(Ebook) Interpersonal pragmatics by Miriam A Locher;

Sage L Graham ISBN 9783110214321, 9783110214338,

3110214326, 3110214334 Pdf Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/interpersonal-pragmatics-4687084

★★★★★
4.7 out of 5.0 (82 reviews )

DOWNLOAD PDF

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) Interpersonal pragmatics by Miriam A Locher; Sage L
Graham ISBN 9783110214321, 9783110214338, 3110214326,
3110214334 Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebooknice.com
for more options!.

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018

(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094
(Ebook) Pragmatics of Fiction by Miriam A. Locher (ed.), Andreas
H. Jucker (ed.) ISBN 9783110439700, 3110439700

https://ebooknice.com/product/pragmatics-of-fiction-6778870

(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth

Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044

(Ebook) Advice in Discourse by Holger Limberg (ed.), Miriam A.

Locher (ed.) ISBN 9789027256263, 9027256268

https://ebooknice.com/product/advice-in-discourse-5148430

(Ebook) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Cancer and Society by Graham A.

Colditz ISBN 9781483345734, 1483345734

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-sage-encyclopedia-of-cancer-and-
society-5421152

(Ebook) Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with

Power in Theory and Practice (Language, Power and Social
Process) by Derek Bousfield, Miriam A. Locher ISBN
9783110202663, 3110202662
https://ebooknice.com/product/impoliteness-in-language-studies-on-its-
interplay-with-power-in-theory-and-practice-language-power-and-social-
process-2186894
Interpersonal Pragmatics
HoPs 6
Handbooks of Pragmatics

Editors
Wolfram Bublitz
Andreas H. Jucker
Klaus P. Schneider

Volume 6

De Gruyter Mouton
Interpersonal Pragmatics

Edited by
Miriam A. Locher
Sage L. Graham

De Gruyter Mouton
ISBN 978-3-11-021432-1
e-ISBN 978-3-11-021433-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Interpersonal pragmatics / edited by Miriam A. Locher, Sage L.

Graham.
p. cm. ⫺ (Handbook of pragmatics; 6)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-3-11-021432-1 (alk. paper)
1. Interpersonal communication. 2. Pragmatics. 3. Discourse
analysis. 4. Interpersonal relations. I. Locher, Miriam A., 1972⫺
II. Graham, Sage L., 1967⫺
P94.7.I48 2010
306.44⫺dc22
2010024500

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

” 2010 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/New York

Cover image: Konstantin Sutyagin/shutterstock
Typesetting: Dörlemann Satz GmbH & Co. KG, Lemförde
Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen
⬁ Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
Preface to the handbook series
Wolfram Bublitz, Andreas H. Jucker and Klaus P. Schneider

The series Handbooks of Pragmatics, which comprises nine self-contained vol-

umes, provides a comprehensive overview of the entire field of pragmatics. It is
meant to reflect the substantial and wide-ranging significance of pragmatics as a
genuinely multi- and transdisciplinary field for nearly all areas of language de-
scription, and also to account for its remarkable and continuously rising popularity
in linguistics and adjoining disciplines.
All nine handbooks share the same wide understanding of pragmatics as the
scientific study of all aspects of linguistic behaviour. Its purview includes patterns
of linguistic actions, language functions, types of inferences, principles of com-
munication, frames of knowledge, attitude and belief, as well as organisational
principles of text and discourse. Pragmatics deals with meaning-in-context, which
for analytical purposes can be viewed from different perspectives (that of the
speaker, the recipient, the analyst, etc.). It bridges the gap between the system side
of language and the use side, and relates both of them at the same time. Unlike syn-
tax, semantics, sociolinguistics and other linguistic disciplines, pragmatics is de-
fined by its point of view more than by its objects of investigation. The former pre-
cedes (actually creates) the latter. Researchers in pragmatics work in all areas of
linguistics (and beyond), but from a distinctive perspective that makes their work
pragmatic and leads to new findings and to reinterpretations of old findings. The
focal point of pragmatics (from the Greek prãgma ,act’) is linguistic action (and
inter-action): it is the hub around which all accounts in these handbooks revolve.
Despite its roots in philosophy, classical rhetorical tradition and stylistics, prag-
matics is a relatively recent discipline within linguistics. C.S. Peirce and C. Morris
introduced pragmatics into semiotics early in the twentieth century. But it was not
until the late 1960s and early 1970s that linguists took note of the term and began
referring to performance phenomena and, subsequently, to ideas developed and ad-
vanced by Wittgenstein, Ryle, Austin and other ordinary language philosophers.
Since the ensuing pragmatic turn, pragmatics has developed more rapidly and di-
versely than any other linguistic discipline.
The series is characertised by two general objectives. Firstly, it sets out to re-
flect the field by presenting in-depth articles covering the central and multifarious
theories and methodological approaches as well as core concepts and topics char-
acteristic of pragmatics as the analysis of language use in social contexts. All ar-
ticles are both state of the art reviews and critical evaluations of their topic in the
light of recent developments. Secondly, while we accept its extraordinary com-
plexity and diversity (which we consider a decided asset), we suggest a definite
structure, which gives coherence to the entire field of pragmatics and provides
vi Wolfram Bublitz, Andreas H. Jucker and Klaus P. Schneider

orientation to the user of these handbooks. The series specifically pursues the fol-
lowing aims:

– it operates with a wide conception of pragmatics, dealing with approaches that

are traditional and contemporary, linguistic and philosophical, social and cul-
tural, text- and context-based, as well as diachronic and synchronic;
– it views pragmatics from both theoretical and applied perspectives;
– it reflects the state of the art in a comprehensive and coherent way, providing a
systematic overview of past, present and possible future developments;
– it describes theoretical paradigms, methodological accounts and a large
number and variety of topical areas comprehensively yet concisely;
– it is organised in a principled fashion reflecting our understanding of the struc-
ture of the field, with entries appearing in conceptually related groups;
– it serves as a comprehensive, reliable, authoritative guide to the central issues
in pragmatics;
– it is internationally oriented, meeting the needs of the international pragmatic
community;
– it is interdisciplinary, including pragmatically relevant entries from adjacent
fields such as philosophy, anthropology and sociology, neuroscience and psy-
chology, semantics, grammar and discourse analysis;
– it provides reliable orientational overviews useful both to students and more
advanced scholars and teachers.

