On historical Chinese apology and its strategic application

Kádár, Dániel Z.

doi:10.1515/pr.2007.006

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…argue this is a reflection of the so-called "no apologising culture" (bu daoqian wenhua) developing in (Mainland) China. While apologies were traditionally quite frequent in Chinese (Chun and Yun 2010;Kádár 2007), Pan and Kádár (in press) claim that in modern China apologies are more often achieved "by means other than linguistic expressions, such as taking redressive action or doing something for the person offended to mend the relationship" (p.99). This claim that the rate of apology IFIDs is decreasing in Chinese (which is what is what we understand to be meant by "no apologising culture") is reflected in Tsai's (2007: 83) apology role play data, where she found offers of repair (34.6%) more frequently than IFIDs (22.6%).…”

Section: Apologies In English and Chinesementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology

Chang

Haugh

2011

Intercultural Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines variation in evaluations of im/politeness of a recording of a naturally occurring intercultural apology, focusing in particular on potential cultural differences in these evaluations across speakers of (Australian) English and (Mandarin) Chinese. We first closely analyse the apology itself as a form of social action, and suggest in the course of this analysis that evaluations of im/politeness are closely tied to converging and diverging interpretations of actions and meanings that are interactionally achieved in situated discourse. The results of a survey of evaluations of the apology and follow-up interviews with Australian and Taiwanese informants are then discussed. A comparison of ratings of im/politeness of the intercultural apology between Taiwanese and Australians suggests that there are indeed significant differences in evaluations of im/politeness between members of these two cultural backgrounds. We trace this through our analysis of metadiscursive commentary to differences in the ways in which "sincerity" is conceptualised in (Australian) English and Taiwanese Mandarin. In doing so we propose a firmer empirical basis for the analyst to make inferences about whether the interactional achievement of diverging interpretations of meanings and actions in intercultural discourse is culturally motivated or simply idiosyncratic to the situation or individual participants. We conclude, however, that while evaluations of im/politeness are indeed influenced by the cultural background of respondents, developing a more fine-grained understanding of cultural influences on evaluations of im/politeness is necessary. Abstract:This study examines variation in evaluations of im/politeness of a recording of a naturally occurring intercultural apology, focusing in particular on potential cultural differences in these evaluations across speakers of (Australian) English and (Mandarin) Chinese. We first closely analyse the apology itself as a form of social action, and suggest in the course of this analysis that evaluations of im/politeness are closely tied to converging and diverging interpretations of actions and meanings that are interactionally achieved in situated discourse. The results of a survey of evaluations of the apology and follow-up interviews with Australian and Taiwanese informants are then discussed. A comparison of ratings of im/politeness of the intercultural apology between Taiwanese and Australians suggests that there are indeed significant differences in evaluations of im/politeness between members of these two cultural backgrounds. We trace this through our analysis of metadiscursive commentary to differences in the ways in which "sincerity" is conceptualised in (Australian) English and Taiwanese Mandarin. In doing so we propose a firmer empirical basis for the analyst to make inferences about whether the interactional achievement of diverging interpretations of meanings and actions in intercultural discourse is culturally motivated or simply idiosyncratic to the situation ...

show abstract

Section: Apologies In English and Chinesementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology

Chang

Haugh

2011

Intercultural Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As illustrated in Table 1 below, the major face collocations underpinning early theories of face and politeness all have equivalents with Chinese collocations (with the notable exception of face threat), a fact that can be traced to the formative influence of Hu's (1944) explication of the Chinese folk notions of miànzi and liăn on Goffman's (1955Goffman's ( , 1967 seminal work on face. There has, however, more recently been a growing surge of interest in interpersonal or relational behaviour in (Mandarin) Chinese in both contemporary and historical Chinese (Kádár 2007a(Kádár , b, 2008(Kádár , 2010Kádár and Pan 2011;Pan and Kádár 2011;Ruhi and Kádár 2011), as well as in other "dialects" such as Taiwanese (Chang and Haugh 2011, forthcoming), and Hong Kong Cantonese (Gibbons 2008;Pan 2011). The papers in this special issue of the Journal of Politeness Research are thus a very welcome addition to this rapidly growing body of work, which should be of interest not only to scholars of Chinese, but also to politeness and face researchers more generally.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research

Haugh

2012

Journal of Politeness Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research MICHAEL HAUGH AbstractThe papers in this special issue on Chinese 'face' and im/politeness collectively raise very real challenges for the ways in which the now well-known distinction between first order and second order approaches is conceptualized and operationalized by face and politeness researchers. They highlight the difficulties we inevitably encounter when analyzing face and im/politeness across languages and cultures, in particular, those arising from (1) the use of English as a scientific metalanguage to describe concepts and practices in other languages and cultures, (2) the inherent ambiguity and conservatism of folk concepts such as face and politeness, and (3) the difficulties in teasing out face and im/politeness as important phenomena in their own right. In this paper it is suggested that these issues arise as a consequence of the relative paucity of critical discussion of the first-second order distinction by analysts. It is argued that the first-second order distinction needs to be more carefully deconstructed in regards to both its epistemological and ontological loci. It is suggested that equating first order approaches with an "emic" perspective and second order approaches with a "scientific" perspective masks a number of important distinctions that are too often glossed over by those who make claims to being either first or second order researchers. It is concluded that rather than treating the first-second order distinction as a simplistic dichotomy, it is much more productive to deploy the multiple loci of the first-second order distinction in clarifying the various focal points for analysis and theorization in face and politeness research.

show abstract

“…In Poland, the Institute of Oriental Studies of Warsaw University was established in 1933, and had in its ranks Janusz Chmielewski (1916Chmielewski ( -1998, and his student Mieczysław Jerzy Künstler (Chinese name: Jīn Sīdé 金斯德;1933-2007, as key personalities in Chinese linguistic scholarship. Chmielewski dealt extensively with various aspects of Chinese in his early career (Chmielewski 1956(Chmielewski , 1957, but specialized in logic and philosophy later.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kádár (Chinese name: Táng Zuǒlì 唐佐力, b. 1979) working on linguistic politeness, and discourse analysis in vernacular literary texts (e.g, Kádár 2007Kádár , 2010 In all of these countries, there is currently more work going on in the field of Chinese linguistics, with a new generation of scholars, better integrated into European and international scholarship than their above-mentioned predecessors. This is also indicated by the fact that the biannual conference of the European Association of Chinese Linguistics (EACL) was held twice in this region (EACL 4: Budapest, 2006;EACL 6: Poznań, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese Linguistics in Eastern Europe

Encyclopedia of Chinese Language and Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On historical Chinese apology and its strategic application

Cited by 13 publications

References 29 publications

Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology

Evaluations of im/politeness of an intercultural apology

Epilogue: The first-second order distinction in face and politeness research

Chinese Linguistics in Eastern Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About