As a way of establishing a general framework of the development of politeness research, I will give an overview of different theories: the first being the conversationalist maxim view, including the work of Grice, Lakoff and Leech; and the second being the face- saving view of politeness, including Brown and Levinson's model. Then, I will investigate how politeness is realised in German and English. For this purpose, I will firstly consider cultural specificities that determine linguistic politeness, examining dimensions of cross- cultural difference as proposed by Juliane House and critically evaluate these dimensions. Secondly, I will look at how politeness is reflected in the realisation of the speech act of request, drawing on results from a contrastive study on politeness markers by Juliane House and Gabriele Kasper. These will subsequently be compared to findings gained in other empirical works. Following the critical evaluation, I will also take a closer look at the significant role of modal particles in the modification of requests in order to account for some of the prevalent linguistic choices observed in the contrastive study. Finally, the paper ends with a summarising conclusion.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical framework of linguistic politeness
2.1 The conversational-maxim view of politeness
2.1.1 Grice's Cooperative Principle
2.1.2 Lakoff's Rules of Politeness
2.1.3 Leech's Politeness Principle
2.2 The face-saving view of politeness
2.2.1 Brown and Levinson’s Theory of Politeness
3. Contrasting linguistic politeness in German and English
3.1. Dimensions of cross-cultural differences in German and English
3.1.1 Critical evaluation
3.2. Contrasting speech act realisation: Requests in German and English
3.2.1 Politeness markers in German and English
3.2.2. Critical evaluation
3.2.3. The role of modal particles
4. Conclusion
5. References
Research Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this thesis is to critically evaluate linguistic politeness research within German and English speech communities, specifically investigating how culture-specific linguistic strategies influence the perception of politeness and contribute to cross-cultural miscommunication. By analyzing theoretical frameworks and empirical contrastive studies, the work explores whether observed differences in communicative behavior indicate inherent levels of politeness or reflect divergent sociopragmatic norms.
- Theoretical foundations of linguistic politeness (conversational-maxim and face-saving views).
- Dimensions of cross-cultural difference between German and English speakers.
- Contrastive analysis of the speech act of "requesting" and the use of politeness markers.
- The pragmatic function and role of German modal particles in mitigating requestive force.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2.3 The role of modal particles
Looking at the findings of House and Kasper's study, certain tendencies and speaker preferences are particularly prominent, such as the choice of higher directness levels and the far higher application of downtoners by Germans in comparison to English subjects. These differences are due to linguistic constraints or specificities; thus, the range of modality markers available differs across languages. One language-specific feature that will be investigated here, in order to try to provide an explanation for the above differences, is the modal particle.
Weydt (1963) introduced the German term “Abtönungspartikel” (literally translatable as downtoning particle; however, I will use the term modal particles here) referring to particles such as aber, allerdings, auch, bloß, denn, doch, eben, eigentlich, halt, ja, mal, nur, schon, vielleicht or wohl. Besides their general function to enhance authentic communication, primarily in spoken language, it serves as a means for the speaker to modify his utterance and influence his addressee. Moreover, “interpersonal relationships and particular expectations, which in other speech communities may be fulfilled by [different linguistic devices] are largely signalled in German by means of these particles” (qtd. In Barron 2003: 150).
As Bublitz (1987), Abraham (1991), and Nehls (1989) have claimed, English does not posses a comparable set of modal particles. Therefore, the same functions have to be fulfilled by syntactic means (auxiliary verbs, tag questions); prosodic devices (intonation, stress); or lexical means (adverbs, conjunctions) (see Nehls 1989: 284f.). In contrast to English and other Germanic and Romance languages, German is often referred to as a particle-language (Partikelsprache) with modal particles representing a still growing word class, even today. Moreover, while in English there is no distinction between particles and adverbs, in German particles are considered a separate word class and, unlike interjections or discourse particles like English oh, well, yes, okay, “they are intonationally integrated and occur inside sentence boundaries where their occurrence is restricted to particular syntactic positions” (Fischer 2007: 5).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter highlights the complexity of politeness research and defines the paper's goal to investigate the cultural factors leading to cross-cultural misunderstandings in German and English communication.
2. Theoretical framework of linguistic politeness: This section provides an overview of foundational theories in pragmatics, including the conversational-maxim view (Grice, Lakoff, Leech) and the face-saving view (Brown and Levinson).
3. Contrasting linguistic politeness in German and English: This chapter critically analyzes dimensions of cross-cultural difference and examines the speech act of requesting, specifically focusing on the influence of politeness markers and the role of modal particles in German.
4. Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the research findings, confirming that while cultural preferences influence linguistic choices, politeness remains a complex, context-dependent phenomenon that cannot be reduced to simple dichotomies.
5. References: A comprehensive list of cited academic works used to support the analysis of linguistic politeness and cross-cultural communication.
Keywords
Politeness research, Intercultural communication, German, English, Speech acts, Requests, Pragmatics, Modal particles, Cross-cultural difference, Face-saving theory, Cooperative principle, Sociolinguistics, Linguistic markers, Pragmatic transfer, Stereotypes.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this thesis?
The thesis examines the differences in how politeness is realized and interpreted in German and English, aiming to understand why certain communicative styles are perceived as polite or impolite across these cultures.
What are the central thematic fields?
The core themes include pragmatics, intercultural communication, the comparative analysis of speech acts (specifically requests), and the impact of culture-specific linguistic features on interpersonal interaction.
What is the primary objective of the study?
The goal is to provide a critical evaluation of existing politeness research and to determine if stereotypes about German "directness" and English "indirectness" are grounded in empirical usage or cultural perception.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author employs a qualitative contrastive analysis, reviewing foundational linguistic theories alongside empirical studies (such as role-play data) to evaluate how speakers from both cultures perform requests.
What does the main part cover?
The main section investigates theoretical frameworks like Brown and Levinson’s face-saving theory, discusses Juliane House’s dimensions of cross-cultural difference, and analyzes the role of modal particles in German request realization.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include linguistic politeness, pragmatics, speech act realization, cross-cultural miscommunication, and modal particles.
How do modal particles affect request realization?
In German, modal particles (like "mal" or "doch") serve to mitigate the force of an utterance, effectively transforming a potentially blunt imperative into a polite request, a feature for which English lacks a direct equivalent.
Why is the concept of "face" important in this research?
Brown and Levinson's notion of "face" (positive and negative) is used to explain why speakers employ certain politeness strategies to avoid the "face-threatening" nature of requests and maintain social equilibrium.
- Quote paper
- Friederike Brons (Author), 2011, A critical evaluation of Politeness research in English and German, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/187311
