Applying Brown and Levinson’s model to investigate the differences in the use of politeness strategies between spoken Saudi and British English
Main Article Content
Abstract
The aim of the study was to apply Brown and Levinson’s model of politeness to investigate the differences in the female use of politeness strategies between spoken Saudi and British English. The study applied an observation approach and consisted of 103 female participants which were divided into 2 groups. The 1st group comprised of 53 native speakers of Saudi Arabia and the other one consisted of 50 British English females. The researcher met the participants to explain that they would be given 15 real-life situations and they had to carefully listen to each one of them and respond. These situations were designed by the researcher according to Brown and Levinson’s (1987) contextual determinants. The researcher noted their response to every situation on a pre-designed evaluation sheet. The data collected was quantitatively analyzed using SPSS program to test the significant differences between Saudi and British groups in the types of politeness strategies and the realization of the contextual determinants based on the frequencies. The findings of the study reflected significant inter-group differences in the realization of some of the contextual determinants but power did not have an influence on the speakers’ performance of polite offers in both the cultures, and for social distance the result showed significant influence on the British use of politeness strategies. In conclusion, the study findings supported Brown and Levinson (1987) politeness theory in terms of cross-cultural similarities and differences.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
How to Cite
References
Adel, S. M. R., Davoudi, M., & Ramezanzadeh, A. (2016). A qualitative study of politeness strategies used by Iranian EFL learners in a class blog. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 4(1), 47-62.
Agbaglo, E.2017. Sections of English Research Articles.
Alkhateeb, I. 2015. Examining the universality of Brown and Levinsons’ Politeness model In the Arabic Gulf Context. Journal: Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 5(3).
Atawneh, A., & Sridhar, S. N. (1993). Arabic‐English bilinguals and the directive speech act. World Englishes, 12(3), 279-297.
Aziz, E. A. (2003). Theorizing linguistic politeness in Indonesian society. Linguistik Indonesia, 21(2), 167-187.
Dowlatabadi, H., Mehri, E., & Tajabadi, A. (2014). Politeness Strategies in Conversation Exchange: The Case of Council for Dispute Settlement in Iran. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 411-419.
Eelen, G. (2014). A Critique of Politeness Theory: Volume 1 (Vol. 1). Routledge.
Eshreteh, M. K. (2014). A cross-cultural socio-pragmatic study of invitations in Palestinian Arabic and American English.
Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2008). Politeness in Mexico and the United States: A contrastive study of the realization and perception of refusals (Vol. 171). John Benjamins Publishing.
Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of pragmatics, 14(2), 219-236.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation in Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, a cura di P. Cole.
Gunarwan, A. (1994). Kesantunan negatif di kalangan dwibahasawan Indonesia-Jawa di Jakarta: Kajian sosiopragmatik. Di dalam Bambang Kaswanti Purwo (Editor). PELLBA, 7.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness.
Kasper, G, (1998). Interlanguage pragmatics. Pp. 183-208 in learning second and foreign languages, edited by H. Byrnes. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
Keenan, E O. (1976). The universality of conversational postulates. Language in Society 5:67-80
Khouja, D. A. (2015). The pragmatics of requests in Lebanese Arabic and English in the discourse of Lebanese students (Doctoral dissertation).
Kiyama, S., Tamaoka, K., & Takiura, M. (2012). Applicability of Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory to a non-western culture: Evidence from Japanese facework behaviors. SAGE Open, 2(4), 2158244012470116.
Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. In ninth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 8: 292-305. 292J305. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Leech, G. (2016). Principles of pragmatics. Routledge.
Locher, M. A. (2004). Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese. Journal of pragmatics, 12(4), 403-426.
Nwoye, O. G. (1992). Linguistic politeness and socio-cultural variations of the notion of face. Journal of pragmatics, 18(4), 309-328.
O'driscoll, J. (1996). About face: A defence and elaboration of universal dualism. Journal of pragmatics, 25(1), 1-32.
Olshtain, E., Weinbach, L., Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics.
Redmond, M. V. (2015). Face and politeness theories.
Shahrokhi, M., & Bidabadi, F. S. (2013). An overview of politeness theories: Current status, future orientations. American Journal of Linguistics, 2(2), 17-27.
Susanti, R., Sumarlam, S., Djatmika, D., & Rohmadi, M. (2020). Study of Politeness Strategy of Speech Act Caring Utterances: Discourse Completion Test (DCT) Approach. Latin American Utopia and Praxis: International Journal of Ibero-American Philosophy and Social Theory, 25 (1), 282-290.
Watts, R. J., Ide, S., & Ehlich, K. (2005). Politeness in language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Yaqubi, M., Saeed, K. M., & Khaksari, M. (2016). Conversational maxim view of politeness: focus on politeness implicatures raised in performing Persian offers and invitations. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(1), 52-58.