‘Successful linguistic communication depends on participants’ capacity for rational, purposeful... - page 1
Keywords: Sociolinguistics; talk; language; politeness theory; face; communication
By sth202 on 25/09/2008
Level: Bachelor Honours Degree (BA, BEng, BSc etc)
Page Number: 1 of 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Exploring Talk
December 2005
‘Successful linguistic communication depends on participants’ capacity for rational, purposeful and […] co-operative action.’ (Cameron) How far can politeness theory and the concept of face support this claim about human interaction?
According to Cameron (2001: 75), there is a certain type and amount of cooperation necessary for people to be able to follow one another’s contributions in a conversation and therefore to achieve successful linguistic communication, but what does this cooperation mean/involve? How do people know what to expect and, in turn, what is expected of them in such a situation that they need to communicate linguistically in a comprehensive manner? There are several theories and rules which, it is said, we as human beings follow naturally, rather than things we physically learn. This essay, however, will concentrate on the idea of politeness theory and the notion of face, and how they are used in human linguistic relationships. Furthermore, I will concentrate on the use of these ‘rules’ in British English, as it has been stated that the unwritten rules for communication in other languages and cultures differ from those which I, as a native speaker of English, understand and utilise. To start with I will attempt to explain what I view as successful linguistic communication, but in order to study this topic I feel I must also define ‘face’ and ‘politeness’.
When we interact with one another in conversation, we unconsciously believe it reasonable to presume that others are using language in the same manner that we are, to achieve a goal – i.e. to convey a meaning to the hearer – rather than just “uttering pointless remarks at random” (Cameron 2001: 75). Certainly Wardhaugh (1998) agrees with this, as he points out that conversation relies on cooperative action in that speakers and listeners employing a common set of assumptions about what is happening is essential. In addition, well documented references by Grice say that we are able to have conversations with each other because we distinguish common targets in discussions and we realise that there are very precise ways of reaching these targets (Wardhaugh 1998). In any conversation, only particular kinds of acts are available to the speaker if s/he is to be understood at any given time on account of the limits which are in place and which rule linguistic interaction. These confines mean that speakers have reduced choice in what they can say
Last 5 comments…
There have been no comments posted for this article, but you need to register if you want to be the first!