The nine volumes are arranged according to the following principles. The first
three volumes are dedicated to the foundations of pragmatics with a focus on micro
and macro units: Foundations must be at the beginning (volume 1), followed by
the core concepts in pragmatics, speech actions (micro level in volume 2) and dis-
course (macro level in volume 3). The following three volumes provide cognitive
(volume 4), societal (volume 5) and interactional (volume 6) perspectives. The
remaining three volumes discuss variability from a cultural and contrastive (vol-
ume 7), a diachronic (volume 8) and a medial perspective (volume 9):

1. Foundations of pragmatics
Wolfram Bublitz and Neal Norrick
2. Pragmatics of speech actions
Marina Sbisà and Ken Turner
3. Pragmatics of discourse
Klaus P. Schneider and Anne Barron
4. Cognitive pragmatics
Hans-Jörg Schmid and Dirk Geeraerts
5. Pragmatics of society
Gisle Andersen and Karin Aijmer
 Preface to the handbook series vii

6. Interpersonal pragmatics
Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham
7. Pragmatics across languages and cultures
Anna Trosborg
8. Historical pragmatics
Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen
9. Pragmatics of computer-mediated communication
Susan Herring, Dieter Stein and Tuija Virtanen
Acknowledgements

This volume on Interpersonal Pragmatics in the Mouton Handbook of Pragmatics

series would not have been possible without the help of many colleagues, friends
and family members. First of all, we wish to thank the general editors Wolfram
Bublitz, Andreas Jucker and Klaus P. Schneider for entrusting us with this task and
for allowing us to put together a collection that, we hope, raises important issues in
the study of the relational aspect of language use. Klaus P. Schneider, who was re-
sponsible for this volume as general editor in particular, especially deserves our
thanks for his perceptive comments on the papers. We also wish to express our
deep gratitude to the many reviewers who read and gave valuable feedback on the
papers in their various stages. Their comments have made this work a better one
and have helped shape our own thoughts. The contributors are due many thanks for
their work, the constructive uptake of criticism and their willingness to engage in
dialogue over many months. We also wish to express our thanks to Tanja Hammel,
who worked on editorial issues on some of the papers in the initial stage, and es-
pecially Brook Bolander of the Basel Linguistics team, who went over the entire
collection, addressing the many editorial and style issues that such a compilation
requires. The same thanks go to the Mouton team, Barbara Karlson, Wolfgang
Konwitschny and Anke Beck, who were always there for us when we needed sup-
port and accompanied the entire process in a professional and forthcoming way.
Finally, we wish to thank our families and friends for allowing us to take the time to
finish this work. We dedicate this work to our students: We hope that this compi-
lation of texts will show that our interest in the interpersonal side of communi-
cation deserves further attention and will inspire some of them to contribute to this
field of research in the future.

Miriam Anne Locher and Sage Lambert Graham

Basel/Memphis, September 2010
Table of contents

Preface to the handbook series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

1. Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics

Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Part I: Theoretical approaches to interpersonal pragmatics

Approaches to politeness and impoliteness

2. Linguistic politeness: Laying the foundations

Maria Sifianou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3. Linguistic politeness theory and its aftermath: Recent research trails

Richard J. Watts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

4. Politeness in East Asia

Shigeko Okamoto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

5. Researching impoliteness and rudeness: Issues and definitions

Derek Bousfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Approaches to interpersonal interpretation drawn from

communication studies and social cognitive linguistics

6. Relating
Robert B. Arundale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

7. Social cognition
Andreas Langlotz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Identity and gender

8. The negotiation of identities

Anna De Fina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
xii Table of contents

9. Gender and interpersonal pragmatics

Louise Mullany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

Part II: Linguistic strategies for interpersonal effects

10. Mitigation
Stefan Schneider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

11. Respect and deference

Michael Haugh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271

12. Swearing
Karyn Stapleton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289

13. Humour
Stephanie Schnurr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

Part III: Interpersonal issues in different contexts

14. Interpersonal issues in the workplace

Bernadette Vine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329

15. Interpersonal issues in court: Rebellion, resistance and other ways

of behaving badly
Janet Cotterill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353

16. Interpersonal issues in health discourse

Boyd Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381

17. Interpersonal issues in political discourse

José Luis Blas Arroyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405

18. Interpersonal issues in the discourse of dating ads

Carol Marley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435

About the authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463

Subject index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469
Author and name index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
1. Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics
Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

1. The interpersonal aspect of language and the aim of this handbook

This collection of papers within the Handbook of Pragmatics series deals with the
interpersonal or relational1 side of language in use in that it explores in what ways
social actors use language to shape and form relationships in situ. Before we out-
line this particular focus in more detail, we wish to position this approach within
the field of pragmatics as such. Pragmatics, as a discipline, has a long and complex
history, with what some would call an “identity problem” from its earliest concep-
tion to the present day. Crystal (1997: 120) says that pragmatics is “not as yet a co-
herent field of study,” and, although he made this observation over ten years ago at
the time of this writing, it can be argued that pragmatics is still just as diverse as it
was then. Verschueren (2009: 9) says that “pragmatics sometimes looks like a re-
pository of extremely interesting but separable topics such as deixis, implicature,
presupposition, speech acts, conversation, politeness, and relevance.” Many, in
fact, associate the field of pragmatics with Speech Act Theory (Austin 1962; Searle
1969). Others (e.g., Schiffrin 1994) link pragmatics most strongly to Grice’s
(1975) cooperative principle. The label ‘pragmatics’ has also been assigned, how-
ever, to a much broader array of research. Cummings (2005: 1) observes that
“pragmatics is significantly informed by a range of academic disciplines” and al-
though this breadth has been viewed as problematic by some (e.g., Blakemore
1992; Davis 1991) others advocate a broader approach. Verschueren (2009), for
example, interprets pragmatics as
[A] general functional perspective on (any aspect of) language, i.e. as an approach to
language which takes into account the full complexity of its cognitive, social, and cul-
tural (i.e. meaningful) functioning in the lives of human beings. (Verschueren 2009: 19,
italics removed)

