The landscape of impoliteness research

Dynel, Marta

doi:10.1515/pr-2015-0013

Cited by 79 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 85 publications

(158 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the huge literature on politeness, there are still theoretical problems (Eelen, 2014). Therefore, research on politeness does not stop, and the field of impoliteness too is still rapidly growing (Dynel, 2015). Researchers have pointed out that studies in im/politeness still need to be carried out in many areas in order to have a better understanding of these fields of study that are still not satisfactorily understood despite the huge literature and/or research on them.…”

Section: Statement Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the inclusion of data comprising sermons delivered in Yorùbá adduced evidence of the influence of the Yorùbá culture in the linguistic politeness practices of the Imams. In addition, it is shown that although the Imams used the traditional Face Threatening Acts (FTAs), these largely amount to ‗conventional aggression' (Harris, 2001)or ‗unmarked FTAs' (Dynel 2015). The study concluded that the Imams were characteristically polite in their delivery, and politeness is an important feature in a religious discourse such as the Friday sermon.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Im/politeness in Muslim Discourse: A Study of Nigerian Friday Sermons

Kareem¹

2018

IJLC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigated the use of im/politeness in Muslim sermons or Khutbahs. The study attempts to show that the Muslim sermon, in its aim to impart various types of religious information to the congregation, is a communicative event that is capable of generating ill-feelings among its various audiences. The Imam is thus expected to make strategic use of politeness elements in his delivery or risk compromising the efficacy of the sermon. To identify these elements, a modified version of Brown and Levinson's (1987) model of politeness was used as an analytical framework. Using naturally occurring data collected from Friday sermons, the study shows that the Imams used several politeness strategies identified in the Brown and Levinson model. Furthermore, the inclusion of data comprising sermons delivered in Yorùbá adduced evidence of the influence of the Yorùbá culture in the linguistic politeness practices of the Imams. In addition, it is shown that although the Imams used the traditional Face Threatening Acts (FTAs), these largely amount to ‗conventional aggression' (Harris, 2001)or ‗unmarked FTAs' (Dynel 2015). The study concluded that the Imams were characteristically polite in their delivery, and politeness is an important feature in a religious discourse such as the Friday sermon.

show abstract

Section: Statement Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Im/politeness in Muslim Discourse: A Study of Nigerian Friday Sermons

Kareem¹

2018

IJLC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…languages, we can see that the mismatch was more pronounced for sarcastic / SARCASTICO than ironic / IRONICO in both datasets which is particularly interesting in light of Partington's (2006) claim that the echoic mention theory of irony is in fact a theory of sarcasm. It suggests a gap between the first-order usage and Dynel's (2015) second-order description of irony and sarcasm which predicted that sarcasm need not involve mismatch.…”

Section: Who Is the Target?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between irony and sarcasm: Insights from a first-order metalanguage investigation

Taylor¹

2017

Journal of Politeness Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between irony and sarcasm has been much discussed and yet there is still little agreement on how the two relate at a theoretical level, as Attardo (2000:795) notes 'there is no consensus on whether irony and sarcasm are essentially the same thing […] or if they differ significantly'. The aim of this paper is to take a user-perspective and report on how participants in everyday conversations in the UK and Italy talk about irony and sarcasm and what kinds of authentic behaviours are described using these labels. These findings are discussed with reference to the academic concepts of irony and sarcasm to investigate how the lay and academic perspectives relate. IntroductionThis paper addresses the 'thorny relationship' (Dynel, forthcoming) between irony and sarcasm. These are both commonly discussed in terms of their im/politeness potential, as evidenced in their inclusion in taxonomies of both politeness (e.g. Brown & Levinson 1987) impoliteness (e.g. Culpeper 1996). The analysis of these features in this paper takes a firstorder perspective, that is to say I start by examining how irony and sarcasm are talked about in everyday conversation and identify what kinds of behaviour are actually labelled as ironic and sarcastic. Such user perspectives are compared with the second-order 'theoretical construct' (Watts et al. 1992) which is most commonly associated with academic study. First-order and second-order im/politenessThe first-order/second-order distinction originates with work by Watts et al. (1992) who state that:2 We take first-order politeness to correspond to the various ways in which polite behaviour is perceived and talked about by members of socio-cultural groups. It encompasses, in other words, commonsense notions of politeness. Second-order politeness, on the other hand, is a theoretical construct, a term within a theory of social behaviour and language usage Watts et al. (1992:3) Thus, the first/second order distinction allows us to separate out our lay understanding and evaluations of behaviour as members of a given community of practice, and our conceptualisations as social scientists investigating the relationship between language and social interaction. Second-order politeness is an interpretation and theorisation which aims to explain the phenomena observed as first-order politeness (Eelen 2001:44).This distinction between first and second-order understandings becomes highly significant in our field because politeness exists as both a folk concept and a scientific concept. Eelen (2001: 33) draws on Vygotsky's (1968) distinction between spontaneous concepts and scientific concepts to clarify the discussion. Whereas spontaneous concepts are viewed as being driven by experience of the phenomena, scientific concepts are detached from day to day reality, and pre-defined. From Vygotsky, Eelen takes the examples of 'brother' and 'Archimedean law' as examples of spontaneous and scientific concepts respectively. We might equally take terms like 'politeness' and 'phoneme'...

show abstract

“…Impoliteness has become an intensively studied topic over the last decade (for an overview, see Dynel, 2015). Kádár and Haugh (2013, p. 244) argue that there has been an unfortunate lack of studies on impoliteness in intercultural settings to date.…”

Section: The State Of the Art: Main Topics And Tendencies In Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%