The bases of (im)politeness evaluations: Culture, the moral order and the East–West debate
Issue: Vol 1 No. 1 (2016)
Journal: East Asian Pragmatics
Subject Areas:
Abstract:
Evaluation is an important aspect of (im)politeness, and this article explores it from an interdisciplinary perspective. It starts by considering the East–West debate in politeness theory and argues that both emic and etic approaches to research can contribute usefully to the deliberations. It then maintains that, if we are to understand the impact of culture on people’s (im)politeness evaluations, we need to unpack the concept more thoroughly. It proposes that useful insights can be obtained from Haidt’s (e.g. Haidt & Kesebir, 2010) work on moral foundations and Schwartz’s (e.g. Schwartz et al., 2012) work on basic values. The article ends by revisiting the East–West debate, discussing the potential impact of other factors such as beliefs and ideologies, and noting the ongoing uncertainties over levels and links between the various concepts explored. It urges pragmaticists and psychologists to engage more fully with each other to help address these challenges.
Author: Helen Spencer-Oatey, Dániel Z. Kádár
References :
ACTFL (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages). (nd). World readiness standards for learning languages.Available at http://www.actfl.org/publications/all/world-readiness-standards-learning-languages [Accessed 14 February 2016]
Apte, M. (1994). Language in sociocultural context. In R. E. Asher (Ed.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics (Vol.4, pp. 2000–2010). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Bellah, R. N. (1991). Beyond belief: Essays on religion in a post-traditionalist world. California: University of California Press.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Boer, D., & Fischer, R. (2013). How and when do personal values guide our attitudes and sociality? Explaining cross-cultural variability in attitude-value linkages. Psychological Bulletin, 139(5), 1113–1147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031347
Bond, M. H., Leung, K., Au, A., Tong, K.-K., Reimel De Carrasquel, S., Murakami, F., … Stetovska, I. (2004). Culture-level dimensions of social axioms and their correlates across 41 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(5), 548–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022104268388
Bond, M. H., Žegarac, V., & Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Culture as an explanatory variable: Problems and possibilities. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures (pp. 47–71). London: Continuum.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Originally published as Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomenon. In Esther Goody (Ed.), Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978.
Chao, G. T., & Moon, H. (2005). The cultural mosaic: A metatheory for understanding the complexity of culture. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1128–1140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1128
Chen, R., He, L., & Hu, C. (2013). Chinese requests: In comparison to American and Japanese requests and with reference to the “East-West divide”. Journal of Pragmatics, 55(Sep), 140–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.012
Cialdini, R. B. (2012). The focus theory of normative conduct. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 295–312). London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n41
Eelen, G. (2001). A critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St Jerome.
Fischer, R., & Schwartz, S. H. (2011). Whence differences in value priorities?: Individual, cultural, or artifactual sources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(7), 1127–1144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381429
Fiske, A. P. (2002). Using individualism and collectivism to compare cultures – A critique of the validity and measurement of the constructs: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 78–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.78
Fukada, A., & Asato, N. (2004). Universal politeness theory: Application to the use of Japanese honorifics. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(11), 1991–2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.11.006
Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90082-O
Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0034-z
Haidt, J., & Kesebir, S. (2010). Morality. In S. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., pp. 797–852). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy002022
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.
Hall, J. K. (2002). Teaching and researching language and culture. London: Longman.
Harris, M. (1976). History and significance of the emic/etic distinction. Annual Review of Anthropology, 5, 329–350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.05.100176.001553
Harris, M. (2001). Cultural materialism: The struggle for a science of culture (updated ed.). Walnut Creek: AltaMera Press.
Haugh, M. (2005). The importance of ‘place’ in Japanese politeness: Implications for cross-cultural and intercultural analyses. Intercultural Pragmatics, 2(1), 41–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iprg.2005.2.1.41
Haugh, M. (2007). Emic conceptualisations of (im)politeness and face in Japanese: Implications for the discursive negotiation of second language learner identities. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 657–680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.005
Haugh, M. (2012). Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research, 8, 111–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2012-0007
Haugh, M. (2013). Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 52–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003
Hills, M. D. (2002). Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck’s Values Orientation Theory. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 4(4). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1040
Hinze, C. G. (2007). Looking into ‘face’: The importance of Chinese mian and lian as emic categories. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini & M. Gotti (Eds.), Asian Business Discourses (pp. 169–210). Berne: Peter Lang.
Hinze, C. G. (2012). Chinese politeness is not about ‘face’: Evidence from the business world. Journal of Politeness Research, 8, 11–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2012.002
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Holmes, J., Marra, M., & Vine, B. (2011). Leadership, discourse, and ethnicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730759.001.0001
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. London: Sage.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: Two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8(2/3), 223–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.223
Intachakra, S. (2012). Politeness motivated by the ‘heart’ and ‘binary rationality’ in Thai culture. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 619–635. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.07.016
Kádár, D. Z. (2013). Relational rituals and communication: Ritual interaction in groups. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230393059
Kádár, D. Z., & De La Cruz, M. (In Press). Rituals of outspokenness and verbal conflict. Pragmatics and Society, 6(1).