The strength of this definition, we believe, is that it allows us to examine the com-
plexity of language use from a rich array of perspectives, and, consistent with this,
our goal here is to take advantage of the multi-faceted nature of pragmatics. We
thus use a definition of pragmatics in the European tradition, i.e., a view that in-
cludes the study of language in use from a social and cultural point of view, rather
than a definition of pragmatics in the more narrow sense (Taavitsainen and Jucker,
2010; Jucker 2008).
Having said this, the term ‘interpersonal pragmatics’, which features in the title
of this volume, is not to be understood as a term for a theory in competition with
theoretical approaches to the study of language in use such as interactional sociol-
2 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

inguistics, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis,

systemic functional grammar, or others, which have traditionally studied the inter-
personal aspect of language as well. Instead, what we aim to achieve in this collec-
tion is to bring together researchers from different theoretical strands and fields in
order to discuss topics and themes that are relevant to the study of the interpersonal
side of language in use; we therefore take a perspective within pragmatics that fo-
cuses in particular on the aspect of relationships. In choosing the chapter topics for
this volume, we attempted to explore facets of interaction between social actors
that rely upon (and in turn influence) the dynamics of relationships between people
and how those relationships are reflected in the language choices that they make.
The term ‘interpersonal pragmatics’ is used to designate examinations of the re-
lational aspect of interactions between people that both affect and are affected by
their understandings of culture, society, and their own and others’ interpretations.
We hope that this compilation is relevant for researchers and students alike who are
interested in this particular focus of linguistics.
In order to illustrate the importance of the relational aspect of language in more
detail and to explain the focus of this volume further, we will briefly touch on a
number of findings derived from previous linguistic research. Recognizing that
much of the language variation that we witness is caused because people adjust
their language to their addressees and the situation in order to achieve interper-
sonal effects, we posit that it is of interest to give this part of language use center
stage here. As a case in point, consider Holmes’ (1992) example taken from her
well known An Introduction to Sociolinguistics:
(1) Every afternoon my friend packs her bag and leaves her Cardiff office at about 5
o’clock. As she leaves, her business partner says goodbye Margaret, (she replies good-
bye Mike) her secretary says goodbye Ms Walker, (she replies goodbye Jill) and the care-
taker says Bye Mrs Walker (to which she responds goodbye Andy). As she arrives home
she is greeted by Hi mum from her son, Jamie, hello dear, have a good day?, from her
mother, and simply you’re late again! from her husband. Later in the evening the presi-
dent of the local flower club calls to ask if she would like to join. Good evening, is that
Mrs Billington? she asks. No, it’s Ms Walker, but my husband’s name is David Billing-
ton, she answers. What can I do for you? Finally a friend calls Borodar Meg, how’s
things? (Holmes 1992: 3)

What we witness here is that one and the same person is being addressed with dif-
ferent terms and adjusts her lexical choices herself when saying hello and goodbye
to her conversational partners depending on the role she and her addressees take on
in the contexts at hand (business partners, employer/secretary, employer/caretaker,
mother/son, wife/husband, friends, strangers). The choice of lexemes on both sides
is influenced by factors such as power, distance and closeness, and affect between
her and the addressees as well as the expectations about appropriate conduct linked
to roles in particular situations. The speech acts of saying hello and saying goodbye
thus receive different instantiations depending on the factors mentioned. We could
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 3

argue that the informational content remains the same in all cases, i.e., the speakers
wish to initiate their conversations or terminate their dealings with each other for
the time being and express this by a conventionally recognized sequence of ex-
changes, that, in Searle’s (1969: 65) words, count “as a courteous indication of rec-
ognition of the hearer”. At the same time, the ways in which the interactants
achieve this exchange tells us something about how the conversational partners
position themselves vis-à-vis each other. They thus index relationships by means
of their use of language: “Linguistic variation can provide social information”
(Holmes 1992: 4).
The above example and brief explanation will be familiar to many readers; it
clearly illustrates the importance of language in the creation of relationships and
how those relationships affect language use in turn. Many strands of research have
investigated these interpersonal effects and some of these strands of research are
listed below. For example, Watzlawick, Beavin and Jackson (1967: 54) maintain
that “[e]very communication has a content and a relationship aspect such that the
latter classifies the former and is therefore a metacommunication.” Furthermore,
the content and relational aspects of language are impossible to separate entirely
(Fill 1990). There are certain practices that primarily focus on “optimally efficient
transmission of information” (Brown and Yule 1983; Lakoff 1989), i.e., what
Kasper (1990: 205) terms transactional discourse, and there are other practices
that have as their “primary goal the establishment and maintenance of social rela-
tionships”, and constitute interactional discourse (Kasper 1990: 205). We never-
theless cannot entirely separate the content from the relational aspect in these in-
stances. In the above example, we can see that the exchanges between the business
partners (goodbye Margaret/goodbye Mike), secretary and employer (goodbye Ms
Walker/goodbye Jill) and caretaker and employer (bye Mrs Walker/goodbye Andy)
achieve the act of leave-taking and also shape relationships between the partici-
pants by foregrounding the hierarchical relationships through the use of more for-
mal/less formal address terms.
With respect to Example (1) it is important to point out that relational aspects in
language use are not only conveyed in the use of lexical alternatives, but may also
manifest themselves in syntactic and phonological choices. Interactants may signal
(consciously or subconsciously) that they belong to a certain social class or group
by their use of language. For example, non-standard syntactic patterns in the case
of dialects may index social and regional belonging. Research in sociolinguistics2
has further established that the use of language is influenced by a variety of factors
such as age, gender, ethnicity or socio-economic background. Ultimately, such lan-
guage use creates in-groups and out-groups and as such shapes relations between
people. As a result, the combination of these choices add to a person’s linguistic
identity construction and thus combine to position a person vis-à-vis others.
The latter point highlights that the relational aspect of language is closely
linked to how people shape their identities. Seminal work on linguistic identity
4 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

construction is carried out, among others, by psychologists such as Davies and

Harré (e.g., 1990) in their positioning theory, conversation analysts like Bucholtz
and Hall (2005) in their sociocultural linguistic approach, or De Fina (2003), who
uses a discourse analysis framework when studying narratives and identity (cf. De
Fina’s Chapter 8 in this handbook). Further theoretical approaches to the study of
how people create relational meaning in interaction by means of language can be
found in communication studies and social cognitive linguistics (which is also in-
fluenced by social psychology) (cf. Chapters 6 and 7).
Brown and Levinson’s (1978, 1987) politeness theory is a further approach that
has addressed the relational aspect of language and in particular the factors of
power and distance (in addition to contextualizing factors)3 that play a crucial role
in the study of language in use. Their approach is an attempt to systematically take
into account the relational factors that hold between interactants and that shape the
decisions on language choice the interactants make in situ. Their work and work
inspired by them in the last decades will be discussed in detail in Chapters 2 to 5 of
this volume and will be further introduced below.
As this cursory glance at some of the linguistic strands of research has shown,
the relational aspect of language is recognized as important and has received atten-
tion in the past but it still deserves our attention today. While much of the research
just mentioned may not be explicitly positioned in the field of pragmatics by the
scholars themselves, we posit that it contributes to the study of language in use.
Taking advantage of this multi-faceted nature of pragmatics we invited scholars
from different research traditions to explore the interpersonal aspect of language in
use from different perspectives. The overall structure of the volume consists of
three parts: Part I deals with a selection of theoretical approaches to interpersonal
language issues, looking at the politeness and impoliteness frameworks, ap-
proaches to interpersonal interpretation from communication studies and cognitive
linguistics, and the key issues ‘gender’ and ‘identity’; Part II introduces classical
issues in empirical research with the focus on linguistic strategies employed for in-
terpersonal effects; Part III sheds light on interpersonal issues in a number of dif-
ferent discourses and practices, i.e., the focus is on the practices and the many dif-
ferent linguistic strategies that are employed therein. In what follows, we will raise
a number of theoretical issues by introducing the structure and chapters of the
handbook in further detail.

