10 Doing FTAs in conversation会话中的威胁面子行为

10.1 The notion of face
Face consists of two related aspects: negative face and positive face.
10.1 The notion of face
negative face消极面子: the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to noninterference, i.e. to the freedom of action and freedom from imposition
10.1 The notion of face
face: the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself or herself, or the emotional and social sense of self that everyone has and expects everyone else to recognize.
10.1 The notion of face
positive face积极面子: the positive consistent self-image or “personality” (crucially including the desire that this selfimage be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants
2. Convey that S and H are cooperators.
10.3 Strategies of doing FTAs
The following are some common strategies for expressing negative politeness: 1. Be direct 2. Don’t presume or auusme 3. Don’t coerce H. 4. Communicate S’s unwillingness to impinge on H.
5. Redress other wants of H’s
10.4 Factors behind the strategy choice H’s relative power over S is comparable to or superior to S, the rank of imposition involved is neither too big nor too small, the social distance between S and H is not too close.
1. Acts threatening the hearer’s positive face indicating (potentially) that the speaker does not care about the hearer’s feelings, interests, wants, etc.
10.3 Strategies of doing FTAs
Read Figure 1 on p. 132
10.3 Strategies of doing FTAs
S tries to emphasize his solidarity with H by using one or more of the following strategies (positive politeness): 1. Claim common ground between S and H.
Unit 10 Doing FATs in Conversation
会话中的威胁面子行为
Contents
10.1 The notion of face 10.2 Face-threatening acts
10.3 Strategies of doing FTAs
10.4 Factors behind the strategy choice
10.2 Face-threatening acts
Two points to be noted: 1. an overlap in this classification of FTAs, because some FTSs intrinsically threaten both negative and positive face; 2. Cultures vary in the rating of illocutionary acts in terms of face threat.
According to Brown and Levinson (1978/1987), face is one of the various rational behaviors of a Model Person to satisfy one’s face wants. A Model Person has to special properties: rationality and face.
10.2 Face-threatening acts
2. Acgative face 3. Acts threatening the speaker’s positive face 4. Acts threatening the speaker’s negative face
10.1 The notion of face
Brown and Levinson (1978/1987) developed Goffman’s (1967) notion of face into the well-known Face Theory (FT for short).
10.1 The notion of face
10.2 Face-threatening acts
the illocutionary acts that run contrary to either their own face wants or those of their hearers Four types
10.2 Face-threatening acts
10.1 The notion of face
rationality: the application of a specific mode of reasoning which guarantees inferences from ends or goals to means that will satisfy those ends.
10.4 Factors behind the strategy choice
Wx = D (S, H) + P (H, S) + Rx
D (S, H): the social distance between the speaker and the hearer P (H, S): the power of H over S Rx: the absolute ranking of the imposition x in a give culture
10.4 Factors behind the strategy choice
However, real-time communication is much more complex than those conditions. Thus, the choice of a strategy for doing a FTA entails the consideration of the weightiness of the FTA (Wx), which diagramed as follows: