Notes on Face Politeness Face and Facework Goffman

Notes on Face & Politeness

Face and Facework Goffman Face: The positive social image we seek to maintain during interaction. Why is Goffman’s perspective considered to fall within the perspective of Symbolic Interactionism? What does it mean to say that even the “private self” is a symbolic construction?

The Dramaturgical Perspective Interaction = Performance Lines Props Audience Front Stage & Back Stage v. Can be in Wrong Face and be Out of Face v. Can be Heartless or Shameless

Fact Threat/Loss Sequence PREVENTIVE FACEWORK Disclaimers Tact Interaction continues Face Threat Face Loss Face Restored CORRECTIVE FACEWORK Apology Account Excuse Justification Remediation Humor Avoidance Aggression

Critique • What are the strengths and limitations of face theory? – Criteria • Scope? • Heurism? • Parsimony?

Brown & Levinson’s Politeness Theory • Brown & Levinson are socio-linguists • Extend Goffman’s notion of face – Positive face – Negative face • And focus only on preventive facework • And face needs (positive and negative)

Sequence PREVENTIVE FACEWORK Positive Politeness Negative Politeness Face Threat Interaction continues

Positive Face (the dog) is the desire to be valued and included by relevant or significant others

Negative Face (the cat) is the desire to be free from imposition and restraint and to have control of our time, property, space, and resources

Threats to Pos. /Neg. Face • Social connections make threat to positive and negative face inevitable. • We need to give orders, ask favors, deny favors, give feedback, etc. • When part of a job requirement, threats are not problematic • During social interaction, threats are problematic and should be prevented.

Severity of Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) • Severity = Power, Distance, Rank (PDR) • Power of speaker over hearer • Distance between hearer and speaker (close or distant) • Rank of imposition – Both social/conventional ranking of threat – And idiosyncratic/relational ranking of threat

STRATEGIES FOR DOING FTAs 1. Without redressive action(bald on record) Very Efficient 2. Positive Politeness (redressive action) 3. Negative Politeness (redressive action) 4. Off record (hinting) 5. Don't do the FTA Very Polite

POSITIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES Convey X is admirable/interesting > Notice, attend to X’s interests, needs, etc. > Exaggerate interest, approval, etc. Claim in-group membership with X > Use in-group markers (we, us) Claim common point of view, attitude, opinions, knowledge, empathy > Give agreement and avoid disagreement > Joke Indicate you are taking X’s interests or needs into account Give reasons Give gifts to X

NEGATIVE POLITENESS STRATEGIES Don’t assume X is willing or able to perform the action > Question, hedge Don’t try to coerce X Give X option not to act > Be indirect > Assume X is not likely to do the action (Be pessimistic) Minimize threat > Minimize imposition > Give deference > Apologize > Go on record as incurring a debt, or as not indebting H

Complications • As evident in the politeness strategies, the interaction is complicated by the fact that – Some FTAs threaten both pos. and neg. face so a particular message might contain both types of strategies. • Consider a complaint – Some politeness strategies threaten the speaker’s positive or negative face while addressing the hearer’s face • Consider an apology