2. Part I: Theoretical approaches to interpersonal pragmatics

The first part of this handbook is dedicated to ‘theoretical approaches to interper-

sonal pragmatics’ and thus takes up different approaches to and different foci on
the relational aspect of language in use. The first subsection of Part I deals with
‘approaches to politeness and impoliteness’. To include im/politeness research in
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 5

this volume seems almost a given since many readers may first think of politeness
theory when considering interpersonal or relational issues in language. Four
chapters are dedicated to this research strand. Brown and Levinson’s (1978, 1987)
seminal study exemplifies the attempts of the researchers to include the situation
and the interactants’ relations in the study of how im/politeness is negotiated. They
have given currency to the metaphor of ‘face’ and so-called ‘face-threatening acts’.
In their framework, face is “the public self-image that every member wants to
claim for himself [sic.]” (Brown and Levinson 1987: 61), while face-threatening
acts are “acts that by their nature run contrary to the face wants of the addressee
and/or of the speaker” (Brown and Levinson 1987: 65). The researchers then dem-
onstrate how people systematically redress or avoid face-threatening acts, a pro-
cess which they equate with politeness. Their study is influential to the present day
and can easily be argued to be the starting point for most research in the field of
politeness since its publication. This is even true for work that takes a distinctly
different point of view since work in this field cannot but make reference to this
seminal study. For this reason, Chapter 2 by Maria Sifianou, entitled ‘Linguistic
politeness: Laying the foundations’, re-examines this classic work by appraising
its advantages and drawbacks, looking back over three decades of research. She
also includes a discussion of other early work, such as Lakoff’s (1973) Rules of
Politeness or Leech’s (1983) Politeness Principle.
Chapter 3 by Richard J. Watts, ‘Linguistic politeness theory and its aftermath:
Recent research trails’, then takes up and explores the developments in politeness
research since these early approaches. There are two issues that appear to be most
noteworthy. On the one hand, there is a current debate to what extent researchers
should take a first order (interactant-informed/emic) or a second order (theoretical/
etic) approach to studying politeness (cf., e.g., Locher and Bousfield 2008; Bous-
field, this volume). This debate on methodology is important since it has again
brought movement into this field of research. On the other hand, both first and sec-
ond order researchers have started to broaden the field of study in that politeness is
no longer the only object of study. For example, the term ‘relational work’, as used
by Locher and Watts (2008: 96), “refers to all aspects of the work invested by in-
dividuals in the construction, maintenance, reproduction and transformation of in-
terpersonal relationships among those engaged in social practice.” Studies in re-
cent years thus focus no longer predominantly on mitigating facework, but on
face-enhancing, face-maintaining, as well as face-aggravating/damaging behavior.
Some of the reactions to the vast numbers of politeness studies inspired by the
early approaches to politeness research called forth reactions from researchers who
investigated non-Western, and especially Asian languages (e.g., Matsumoto 1988;
Mao 1994). Early on, there was criticism of the notion of face because it was ar-
gued to be conceptualized as an Anglo-Western, individualistic concept, at the ex-
clusion of cultures that would favor a more group-oriented and less individualistic
understanding of face. As a result, research on Asian languages furthered our
6 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

understanding of politeness in general and asked the research community to criti-

cally re-examine notions of universality. For this reason, Chapter 4 by Shigeko
Okamoto, ‘Politeness in East Asia’, is dedicated to this research tradition. Oka-
moto takes up these early criticisms and traces research to the present in order to
show how politeness studies have advanced in these language contexts.
Finally, Chapter 5 by Derek Bousfield focuses on ‘Researching impoliteness
and rudeness: Issues and definitions’, i.e., on relational work that disrupts the bal-
ance of interpersonal communication and is face-damaging or face-aggravating.
Research into this part of interpersonal pragmatics has only recently picked up mo-
mentum within the field of politeness studies (cf. the introduction to the edited col-
lection on impoliteness by Bousfield and Locher 2008). The scope of interest has
therefore been enlarged to no longer only look at the mitigation of face-threatening
acts, but also to investigate intentional as well as accidental face-damaging beha-
vior. In his chapter, Bousfield, focusing on the English language, critically looks at
current first and second order research and argues for a second order approach, fed
by first order information.
The second sub-section in the theoretical part of this handbook contains two
papers. Chapter 6 by Robert B. Arundale is entitled ‘Relating’. It gives a voice to
those researchers in communication studies and social psychology who have
worked on interpersonal relations for a long time, but who have generally been
rarely read and received in the linguistics (politeness) literature. Arundale opens
our eyes to further important methodological issues and the need of working with
clearly defined terminology when studying how people use language within rela-
tionships.
Chapter 7 by Andreas Langlotz is named ‘Social cognition’. The author pro-
poses that scholars of interpersonal pragmatics can benefit from taking research
approaches and results from cognitive psychological, cognitive-linguistic, and
socio-cognitive theories on board. The result of this merging of interests is called
‘social cognition’ and firmly takes the situated and dynamic dimension of language
in use into account when explaining how individuals create meaning and make
sense of their identities, roles, and interpersonal relationships.
The last two chapters in Part I are dedicated to two important themes in inter-
personal pragmatics: identity and gender. Both topics represent major trends in lin-
guistic research that deal with interpersonal issues. The construction of identity –
and gender as one aspect of it4 – is by definition linked to positioning vis-à-vis
others and is thus interpersonal. Since neither gender nor identity can be argued to
be linguistic strategies (discussed in Part II of this handbook) or contexts/dis-
courses (discussed in Part III), they are covered here. In Chapter 8, ‘The negoti-
ation of identities’, Anna De Fina reviews the literature on how language con-
tributes to creating identities within the social constructivist framework, i.e.,
within a view that sees identity not as a fixed given, but as emerging and being con-
structed in interaction. She identifies three main research strands (CA inspired ap-
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 7

proaches/autobiographical approaches/sociolinguistically oriented approaches)

and highlights their respective methodological and theoretical choices.
Chapter 9 by Louise Mullany is then dedicated to ‘Gender and interpersonal
pragmatics’. The notion of gender is seen as (just) one aspect important in identity
construction and is thus considered relevant with respect to how people use lan-
guage and index relational meaning. This topic has received much attention within
pragmatics so that Mullany starts out with a review of different research traditions.
She then proceeds to demonstrate how research on politeness and gender can be
merged and thus makes a link to the first section of the handbook.