Kádár, D. Z., & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717
Kádár, D. Z., & Márquez-Reiter, R. (2015). (Im)politeness and (im)morality: Insights from intervention. Journal of Politeness Research, 11(2), 239–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0010
Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. New York: Harper & Row.
Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 292–305). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East–West divide? Journal of Politeness Research, 3(2), 167–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/PR.2007.009
Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
Leung, K., Bond, M. H., Reimel de Carrasquel, S., Munoz, C., Hernandez, M., Murakami, F., … Singelis, T. M. (2002). Social axioms: The search for universal dimensions of general beliefs about how the world functions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(3), 286–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033003005
Madsen, R. (1984). Morality and power in a Chinese village. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 451–486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90025-6
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 403–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3
Matsumoto, Y. (1989). Politeness and conversational universals – observations from Japanese. Multilingua, 8(2/3), 207–221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.207
Miller, J. G. (2002). Bringing culture to basic psychology theory – Beyond individualism and collectivism: Comment on Oyserman et al. (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 97–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.97
Moran, P. R. (2001). Teaching culture: Perspectives in practice. Boston: Heinle.
Nwoye, O. G. (1992). Linguistic politeness and socio-cultural variations of the notion of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 309–328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90092-P
O’Driscoll, J. (1996). About face: A defence and elaboration of universal dualism. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(1), 1–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00069-X
Olshtain, E. (1989). Apologies across languages. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies (pp. 155–173). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3
Pan, Y. (2000). Politeness in Chinese face-to-face interaction. Stamford, CT: Ablex.
Pan, Y., & Kádár, D. Z. (2011). Politeness in historical and contemporary Chinese. London: Bloomsbury.
Pike, K. L. (1967). Language in relation to a unified theory of the structures of human behavior (2nd ed.). The Hague: Mouton. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14786-000
Pizziconi, B. (2003). Re-examining politeness, face and the Japanese language. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10–11), 1471–1506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00200-X
Pizziconi, B. (2011). Honorifics: The cultural specificity of a universal mechanism in Japanese. In D. Z. Kádár & S. Mills (Eds.), Politeness in East Asia (pp. 45–71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511977886.005
Ran, Y., & Kádár, D. Z. (forthcoming). Intervention and morality in Chinese. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Ruhi, Ś., & Kádár, D. Z. (2011). ‘Face’ across historical cultures: A comparative study of Turkish and Chinese. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 11(2), 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jhp.12.1-2.02ruh
Saroglou, V. (2011). Believing,bonding, behaving, and belonging: The big four religious dimensions and cultural variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(8), 1320–1340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022111412267
Saucier, G., Kenner, J., Iurino, K., Malham, P. B., Chen, Z., Thalmayer, A. G., … Altschul, C. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in a global “survey of world views”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(1), 53–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022114551791
Schmidt, R. W. (1980). Review of E. N. Goody (Ed.) (1978) “Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction”. Cambridge Papers in Social Anthropology 8. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. RELC Journal 12(2), 100–114.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). San Diego: Academic Press.
Schwartz, S. H. (2007). Universalism values and the inclusiveness of our moral universe. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(6), 711–728. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022107308992
Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032003002
Schwartz, S. H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Davidov, E., Fischer, R., Beierlein, C., … Konty, M. (2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 663–688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029393
Spencer-Oatey, H. (1997). Unequal relationships in high and low power distance societies. A comparative study of tutor-student role relations in Britain and China. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(3), 284–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022197283005
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Face, (im)politeness and rapport. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory (pp. 11–47). London: Continuum.
Spencer-Oatey, H., & Jiang, W. (2003). Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic findings: Moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs). Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1633–1650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00025-0
Sugiyama Lebra, T. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu, HI: The University Press of Hawaii.
Tarakeshwar, N., Stanton, J., & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Religion. An overlooked dimension in cross-cultural psychology. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(4), 377–394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022103034004001
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Usami, M. (2002). Discourse Politeness in Japanese Conversation. Some Implications for a Universal Theory of Politeness. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.
Watts, R. J. (1989). Relevance and relational work: Linguistic politeness as politic behavior. Multilingua, 8(2/3), 131–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.131
Willis, J. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Xing, J. (2002). Relational management in British–Chinese business interactions (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Luton.
Yin, R. K. (2015). Qualitative research from start to finish (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Žegarac, V. (2007). A cognitive pragmatic perspective on communication and culture. In H. Kotthoff & H. Spencer-Oatey (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural communication (pp. 31–53). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.