Face in interaction

Haugh, Michael; Bargiela‐Chiappini, Francesca

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.013

Cited by 88 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The notion of "face" is widely recognized by politeness scholars to have such explanatory value but many also argue that Brown and Levinson's treatment needs to be extended beyond seeing politeness only as a response to potential face threats (see Haugh 2009 for a discussion). Many prefer to talk in terms of face "work" and would do away with the notions of negative and positive face (for example, Locher and Watts 2005;Spencer-Oatey 2009).…”

Section: A Neo-brown and Levinson Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“We’re not in a club now”: a neo-Brown and Levinson approach to analyzing courtroom data

Grainger¹

2018

Journal of Politeness Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discursive approaches to analyzing politeness often eschew Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness as being too dependent on speech act theory and Gricean pragmatics. However, in this analysis of a courtroom interaction I will show how some of the concepts from Brown and Levinson's theory, such as face-threatening behaviour and positive and negative politeness, can provide us with a vocabulary with which to talk about dynamic situated interaction. These are combined with reference to the norms of behaviour in the context of situation, as well as an appreciation of how meaning is defined as negotiated by participants as they interact. In the interaction under question here I show how the meaning of these utterances can be observed in the data themselves by looking at the sequence and take-up of turns at talk and by commenting on the relationship between the form of the utterances and the context in which they are uttered. In this way, some of the most useful concepts from Brown and Levinson are applied to the data from a constructivist perspective.

show abstract

Section: A Neo-brown and Levinson Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“We’re not in a club now”: a neo-Brown and Levinson approach to analyzing courtroom data

Grainger¹

2018

Journal of Politeness Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Haugh and Bargiela-Chiappini (2010) point out this is the case for face and politeness, and maintain that "while acknowledging the important role that face plays in politeness and impoliteness research, it is suggested that the time has come for face to be theorized on its own terms " (2010: 2073). I would similarly argue that this is the case for the concept of 'relations'.…”

Section: Face Politeness and Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This co-constructionist perspective has become increasingly dominant in recent theorising on face and im/politeness, and is reflected in works such as Locher and Watts (2005), Bargiela-Chiappini and Haugh (2009), Haugh and Bargiela-Chiappini (2010) and Arundale (2010a). However, as Langlotz points out, it is essential for such work to have a strong cognitive component.…”

Section: Individual and Social Perspectives On Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relating at work: Facets, dialectics and face

Spencer‐Oatey

2013

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines 'relating at work'. Recent theorising in pragmatics has drawn attention to the importance of analysing relations, and yet the pragmatic study of relations is now intertwined so closely with the concept of face (e.g. Arundale, 2010a;Holmes et al., 2011; Watts 2005, 2008) that it might seem the two are synonymous. In this paper, I review this research from a multidisciplinary perspective, and then report a study on 'relating at work' in which leaders and interns were interviewed about their experiences of starting work in a culturally unfamiliar setting. I focus on one dialectic, connectedness-separateness, and report the challenges they described in 'making contact'. In the discussion section and on the basis of my findings, I argue the following points: (a) relating at work entails a complex web of interrelated facets and 'smooth relations' is just one of employees' relational concerns; (b) Relational Dialectic Theory offers much potential for interpersonal pragmatics; (c) dialectic tensions can occur at the individual as well as the interpersonal/relational levels and an interactional achievement analytic perspective needs to be complemented by an individual perspective; (d) Relational Dialect Theory and Face Theory are complementary to each other and should not be conflated. KeywordsRelations; Relational dialectics; Relating at work; Contact-Separation; Face. Highlights I review key issues and controversies re pragmatic approaches to 'the relational'.  I analyse metapragmatic emotion comments from workplace project partnerships.  I argue that such comments offer useful insights for evaluating conceptual frameworks.  I claim that discourse data alone is insufficient for studying 'the relational'.  I call for more pragmatics research on 'the relational' to seek applied relevance.

show abstract

“…It is also understood that the concept of 'face' was introduced into academic English discourse by Goffman (1955Goffman ( , 1959Goffman ( , 1967 and that 'face' came to take its place as a central pillar of politeness theory through the influential work of Levinson (1978, 1987) (Haugh 2009: 1). Goffman's theories on 'face' and 'facework' seem to have been inspired by the early English-language works on 'face' and Chinese national character (Goffman 1959: 24, 53, 82, 89, 244;Goffman 1967: 15, 17, 29, 82;Haugh and Hinze 2003).…”

Section: The Origins Of 'Face' In Englishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese politeness is not about ‘face’: Evidence from the business world

Hinze

2012

Journal of Politeness Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Face in interaction

Cited by 88 publications

References 36 publications

“We’re not in a club now”: a neo-Brown and Levinson approach to analyzing courtroom data

“We’re not in a club now”: a neo-Brown and Levinson approach to analyzing courtroom data

Relating at work: Facets, dialectics and face

Chinese politeness is not about ‘face’: Evidence from the business world

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About