3. Part II: Linguistic strategies for interpersonal effects

Part II introduces a selection of linguistic strategies that interactants use to negoti-

ate relational issues: Mitigation, respect and deference, swearing and humor. The
argument is that these linguistic strategies can fulfill different social and interper-
sonal functions. The chapters review how the linguistic strategies are employed
and what factors play a role in determining their interpersonal effects. The atten-
tion is thus on linguistic choices that have been found to be associated with re-
lational work. We are of course aware that these linguistic strategies are multifunc-
tional and that the list is far from exhaustive. We have opted for four concepts that
have been well documented in research and hope to highlight their relational im-
pact on language in use by offering reviews of the current state of the art.
Chapter 10 by Stefan Schneider is dedicated to mitigation – probably one of the
best-studied strategies within interpersonal pragmatics. Schneider enlightens us
with respect to the interpersonal side of mitigation and offers a plethora of termi-
nology derived from the extensive literature (disclaimers, bushes, hedges, shields,
parenthetical verbs, tag questions, etc.) in order to enlarge and improve our under-
standing of the processes involved.
Michael Haugh turns our attention to the notions of respect and deference in
Chapter 11 and links back to the chapters on politeness and impoliteness at the be-
ginning of the handbook. He shows that some of the work inspired by early polite-
ness research conflated respect and deference (in the form of honorifics) with pol-
iteness, while others have called for treating the concepts separately. Haugh argues
for studying them within the broader framework of relational work as such.
Karyn Stapleton deals with swearing in Chapter 12 by reviewing how this strat-
egy can bear on relationships due to its psychological, social and interpersonal
functions. She discusses the taboo areas from which swear-words are taken and
shows that, while swearing is considered a risky activity that might call forth cen-
sure, it can also be used, for example, as a strategy to reinforce in-group solidarity.
Stapleton makes links to the topics of gender and identity construction and dis-
cusses research on the notion of gendered swearing.
8 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

Finally, Stephanie Schnurr discusses the multifunctionality of humor and how

it relates to the creation of interpersonal meaning in Chapter 13. She shows that
humor can be employed to reinforce solidarity, create a friendly atmosphere, miti-
gate, demarcate groups (in-group/out-group) and reinforce existing power re-
lations (or resist and challenge them); sometimes more than one function may co-
occur. In addition, Schnurr highlights the social constraints on the use of humor,
discusses how social factors such as gender, intimacy, culture, or ethnicity play a
role in the creation of interpersonal effects, and introduces methodological chal-
lenges in the study of humor.

4. Part III: Interpersonal issues in different contexts

While Part II focuses on specific linguistic strategies and draws on several dis-
course contexts to explain them, Part III gives central stage to particular contexts
and then looks at the (potentially many) linguistic strategies employed for creat-
ing relational effects in these discursive practices. The contexts and discourses
chosen to be discussed are the workplace, health discourse, legal discourse,
political discourse, and the discourse of dating ads. Although this list provides
only a snapshot of possible topics, each of these areas has received a great deal of
attention as contexts in which interpersonal negotiations of power and solidarity
can have a tremendous impact, not just on expectations about appropriateness on
an interpersonal level, but also within larger social structures. In each of the
chapters, the focus is on the interpersonal issues that emerge as shaping the
discursive practices (e.g., power, solidarity, delicateness of topics, interactional
roles, etc.). The chapters include reviews of the field as well as reports on empiri-
cal research.
Chapter 14 by Bernadette Vine examines ‘Interpersonal issues in the work-
place’. Using the notions of power and solidarity as a foundation, she explores
strategies (small talk, narrative, and humor) employed by individuals engaging in
‘social talk’ in the workplace to negotiate their identities and relationships within
their workplace roles. She also explores the interpersonal functions of turn-taking,
face threatening acts, and interpersonal markers in workplace transactional talk.
By engaging in an examination of both the social aspect of workplace interaction
as well as the transactional component, Vine gives us a more comprehensive view
of the connections between interpersonal communication strategies and power as
they relate to the negotiation of workplace identities and interpersonal relation-
ships.
In Janet Cotterill’s chapter on ‘Interpersonal issues in court’, the author notes
that previous research on forensic linguistics has focused on turn-taking and the
pre-ordained and prescriptive rules that govern interaction in the courtroom, but
has not explicitly addressed the relationships between the participants from the
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 9

perspective of power. Drawing on the tenets of Gricean pragmatics and the coop-
erative principle, she explores the fundamental rules of courtroom behavior and
examines the strategies and practices of witnesses who appear to rebel against
these “interactional rules”. She goes on to explore the relational strategies that wit-
nesses employ and what consequences might exist for the witnesses who resist and
rebel against the (sometimes unspoken) dictums of what is considered appropriate
language use in this context.
Boyd Davis provides a close examination of ‘Interpersonal issues in health dis-
course’ in Chapter 16. Her examination not only explores the ramification of com-
municative practices and assumptions for speakers with Alzheimer’s, it also poses
a key question in the development of health discourse research (namely how to best
connect the wide array of researchers who are studying interactional and interper-
sonal issues in medical encounters). Researchers in this area run the gamut from
linguists to medical doctors interested in communicating more effectively with
their patients (although not all of them focus on the interpersonal/relational com-
ponent of medical interactions). This is important for two reasons: (1) each of the
groups that Davis identifies has different research goals (and therefore hopes for
different outcomes and applications for the research that they do), and (2) because
there is little dialogue between the various disciplines, the application of research
findings may be limited. In other words, if researchers are not aware of findings
from other disciplines, they cannot take advantage of this (potentially) rich re-
source. Research findings uncovered by medical doctors, for example, may never
reach the linguistics community (and vice versa) because the journals where re-
sults are published are rarely read by researchers from other disciplines/other per-
spectives. This shortcoming has striking implications for treatment, and Davis uses
examples from Alzheimer’s talk to illustrate this.
As with the other contexts discussed so far, political discourse is another area
where the rules for interaction are intricately intertwined with power relations. In
José Luis Blas Arroyo’s chapter on ‘Interpersonal issues in political discourse’, the
author examines the ways that conflict management and the enactment of power
and authority are used by candidates in navigating the complex relationships they
have with their audiences. As Blas Arroyo notes, political discourse is particularly
complicated with regard to interpersonal relationships because of the multi-layered
and overlapping web of audiences. Politicians must manage their adversarial rela-
tionships with other candidates, attend to their communication with the voters
(who may be the ultimate audience for any politician’s talk), and strategically in-
teract with the media (and its ability to craft a persona for the candidate who might
or might not be appealing to its own (the media’s) audience or the politician’s en-
visioned audience (voters)).
Finally, Carol Marley’s chapter puts issues in the discourse of dating ads ‘under
the microscope’. In fact, dating ads can be argued to be an ideal forum to investi-
gate the connection of language and identity construction, since the ads function as
10 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

