Criticism of the Politeness Theory

Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness has been criticized as not being universally valid, by linguists working with East-Asian languages, including Japanese. Matsumoto and Ide claim that Brown and Levinson assume the speaker's volitional use of language, which allows the speaker's creative use of face-maintaining strategies toward the addressee [11, 16]. In East Asian cultures like Japan, politeness is achieved not so much on the basis of volition as on discernment (wakimae, finding one's place), or prescribed social norms. Wakimae is oriented towards the need for acknowledgment of the positions or roles of all the participants as well as adherence to formality norms appropriate to the particular situation.

Japanese is perhaps the most widely known example of a language that encodes politeness at its very core. Japanese has two main levels of politeness, one for intimate acquaintances, family and friends, and one for other groups, and verb morphology reflects these levels. Besides that, some verbs have special hyper-polite suppletive forms. This happens also with some nouns and interrogative pronouns. Japanese also employs different personal pronouns for each person according to gender, age, rank, degree of acquaintance, and other cultural factors.

G. Leech’s Politeness Maxims

According to Geoffrey Leech, there is a politeness principle with conversational maxims similar to those formulated by Paul Grice. He lists six maxims: tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement, and sympathy. The first and second form a pair, as do the third and the fourth. These maxims vary from culture to culture: what may be considered polite in one culture may be strange or downright rude in another.

The Tact Maxim

The Tact maxim states: 'Minimize the expression of beliefs which imply cost to other; maximize the expression of beliefs which imply benefit to other.' The first part of this maxim fits in with Brown and Levinson's negative politeness strategy of minimizing the imposition, and the second part reflects the positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearer's interests, wants, and needs:

Could I interrupt you for a second?

If I could just clarify this then.

The Generosity Maxim

Leech's Generosity maxim states: 'Minimize the expression of benefit to self; maximize the expression of cost to self.' Unlike the tact maxim, the maxim of generosity focuses on the speaker, and says that others should be put first instead of the self:

You relax and let me do the dishes.

You must come and have dinner with us.

The Approbation Maxim

The Approbation maxim states: 'Minimize the expression of beliefs which express dispraise of other; maximize the expression of beliefs which express approval of other.' It is preferred to praise others and if this is impossible, to sidestep the issue, to give some sort of minimal response (possibly through the use of euphemisms), or to remain silent. The first part of the maxim avoids disagreement; the second part intends to make other people feel good by showing solidarity:

I heard you singing at the karaoke last night. It was, um... different.

John, I know you're a genius - would you know how to solve this math problem here?

The Modesty Maxim

The Modesty maxim states: 'Minimize the expression of praise of self; maximize the expression of dispraise of self':

Oh, I'm so stupid - I didn't make a note of our lecture! Did you?

The Agreement Maxim

The Agreement maxim runs as follows: 'Minimize the expression of disagreement between self and other; maximize the expression of agreement between self and other.' It is in line with Brown and Levinson's positive politeness strategies of 'seek agreement' and 'avoid disagreement,' to which they attach great importance. However, it is not being claimed that people totally avoid disagreement. It is simply observed that they are much more direct in expressing agreement, rather than disagreement:

A: I don't want my daughter to do this, I want her to do that.

B: Yes, but ma'am, I thought we resolved this already on your last visit.

The Sympathy Maxim

The Sympathy maxim states: 'Minimize antipathy between self and other; maximize sympathy between self and other.' This includes a small group of speech acts such as congratulation, commiseration, and expressing condolences - all of which is in accordance with Brown and Levinson's positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearer's interests, wants, and needs: I was sorry to hear about your father.

Tasks and Questions

1. Define politeness and its types. What techniques and linguistic devices to show politeness can you name?

2. What is the essence of Y. Matsumoto’s criticism of the politeness theory?

3. Characterize face threatening acts. Give examples.

4. How do P. Brown and S. Levinson show the available range of verbal politeness strategies to redress loss of face?

5. Analyze G. Leech’s politeness maxims. In what way are they similar to conversational maxims formulated by P. Grice?

6. What sociological factors should we take into consideration when deciding whether and how to use the various strategies in real life situations?

7. Do you agree with P. Brown and S. Levinson that positive and negative faces exist universally in human culture? Why? Prove your answer.