
- Ide, S, "Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Linguistic Politeness", Multilingua, 8, pp.223~248 (1989)
- Kang, A, "Talk, Interaction, and Cultural Persistence: Constituting Korean American Discourse in a Meeting Context", 박사, pp.2000
- Koh, I. S, "A Cross Cultural Study of Requests in English and Korean dissertation", 박사, pp.1995
- Lee, J. B, "On the Strategic Usage of Korean Honorifics", Language Study, 35(1) (1999), Seoul National University, Language Research Center
- Leech, G, "Principles of Pragmatics" (1983), Longman
- Locher, M. A, "Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication" (2004), Mouton de Gruyter
- Locher, M. A, "Relational Work, Politeness and Identity Construction, In Handbooks of Interpersonal Communication", pp.509~540 (2008), Mouton de Gruyter
- Locher, M, "Politeness Theory and Relational Work", Journal of Politeness Research, 1, pp.9~33 (2005)
- Matsumoto, Y, "Re-examination of the Universality of Face: Politeness in Japanese", Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), pp.403~426 (1988)
- Mills, S, "Gender and Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Milroy, L, "Observing and Analyzing Natural Language" (1987), Blackwell
- Okamura, A, "Do English Speakers Address Their Japanese Colleagues by Their First Name, While Talking in English in Japan", ~ (2003)
- Pan, Y, "Politeness in Chinese Face-to-Face Interaction" (2000), Ablex Publishing Corporation
- Pizziconi, B, "Re-examination, Face and the Japanese Language", Journal of Pragmatics, 35, pp.1471~1506 (2003)
- Reiter, M-R, "Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Contrastive Study of Request and Apology" (2000), John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Schank, R. C, "Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human knowledge Structures" (1977), Erlbaum Associates
- Searle, J, "Speech Acts" (1969), Cambridge University Press
- Suh, C. S, "A Study of Deferential Treatment: Current System of Deferential Treatment and Problem" (1984), Hanshin Publishing Co
- ten Have, P, "Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide" (1999), Sage Publications
- Terkourafi, M, "Beyond the Micro-level in Politeness Research", Journal of Politeness Research, 1(2), pp.237~262 (2005)
- Watts, R. J, "Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Yum, J. O, "Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspective, In Korean Philosophy and Communication" (1988), Academic Press