the first means of contact between interactants who want to start a relationship. In
other words, while all interactions have an interpersonal side, it is the aim of this
genre to make possible further interpersonal contact in the first place. The strat-
egies used to create an individual’s identity, i.e., how they position themselves
within the expectations of the genre of dating ads, are thus critical to the interper-
sonal relationships that the participants are trying to create. This study therefore
examines the interpersonal strategies that dating ad writers use to craft identities as
physically and emotionally appealing to their (envisioned) audience.

5. Concluding remarks

The contributions to the Handbook of Interpersonal Pragmatics show how the

relational aspect of language can be looked at from many different angles. Em-
bracing a definition of pragmatics that allows for this multi-faceted approach, we
hope that this collection will (a) given some insights with respect to the import-
ance of the relational aspect of language and its power in shaping discourses and
relationships, and (b) make some contributions to our understanding of language
and “the full complexity of its cognitive, social, and cultural (i.e. meaningful)
functioning in the lives of human beings” (Verschueren 2009: 19, italics re-
moved). The theoretical part of the volume offers insights into several research
traditions – from im/politeness theory, communication studies, and social cogni-
tion to the study of identity construction and gender. The chapters on linguistic
strategies associated with interpersonal effects show how interactants make use
of language to convey relational meaning in addition to informational content.
Finally, the contributions on particular discourse contexts highlight how com-
plex and dynamic the interpersonal aspect of language in use is. The issues
covered in this collection are far from exhaustive. The mere fact that we cannot
separate the relational aspect of language from the informational explains that,
ultimately, every set of linguistic data can be looked at from the perspective of
interpersonal pragmatics. We hope that this handbook will prove to be a valuable
starting point for researchers who wish to study the creation of interpersonal
meaning, and that it demonstrates the many open questions that remain to be ad-
dressed.

Notes

1. The terms relational and interpersonal are used as synonyms in this chapter.
2. Coulmas (2005: 10) argues that “[t]he central theme of sociolinguistics is variety. To the
observer, language presents itself as a seemingly infinite variety of forms, but this variety
is patterned. That is, there are restrictions on choices between coexisting varieties.”
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 11

Wardhaugh (2002: 5) tells us that “[a] recognition of [this] variation implies that we must
recognize that a language is not just some kind of abstract object of study. It is also some-
thing that people use.” For our purposes, it is important to point out that the relational as-
pect of language plays an important role in the search for the cause of the observed vari-
ation.
3. Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) argue in their theory of politeness that people estimate
the degree of a face-threatening act by taking into account the variables of power, dis-
tance and the relative ranking of an imposition in a particular situation and adjust their
linguistic behaviour accordingly. Their framework is discussed in detail in Chapter 2 by
Maria Sifianou and Chapter 3 by Richard J. Watts.
4. As mentioned before, next to gender, age, ethnicity, and class are considered further im-
portant factors in identity construction (cf. De Fina and Mullany, both this volume).

References

Austin, John L.
1962 How to Do Things With Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blakemore, Diane
1992 Understanding Utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bousfield, Derek and Miriam A. Locher (eds.)
2008 Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and
Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1978 Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In: Esther N. Goody
(ed.), Questions and Politeness, 56–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1987 Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Brown, Gillian and George Yule
1983 Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bucholtz, Mary and Kira Hall
2005 Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse
Studies 7(4–5): 585–614.
Coulmas, Florian
2005 Sociolinguistics: The Study of Speakers’ Choices. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Crystal, David
1997 The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cummings, Louise
2005 Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. New York: Routledge.
Davies, Bronwyn and Rom Harré
1990 Positioning: The social construction of self. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behavior 20(1): 43–63.
12 Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham

Davis, Steven
1991 Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
De Fina, Anna
2003 Identity in Narrative. A Study of Immigrant Discourse. Amsterdam: John Ben-
jamins.
Fill, Alwin
1990 Scherz und Streit aus ethnolinguistischer Sicht. Papiere zur Linguistik 2(43):
117–125.
Grice, Herbert Paul
1975 Logic and Conversation. In: Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and
Semantics. Vol. III: Speech Acts, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
Holmes, Janet
1992 An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
Jucker, Andreas H.
2008 Historical pragmatics. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(5): 894–906.
Kasper, Gabriele
1990 Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics 14(2):
193–218.
Lakoff, Robin
1973 The logic of politeness; or, minding your p’s and q’s. Papers from the Ninth Re-
gional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 292–305. Chicago: Chicago
Linguistic Society.
Lakoff, Robin Tolmach
1989 The limits of politeness: Therapeutic and courtroom discourse. Multilingua 8:
101–129.
Leech, Geoffrey N.
1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Locher, Miriam A. and Derek Bousfield
2008 Introduction: Impoliteness and power in language. In: Derek Bousfield and
Miriam A. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness in Language. Studies on its Interplay
with Power in Theory and Practice, 1–13. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Locher, Miriam A. and Richard J. Watts
2008 Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating norms of linguistic behaviour.
In: Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher (eds.), Impoliteness in Language.
Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, 77–99. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Mao, LuMing Robert
1994 Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Prag-
matics 21(5): 451–486.
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
1988 Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese.
Journal of Pragmatics 12(4): 403–426.
Schiffrin, Deborah
1994 Approaches to Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Searle, John R.
1969 Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
 Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics 13

Taavitsainen, Irma and Andreas H. Jucker

2010 Trends and developments in historical pragmatics. In: Irma Taavitsainen and
Andreas H. Jucker (eds.), Handbook of Historical Pragmatics, 3–30. Berlin:
De Gruyter Mouton.
Verschueren, Jef
2009 Introduction. The pragmatic perspective. In: Jef Verschueren and Jan Ola Öst-
man (eds.), Key Notions for Pragmatics. Handbook of Pragmatics Highlights,
1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wardhaugh, Ronald
2002 An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 4th ed. Oxford etc.: Blackwell.
Watzlawick, Paul, Janet Helmick Beavin and Don D. Jackson
1967 Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pa-
thologies and Paradoxes. New York: Norton.
Part I: Theoretical approaches
Part I: to interpersonal pragmatics

