Power, Solidarity and (Im)politeness

Culture, Norms, and the Assessment of Communication Contexts: Multidisciplinary Perspectives

“…Within cross-cultural and intercultural pragmatic research, participants’ perceptions of relationships are regarded as particularly important, especially their role and category relations in terms of their relative power status (equal/unequal; typically referred to as P in pragmatics) and their degree of distance/closeness (typically referred to as D in pragmatics; for a review of the impact of P and D variables on communication behavior, see Spencer-Oatey & Žegarac, 2017). Despite this, there has been surprisingly little research into cultural differences in these areas, with very little unpacking of people’s conceptions of the power, distance, and behavioral rights and obligations of given role relationships, either within or across social groups.…”

Language Expression and Cognitive Dissonance of Indonesian Millennials in Delivering Ironical Tweets

“…The second type is called a rhetorical question, a statement which the speakers are asking questions to the opposites which do not need an answer [7]. In rhetorical question, the questions that are asked by the speakers to the opposites implied the humorous assertions or critical assertions of a topic [11].…”

“…Users The first type of language is called as jocularity [7]. A female user states that the addressee is her "furniture husband" (datum 5).…”

“…An individual who has more power tend to use utterances included in impoliteness [6]. The more individuals have power in a social context, the more impolite their utterances are [7] Then in this research, the analysis consists of the language expressions that are more used by the males and females, whether males or females that are more expressive in terms to use language expressions to get attention from their groups. There is not enough explanation about the language expressions which is used by young males and females in their online communication with others, for example, on Twitter.…”

The year’s work in stylistics 2017

“…The structure of this weighty volume in three very general parts – ‘Foundations’, ‘Developments’ and ‘(Im)politeness in Specific Contexts’ – does not do much to clear the jungle. Nonetheless, scholars may find it useful to have such a comprehensive volume bringing together everything from the intersection of (im)politeness with power and solidarity (Spencer-Oatey and Žegarac, 2017), gender (Chalupnik et al, 2017), and its use in a wide range of contexts, the most relevant to stylisticians being fiction (McIntyre and Bousfield, 2017), politics (Tracy, 2017) and digital media (Graham and Hardaker, 2017). Chapters which summarise contemporary methods and experimental approaches (Holtgraves and Bonnefon, 2017; Jucker and Staley, 2017) place this volume at the cutting edge of the subject.…”