Victor

Before we start today’s journey, let me show you a scenario simulation to do!

It is really hot in summer (even in the UK, during some weeks, it will be like a furnace outside), isn’t it? You are chilling at one of your friends’. After a while, you feel very thirsty and you would like some beer (and, of course, you are assumed over 18!). Regardless of your affinity for your friends, what below are you most likely to say if you would like to grab the beer from your friend’s fridge?

A. I want some beer.

B. Is it okay for me to have a beer, mate?

C. I hope it’s not too forward, but would it be possible for me to have a beer?

D. It’s so hot. It makes you really thirsty.

E. No, I would just bear with the thirst rather than ask for beer.

Now that you (my readers) have various cultural backgrounds, I’m sure your choices will be different. Thanks to Brown and Levinson (B&L) (1987), they category options B to D as politeness strategies for face-threatening acts (FTA). That means, if you stand for any of those 3 choices, you may be trying to save your friend’s face on that occasion. In contrast, A is challenging your friend’s face unless you have very close relationships.

It seems that A causing the “threatening” result while B, C and D trying to “save”, they are doing such a big work. Well, just wait take it easy, let me explain what face is.

“Face” was first introduced by Goffman (1955:213) as “the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a personal contact”. Brown & Levinson (1987:61) reformulated it as “the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself”. The definitions sound way too abstract and “academic”. The definition of face is not written in stone but in different cultures, it may include nuanced differences.

In Chinese discourse , “face” understood as 面子, which refers to one’s social status and prestige (Wang, 2019:341). For example, when some conflicts occur between two people in China, the mediator would say “看在我的面子上“（for my face）, where face is more likely to be defined as “sake” like “for god’s sake”. Namely, the mediator is using their prestige to ask both sides to forgive each other. In my understanding, face is a desire that people would maintain to indicate their social image or status when they interact with others. Furthermore, Brown & Levinson (1987) distinguish between two dimensions of face:

Positive Face: The desire to be appreciated and approved of;

Negative Face: The desire to be autonomous or unimpeded.

Accordingly, criticising, disagreeing, insulting, complaining, insincere offers and promised are threatening positive face, like when your teacher criticises you for not bringing your homework to class. Commanding, inviting, requesting, suggesting, warning and personal questions are threatening negative face, like when you are about to go to your high school prom and your mom warns that the curfews still apply to you.

Therefore from the examples A-E above, it is easy to find out that A, as a direct request, is threatening your friend’s negative face. B, as positive politeness that protects the interlocutor’s positive face, starts with the question that includes both the speaker and the hearer in activity (you have the right to decide if I can have a beer). C, as negative politeness that protects the interlocutor’s negative face, the euphemistic tone of the speaker claims autonomy (of beer) belongs to the hearer; D is an off-record strategies that uses the hint to request the beer to hearer indirectly.

So, how do you like your choice of saving (or destroying) your friend’s face? Do you think your choice is the best strategy of them? Well, I would not say which one is the best, but rather say your choice is the best in your cultural context. B is seemingly a traditional British request, isn’t it, my mate? The wording “mate” enhances solidarity between you and me and it sounds cool in contrast with our expression (unless you are a supporter of E and would bear the thirst). But not everyone thinks like a British.

Collective cultures such as Japanese, Arabic, Chinese would have a preference on D as in their cultures, indirect speech acts are perceived as the priority in politeness. For example, in English, “Would you pass the salt to me?” is a polite request with the subjunctive mood but in Japanese, they would give hints like “Is that salt?” to avoid any possibility of being rejected (If the hearer doesn’t want to pass the salt to the speaker, he would possibly pretend no to get the hint; the speaker could also claim that he doesn’t mean to make the request). In other words, Japanese conventional indirect forms are not equivalent to those of English (Matsumoto, 1988:421).

Different options of politeness strategies according to different cultures may result in being less effectively in FTA or even negative comprehension from the hearer. C as a politeness strategy to respect the autonomy of the individual, in Polish cultures, However, it is perceived as hostility and alienation once such a distance is established (Mills, 2017:35). 

Finally, even though good manners are the art of making it easy for us to converse with people, too much politeness sounds unnatural and may even result in misunderstanding of politeness. Politeness is troubling for intercultural communication but it won’t be much annoying as long as you find out. Trust me you can make it!