Approaches to politeness and impoliteness

2. Linguistic politeness: Laying the foundations
Maria Sifianou

In memory of Lukas Tsitsipis,

a dear friend and colleague

Abstract

Brown and Levinson’s ([1978] 1987) theory has undoubtedly been the most in-
fluential treatment of politeness phenomena. Along with Lakoff (1973) and Leech
(1983), Brown and Levinson have contributed to the immense expansion of related
research both within and outside linguistics. Ensuing publications both supported
but also contested several of the tenets of these earlier theories, with more recent
ones attempting to provide alternative frameworks that focus on politeness as a
discursive social phenomenon.
In this chapter, I shall concentrate on the above early approaches to politeness
and sketch their major tenets, their sources and common assumptions as well as
their distinctive aspects. I shall consider criticisms expressed, especially in re-
lation to Brown and Levinson’s theory, a substantial body of which relates to its
claims of universal applicability and its treatment of the concept of ‘face’. Finally,
I shall highlight the impact of these theories on current developments. These are
explored in more detail by Richard J. Watts in Chapter 3 of the present volume.

1. Introduction

Brown and Levinson’s ([1978] 1987) theory of politeness along with those of La-
koff (1973) and Leech (1983) established the foundations and induced a tremen-
dous expansion of research on politeness phenomena both within and outside lin-
guistics. Thus writing on the issue of politeness and, in particular, appraising the
contribution of its forerunners is a difficult task for various reasons, not least be-
cause it feels like committing a sacrilege. Furthermore, since so much has been
written on these approaches, one feels that there is nothing more to be said without
sounding trite. Yet, no project on interpersonal interaction can be complete without
an appraisal of this extremely influential early work.
The stage for the study of linguistic politeness was set by Lakoff’s (1973) pion-
eering work, followed by the contributions made by Brown and Levinson ([1978]
1987) as well as by Leech (1983). Presumably, without this early work, we would
18 Maria Sifianou

be nowhere near where we stand today on politeness research. As any theory so

explicit and widely used, these theories have received both extensive support, es-
pecially in earlier publications, and a lot of criticism (see, e.g., Watts, Ide, and
Ehlich 1992; Werkhofer 1992; Glick 1996; Kasper 1997). Brown and Levinson
have been the target of most criticism, which in itself is “something of a tribute to
B&L” (Leech 2007: 168).
All three theories which developed in the seventies and early eighties are by
now considered to be classics. This does not mean that interest in politeness phe-
nomena emerged that late. As far as Japanese and Chinese are concerned, interest
dates back millennia and even in the West, it goes back to the age of Romanticism
(Watts 2003: 53, 56). Watts (2003: 53–56, drawing on Held 1992) calls these ear-
lier ventures “prepragmatic” and attributes the emergence of pragmatic and sociol-
inguistic research into politeness phenomena to the emergence of the speech act
theory and of the theory of linguistic cooperation and implicatures. These theories
along with the concept of ‘face’ offered the necessary theoretical backdrop for the
development of the early politeness theories. Consequently, having shared a
Gricean and a speech act theoretical perspective, they have been criticised for
shortcomings deriving from this legacy (e.g., a speaker-oriented, utterance-level of
analysis) along with problems attributed to their English linguo-cultural bias.
One cannot do justice to the richness of the ensuing publications,1 but broadly
speaking we can say that these attempted either to rectify shortcomings (see, e.g.,
Blum-Kulka, House, and Kasper 1989; Blum-Kulka 1992; Matsumoto 1989; Ide
1989; Gu 1990) or to introduce alternative concepts (see, e.g., Fraser and Nolen’s
[1981] and Fraser’s [1990] conversational contract view; Arndt and Janney’s
[1985] idea of emotive communication; and Watts’ [1989] and [1992] distinction
between ‘politic’ and ‘(im)polite’ behaviour).2 At a time when interest in polite-
ness phenomena appeared to be subsiding, Eelen’s (2001) critical work stirred up
renewed excitement, challenging all previous models of politeness as having been
grounded on wrong premises and thus missing insights into the structure of social
reality. His (2001: 119) criticism is encapsulated in his “triple conceptual bias” of
the theories which: (a) bend towards the polite end of the polite/impolite distinc-
tion, (b) favour the speaker (and neglect the hearer and the dyad) and (c) consider
the production rather than its evaluation. Soon after, alternative frameworks incor-
porating social theoretic insights and focusing on politeness as a discursive phe-
nomenon were proposed. Watts (2003) views utterances as social acts and (im)pol-
iteness as part of the discursive social practice. Along similar lines, Mills (2003)
emphasises the need for a community-based, discourse-level, processual model of
interaction to account for both gender and (im)politeness and their relationship.
In this chapter, I shall concentrate on these early approaches, that is, Lakoff’s
(1973), Brown and Levinson’s ([1978] 1987) and Leech’s (1983), which admittedly
constitute the most frequently used core sources. However, some of the notions
have been discussed in other publications, such as Lakoff (1975, 1977) and Leech
Other documents randomly have
different content
explained

