Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T11:49:57.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Politeness Strategies and Second Language Acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Shigenori Tanaka  and
Saiki Kawade
Shigenori Tanaka
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Saiki Kawade
Affiliation:
Columbia University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The two studies reported here investigated the notion of politeness as perceived by native speakers of English and advanced learners of English. The questions which concerned us included: (1) Are native speakers of English really aware of the varying degree of politeness conveyed by a given English sentence?; (2) Is there a high correlation between native speakers of English and advanced learners of English in their politeness judgements?; (3) Do native speakers of English really use different politeness strategies in different situations?; (4) Is there a high correlation between native and nonnative speakers of English in the use of politeness strategies? From a theoretical point of view, Study I was concerned with Lakoff's (1973b) claim that politeness increases with decreasing imposition; Study II was concerned with the distance-politeness hypothesis which predicts that one will use polite strategies in situations where he perceives himself as psychological and/or socially distant from his addresee. From a pedagogical point of view, the comparison of the two studies here suggested that the learner's ability of judging politeness in the target language does not necessarily mean that he can use politeness strategies appropriately in actual communication situations.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , Fall 1982 , pp. 18 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bach, K., and Harnish, R.. 1979. Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brown, P., and Levinson, S.. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction, ed. by Goody, E., 56–310. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carrell, P., and Konneker, B.. 1981. Politeness: Comparing native and nonnative judgements. Language Learning 31.17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corder, S. 1972. The elicitation of interlanguage. ERRATA: Papers in error analysis, ed. by Svartvik, J., 36–47. Lund, Sweden: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Davison, A. 1975. Indirect speech acts and what to do with them. Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3): Speech acts, ed. by, Cole, P. and Morgan, J., 143–85. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, B.; Rintell, E.; and Walters, J.. 1980. An approach to conducting research on the acquisition of pragmatic competence in a second language. Discourse analysis in second language research, ed. by Larsen-Freeman, D., 75–91. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Gordon, D., and Lakoff, G.. 1975. Conversational postulates. Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3): Speech acts, ed. by Cole, P. and Morgan, F., 83–106. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1972. Language in context. Language 48.907–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1973a. Logic of politeness: Or minding your P's and Q's. Paper presented at the 9th Regional Meeting. Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1973b. Language and woman's place. Language in Society 2.45–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1976. Language and society. A survey of applied linguistics, ed. by Wardhaugh, R. and Brown, H., 207–28. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1977. What you can do with words: Politeness, pragmatics and performatives. Proceedings of the Texas Conference on Performatives, Presuppositions, and Implicatures, ed. by Rogers, A., Wall, B., and Murphy, J., 79–105. Arlington, Va.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Rintell, R. 1979. Getting your speech act together: the pragmatic ability of second language Learners. Working Papers on Bilingualism 17.97–106.Google Scholar
Sadock, J. 1974. Toward a linguistic theory of speech acts. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Scarcella, R. 1980. On speaking politely in a second language. ON TESOL '79: The learner in focus, ed. by Yorio, C., Perkins, C., and Schachter, J., 275–87. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.Google Scholar
Searle, J. 1975. Indirect speech acts. Syntax and Semantics (Vol. 3): Speech Acts, ed. by Cole, P. and Morgan, J., 59–82. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. 1979. Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, J. 1980. The perception of politeness in English and Spanish. ON TESOL '79: The learner in focus, ed. by Yorio, C., Perkins, C., and Schachter, J., 288–96. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.Google Scholar