Polite appearances: How non-manual features convey politeness in British Sign Language

Abstract

This paper explores how non-manual features are key to conveying linguistic politeness in British Sign Language (BSL). Data were collected through five semi-structured interviews incorporating the elicitation of two speech acts commonly associated with research on linguistic politeness: requests and apologies. The data from this exploratory study suggest that nonmanual features (including specific mouth gestures and movements of the head and upper body) are more crucial for linguistic politeness than manual signs. The data indicate a degree of commonality between the features used for politeness in BSL and those previously identified in American Sign Language (Roush 1999;Hoza 2001Hoza , 2007. While non-manual features convey both linguistic and paralinguistic meaning in signed language (Sandler and Lillo-Martin 2006), their use in politeness highlights the complexity of the interaction between these two functions and illuminates an aspect of politeness frequently overlooked in much research: the use of intonation. Analysis of the use of nonmanual features for politeness also problematizes the categorization of politeness strategies using existing frameworks developed on spoken languages, such as the internal modifications outlined by Blum-Kulka et al. (1989).

Intercultural (Im)politeness

“…This supported triangulation of the data, both within and between the two participant groupings. Coding categorisations were either theory-or data-driven (Braun and Clark 2006) with some theory-driven codes based on earlier research on politeness features in BSL (Mapson 2014a). Initial coding included in vivo terms, those generated by participants (Charmaz 2006), where possible.…”

“…There can be a tendency for studies to reinforce inaccurate cultural stereotypes (Tanaka et al 2008), failing to recognise subtle cultural differences (Aoki 2010) and intra-cultural variation (Hernandez-Flores 1999). This is evident in the association of a lack of indirectness with deaf culture in the USA (Mindess 2006), which is challenged by other studies that evidence how indirectness is conveyed through non-manual markers involving facial expression and the upper body (Ferreira Brito 1995, Roush 2007, Hoza 2007, George 2011, Mapson 2014a.…”

“…Like other signed languages it uses a visual and spatial modality which allows it to be produced very differently to spoken language, by exploiting the space in front of the torso and using the arms, hands, face and upper body. This enables multiple concepts to be produced simultaneously (Sutton-Spence and Woll 1999), with the non-manual components of signed language playing a particularly important role in relation to linguistic im/politeness (Hoza 2007, Roush 2007, George 2011, Mapson 2014a.…”

Text and Context: Exploring Values of Character in "Al-Qiro'ah Al-Rosyidah" Text

“…Ghana, polite behavior is more identified with greetings, use of titles and honorifics, use of the words "please" and "thank you," use of a soft voice, and be quiet if necessary. (Thompson & Anderson, 2019) Slightly different from Ghanaians, parents in Japan usually give first HERITAGE OF NUSANTARA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS LITERATURE AND HERITAGE 253 assignments to children under five years of age to exercise courage, independence, and responsibility (Setiawati, 2020) because children must do the first task without help from their parents. Bugis culture, such as "Siri," can also be applied, teaching students to be individuals with high self-esteem.…”

Untitled

“…(Santoso et al, 2020b;Prasetiyo et al, 2020) Ghana, polite behavior is more identified with greetings, use of titles and honorifics, use of the words "please" and "thank you," use of a soft voice, and be quiet if necessary. (Thompson & Anderson, 2019) Slightly different from Ghanaians, parents in Japan usually give first HERITAGE OF NUSANTARA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS LITERATURE AND HERITAGE 253 assignments to children under five years of age to exercise courage, independence, and responsibility (Setiawati, 2020) because children must do the first task without help from their parents. Rokhman et al (2014) define character education as a process of accumulating knowledge and wisdom to create a good life for humans.…”