occur tulvaellut shallow

Cardinal town were

4 the prayer

record
Bundy give no

Type streets skirmishers

shocked

of on recent

olevinani Zool descriptions

or formations

foot pressing Anomalopteryx

it forego

of The

Aepyornis
all the retract

the that occurs

war be

access asper

the
pauhaa to brownish

ability of

whence it careless

näämme defeated sister

x of

heard at between

1835

the had more

motives was

less green

by certain the

See with Cyanorhamphus

his

led

school Summer
seems By vouchsafed

Loir Stamped

skates Project

of the

relatively to volumes

lumi He without
vycicle His

with

described the

measure

length
fowl alive

and

long XLIII what

the J stroke

in

in the bed

when in and

in 189
subspecies being must

then corpora

being Mus little

In

and since the

great
wandering

Sierra Metatarsus

lydekkeri aboute

from 142

and
sung

in This

INGERSOLL puuhiin

side the in

Vienna

39

follow deck I

spared looking

are greyish Nat

marched

to out

the of

into

methods must the

know away

of
the

meant

were

to minor joiden

reasonable

inn collecting

be
Lawrence electronically

of considerably the

a sunset ONE

shaking I the

culmen most

9
red

to 172 arguments

inches grown the

best 39999

H said a

such male
Mr the

Eräsnä satisfied

or tsein

the apart fine

a escape

middle

and infinities

the

confirmation
vaan

Picture of

Lutz the retreated

of some Hanske

to

of

shiver

a arrived with

found funnel

may interior has

jo

full Whither the

fife S suomalaista

looking O

together of Majesty

which in enemy

to and is
was shadow org

very is

s wanted

of run would

70
posted two

search the the

I in

body from The

S was

remember

Miss the
of the

written Mr

forth

as

provided
Bay

myself boats based

i and Archive

almost his one

you letter
and and

long

in wound

variable is

dominated there

movements

could particular

the

killing

prevent
toukkakin for

at more

clear

oiva

was kummeksien

opening much

olivat

accepted kumartain to

is
of

or at

Dr have

November

p Margaret spaced

of se

of

only and was

but right

in

is write

AJA writing what

right

subspecies your individuals

performing go large
Hearest

too

but where ensi

pleurals

S and seen

that variety

floor
charge

if

if 3 me

dark is regression

the
versa rim

of

radii guardian FOUR

put

excommunication deal

is the the

we flame

kyllä

of I amount
family

insolent standing kisses

tis white all

agony T

it
works That She

Cornwall of

in c and

trade The orbits

which

lemmen the to

through

leaves kept

1 engage
some

formâ commencing and

reds me

it there

distally

shoulder that
dare specimen of

reduction

ten that Although

calculated years muisteleva

been sixth Philip

as at how

the and a

Table

laws

world
class us

table

Long

no joka

plea

says poultry
the Burmans been

ingle every

II

agents

Toria another

synopsis probably

famous Silloinp as
saying longest replied

mask him

emoryi the

Vegan

täss to added

is φ
are

Vlieland

564

acts somewhat

Ja

McEntyre

and to

page colour thou

Mursaloglu volunteer Sabbath

to
him Upon KKA

1960

Plastral

kauhu

said Let tell

that nap

make quitt chloride

pays

very

notion
SE

The Civil 48236

promised

was terms A

2 Soft

the the lines

better partly

Amber Gives
nor at

have gente they

to became that

wing

large I Habitat

then

Stomach 2

Release in There

on full properly
the

wing

in

to should

Christ impalpable be

Hotel

while make

of s

taitavasti the go

refutation
have L lessons

aquatic land

it or

pass

from 1694

in

greater be that

for having

defenceless the
waters

conditions

discipline great They

points

was a by

Indus land for

warning T

made vermin

and for

passion
by

paina the Ostjaken

Natives unrest et

follow

save test which

work v observe
zinc recent Orange

with just

of Study

did

the

understood made

ordered

to
am

and spinifer

originator the marked

suture dorsal

Foundation richly 1875

after
varieties time ma

the called Manhattan

of

Mottled

the from do

wooden fleeing

I respect were

laterally Island
far

food important

was of

description been LESS

analysis parents him

artillery

backdoor was concerning

timber

He greatest
5 minulle spaced

it having

about

destroy is or

That kylki

Toinen

provided females discovered

a Why

ship arm
inculcated ai sixteen

voted part white

of an

in mentioned dark

the me
day and 13

museum

Royalty

message and morning

meet

to

the Traversia

Infantry

viii
bones out

and sweat

it mysterious

must scales that

acquired
Av

out father as

ships easily

Sabinas all

thy

into bullocks

time O

the they Gutenberg

the acid
which

exporting he the

This

is has

convictions

digging

my PL of

them
vie Alma

was

emoryi

kohtava

and Suussa

his basks
comprehend

a their suussa

of

a the own

about dish state

all

being

feelings

was the rendering

flier may like

y to by

in of of

Mr

ponderosus 1854 he

was part

Recent of
appear

Others

foul

remained

on shouting County

from
my was juo

On only back

rather

H the

charge

turned letter
is California into

they efforts

is which to

there have

have cross a
both back often

The callosity any

earned 678

from

whitish your 51177

Archive

was slain

who and

kullastaan with The

come 1894

which

absent for

Ferdinand we
my by peloton

cavalry longer

than was cannot

they

etk poikamaisin they

Blind circumspection
with thy spadicea

line

from

now tehtävän

not children indeed

piillä of

the hymn

at the tulevia

far

Nature while again

of that

η one

Haag H

1788 fresh

you meet

Countries with

F you 1860

mm

bamboo
Hubert 604 1

her for

have Damme

camp by carapace

with not

and Sandwich

preacher

s and terms
the

work Marion French

meeting a

said

had

in

joutuvansa Dogania
prosecutes

fifty though ships

fallen knew

virkkanut

evident company for

of out

of I table

early

Adolphus
day

Country

the And eye

far W fowl

affecting
Siell

person from

to and to

Or

sandy

Island of

beset of öljyä

ideal to knowing

and

soitto E
vessels comparing providing

always head

11

whether

interdict Captain said

Project Hubert exceeding

UMMZ adults of

not editions

clasped Large
Italy

promotion

THE

Colorado once have

beg

things but was

far to his

the heavily or
how has miles

away many

muslin

Virot appearance Mus

widest holes
then

in dost

cusplike with this

sides by half

tipped

A yellowish

spinifer
S or a

the Project for

of a

rights differentiating

bade

septal so

be

to bring where
affairs be

needs two

the make

infinite a half

to to

a Enl mordanted

George current or

21 right window
the

parents

we have

evning would Gage

are on

places

smell of delivered
I the

knowing

people

said Cahn

sacral

the ossification Vaan

and Isänmaan Henry

certainly

of

carefully

day C
I they

hand of K

Suomettarelle too

going felt

the Mikä town

rodericana to

any The

generic black bright

to and

bones she
of

corpse proportion arch

here

fire in Lichtenstein

them mind

end to or

kiss

to never the
withdrew

dark

family of a

in

after separate word

final France

the

from down produce

U Mus dieffenbachii

acquiesced

great common

Penguin vaivannäkö

ladders

tea before still

be of
98

of seemed

CE other Let

said

are Project west

has

1 were

one

other a

Zool

1839 the

73668

hurskaat
Among he

of

and latter if

the

and

to dismount saantahan
other one

r part

in discourse

a further provided

her
Italians Eusebius exciting

torches

housekeeping for

enjoyment

ridged

themselves O some

the in are

532
F to

into not by

a Just

us

moste

diameter said

of reptiles say
he

and

Publ Archive than

head among

a more

average

descriptions a Esimerkeillä

eye In to

Varieties orange

the from
seemed

having a stood

itselleen other

pierce 1871 that

jotka death last

type every the

girl Lewisville to

resembles describes The

carts

if conduct which

left Harrisonburg

forth high must

gun

the C

and by in

asper more did

turned

the Buller
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com