西电跨文化交际论文

PolitenessStrategies—EastandWest1.IntroductionPoliteness,asasub-disciplineofpragmatics,gainsagreatdealofinterestinthepasttwenty-fiveyears.Thenotionof“politeness”isabroadandcomplicatedonewithnumeroustheoriesandapproaches,anditissociallydetermined.Politenessasasocialphenomenoncanbeobservedinalllanguagesandcultures,andithaslongbeenmadeanimportantobjectofstudyinlinguistics．Asamatteroffact,althoughpolitenessstrategyhastheremarkableinfluencesoncross-culturalandcross-linguisticcommunication,therestillhaveafewproblemsinvolvingthewayofusingpolitenessstrategies.ThereallyseriousstudyofpolitenessintheWesternlinguisticcirclescanbetracedbacktotheGermanRomanticMovementintheearly1920s.Inrecentyears,alongwiththerapidmovementtowardspragmatics，politenesshasbecomethecentraltheme.ThetwomostinfluentialandsuccessfultheoriesareBrownandLevinson’sFaceTheoryandLeech’sPolitenessPrinciple.InChina,however,therealstudyofpolitenessonlybeganinthe1980swhenpragmaticswasintroducedintoChina.Themostworth-mentioningfigureinthisareaisGuYueguo.Heputsforwardhisownsetofpolitenessmaximsinhis“Politeness姓名徐进课程名跨文化交际日期2016年6月21日PhenomenainModernChinese”(1990).Later,basedontraditionalChineseculturalvalues,Gu(1992)hasformulatedadifferentsetofpolitenessmaxims,whichhethinksaremoresuitabletotheChineseenvironment．Sincecultureisassociatedwithsociallyconstructedgroups,politenesscriteriamaynotbethesameindifferentcultures.Thewaystorealizepoliteness,andthestandardsofjudgmentdifferindifferentcultures.Beingunawareofsuchdifferenceswouldprobablyleadtotroubleorfailureincross—culturalcommunication.Therefore，itisnecessaryandimportanttostudydifferentconceptsandmanifestationsofpolitenessindifferentcultures,soastoreducethepossibilityofmisunderstandingbetweenthetwosidesandachieveasatisfactoryresult．Thispapermainlyattemptstostudypolitenessstrategiesbetweeneastandwest.Politenesscanberealizedinanumberofways,amongwhichtheuseoflanguageisanimportantone.Withthedevelopmentofpragmaticsinthepastthirtyyearsorso，moreandmoreattentionhasbeenpaidtothewaysinwhichlanguageisusedtoshowpolitenessandalsothedifferencesbetweendifferentlanguagesandcultures．Thispaperprincipallyisconductedbyfiveparts.Inthefirst,anintroductioniswritten.Theninordertodiscussthetopicclearly,theoriesonpolitenessarestudiedabouttheconceptofpolitenessandpolitenesstheories.Thirdly,Politenessbasedonculturalvaluesbetweeneastandwestisdiscussed.Thensomeculturaldifferencesofbehaviorsonpolitenessarestudiedbetweeneastandwest.Intheend,aconclusionisconductedonthesignificanceofculturalawarenesstopoliteness.2.TheoriesonPoliteness2.1TheconceptofpolitenessPolitenessistheexpressionofthespeakers’purposetodecreasefacethreatssupportedbysomefacethreateningactsuponanother.Itisauniversalphenomenoninhumansociety,butitisnotexistentuntiltheprocessofsocializationandcivilization．TheEnglishterm“polite”derivesfromlateMedievalLatin‘‘Politus’’meaning“smoothed”,“accomplished”．Therefore“polite”wasusuallyassociatedwithconceptssuchas“polished”，“refined”．Howeverdifferentlinguistsandscholarsgivetheirdifferentinterpretationsofpoliteness．Leech(1983:82)seespolitenessasaregulativefactorininteractioninordertomaintain“thesocialequilibriumandthefriendlyrelation”.BrownandLevinson(1987)viewpolitenessasaredressiveactiontakentocounter—balancethedisruptiveeffectofface—threateningacts.Yule(2000：106)maintainsthatpolitenessis“asystemofinterpersonalrelationsdesignedtofacilitateinteractionbyminimizingthepotentialforconflictandconfrontationinherentinallhumaninterchange”．WhileHeZhaoxiong，aChinesescholar，holdsthatpolitenesscanbeunderstoodasasocialphenomenon，ameanstoachievegoodinterpersonalrelationships，andanormimposedbysocialconventions，andthereforepolitenessisphenomenal，instrunlental，andnormativebynature(1995:2)．Ingeneral，wemightsaypolitenessisshowingcourtesy,respectandconsiderationtootherpeople，acknowledgingthem,andnotimposingunnecessarilyonthem．2.2ThepolitenesstheoryfromLeechLeech,G.(2005)focusesonthebiasofformerpolitenesstheoriesandreflectionthewriter’sPolitenessintheoriesofPragmaticsasaGrandStrategyofPoliteness,aimingtoshowthechangeanddevelopmentinthisfield.Heanalysestwomainframeworksofpolitenessstrategies:theoldtheoryofPolitenessandanewGrandStrategyofPolitenessinordertocometoaconclusionthatthereisnoEast-Westdivideinpolitenessbehaviors.Inaddition,Leech(1983)proposedthePolitenessPrinciplewhichisdevisedinageneralwayfromtwoaspects:oneistodecreasetheexpressionofimpolitebeliefs;theotheristomaximizetheexpressionofpolitebeliefs.Insteadofonthebasisofhistheoryontheconceptofface,LeechpatternsonGrice’sCP(1975)andmakesadivisionthepolitenessprinciplesintomanymaxims,namelyTactMaxim,GenerosityMaxim,ApprobationMaxim,ModestyMaxim,AgreementMaximandSympathyMaxim.2.3BrownandLevinson’sFaceTheoryonpolitenessTheconceptof‘face’,centraltothetheoryofpolitenessproposedbyBrownandLevinson(1987,1987),isclaimedtobedrawnprimarilyfromtheworkofthenotedAmericansociologistErvingGoffman,whodefinesfaceas‘'thepositivesocialvalueapersoneffectivelyclaimsforhimselfbythelineothersassumehehastakenduringaparticularcont