Formal forms and discernment: two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness

Abstract

Levinson (1978, 1987) proposed principles of language usage according to politeness, which they claim to be universal. Their principles are supported by evidence from three languages of different origins. However, t he universality of the principles is questionable from the perspective of languages with honorifics, in particular Japanese. Their framework neglects two aspects of language and usage which are distinctly relevant to linguistic politeness in Japanese. The neglected linguistic aspect is the choice of 'formal linguistic forms' among varieties with different degrees of formality. The neglected aspect of usage is 'discernment': the Speaker's use of polite expressions according t o social conventions rat her than interactional strategy. This paper Claims that a comprehensive framework for universals of linguistic politeness will have to incorporate these aspects and shows how Brown and Levinson's framework puts these aspects outside of their scope. Finally, the justification of the comprehensive framework is discussed in terms of Weber's typology of actions and Habermas' theory of communicative action. Multilingua

Re-examining politeness, face and the Japanese language

“…The idea of a hierarchical ordering of the operating principles is unfortunately played down in this and the subsequent 1989 study; both Hill et al (1986) and Ide (1989) prefer to elaborate on the Discernment/Volition continuum as a criterion for linguistic typology 6 . They note therefore "the relative prominence of Discernment over Volition in the polite use of language by speakers of Japanese.…”

“…Matsumoto (1993) presents further examples from Japanese and discusses the inadequacy of a Gricean framework for an account of Japanese politeness. Ide (1989) finds B&L's view of 'politeness as diplomatic behaviour' inadequate for a truly universal definition of politeness; she proposes that, in addition to the notion of 'intentional behaviour' oriented to facilitate favourable acceptance of one's message (or acts of 'Volition', major concern of B&L) a definition of politeness should include the notion of 'conformity' to the "expected and/or prescribed norms of speech appropriate to the contextual situation in individual speech communities " (1989:225); in other words, a notion of politeness as 'etiquette', informed by the principle of 'Discernment' or wakimae (a notion subsumed under Fraser's (1990:21) social-norm based account of Politeness). This is "the choice of linguistic form or expression in which the distinction between the ranks or the roles of the speaker, the referent and the addressee are systematically encoded " (1989:230), hence linguistic behaviour oriented towards roles and situations, rather than face wants (1989:231).…”

“…A remarkable amount of modal information in a Japanese utterance is conveyed by suffixes clustered on the (sentence final) predicates; among these, 'style markers' are responsible for the indexing of speech levels; these are therefore labelled 'honorifics of the addressee' and their use is constrained by the power-and distance-relationship between the speaker and the hearer, or their vertical and horizontal distance 19 On the grounds that these forms constitute a grammatically and socio-pragmatically obligatory choice and that they are limited in number (Ide 1989:227), Ide's paradigm assigned these forms to a different category to that of verbal strategies (recall the scheme at p. 6). However, a look at the mechanism by which either 'formal forms' or 'verbal strategies' 'mean' politeness, reveals that they remarkably similar in nature.…”

“…On the contrary, it has been shown that positive politeness is independent from potential threats (and it is also used for self-enhancement) and that it is critically necessary and routinely employed in non-intimate behaviour. Positive politeness is not necessarily linked to intimacy; in Japanese, comity appears more as solicitousness and with the social goal of promoting internal bounding (Ide 1989). Tactics that allow speakers to show appreciation for others and claim it for self are pervasively employed to construe stances which are instrumental to smooth interactional functioning, also in nonsymmetrical relationships (contrary to Scollon and Scollon 1983).…”

On historical Chinese apology and its strategic application

“…The notion that the use of honorifics/RF is basically nonstrategic is rooted in the concept of "discernment", elaborated by Hill et al (1986), Ide (1989), Matsumoto (1989) and others, as an East Asian challenge to Levinson's (1987 [1978]) universalistic framework. The "discernment" aspect means that the use of polite discourse formulae/registers is not optional but socio-pragmatically obligatory (Ide 1989: 231).…”