The Polite Abuser: Using Politeness Theory To Examine Emotional Abuse

Abstract

Over the last few decades more and more cultural attention has been paid to intimate partner violence, especially emotional abuse. Follingstad, Rutledge, Berg, Hause, and Polek (1990) established that emotional abuse fell into six distinct categories; however, little attention had been paid to how abusers can utilize polite communication to hurt their partner. Equally, Brown and Levinson's politeness theory (1987) had never been applied to problematic communication until Austin's (1990) face attack acts model. This study aimed to understand how polite communication can be used as a form of emotional abuse. In-depth, semi structured interviews were conducted with 20 participants who self-identified as having been in a former romantic relationship with a partner who hurt their feelings, made them feel bad about themselves, or manipulated them. The utterances were categorized according to Brown and Levinson's (1987) politeness theory and Austin's (1990) face attack acts model of politeness. The utterances used by both abusers and their victims were then analyzed using thematic analysis. Abusers used all six of Austin's face attack act strategies, and victims responded using three of Brown and Levinson's four politeness strategies. Each strategy resulted in themes that abusers would utilize to hurt their partner. Implications of the study, limitations, and future research are then discussed.

An examination of visually impaired individuals’ communicative negotiation of face threats

“…Additionally, individuals use off-record strategies when they communicate indirectly or hint (“If only I had a ride to the store, I could get groceries.”). Last, people most concerned about face threats opt to not engage in the FTA, saying nothing as they deem the face threat risks too high (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2021) choosing, for example, to pass as a drinker versus reveal their non-drinking status (Romo et al, 2015). Individuals can also use humor to prevent face threats (e.g., Miller-Ott & Linder, 2013).…”