Linguistic Routines and Politeness in Greeting

and Parting

An analysis of John Laver’s article by A.Vigneron

Outline Introduction Raymond Firth’s view The importance of face (and FTAs) Risk/Routinization equivalent evolution Paul Grice’s Cooperative principle Grice’s 4 maxims vs Politeness and Face Ervin-Tripp’s flow chart Formulaic greeting and parting Conversational phases and routine choice Norm and deviation : conversational implicature Phatic communion Initial phase : Acknowledgment and Re-negotiation Final phase : Mitigation and consolidation Conclusion

Introduction

Permanent tension between› Efficiency (Grice)› Politeness (Brown and Levinson)

Linguistic routines :› Are polite behaviour tools› Help reduce FTA

Norm is key any deviation = negotiation of social relationship between participants (cf. slides 9 & 10)

Raymond Firth’s view

Main function of routine linguistic material = ceremonial / ritual function

« Sociological observations suggest [it] is highly conventionalized (…) greeting and

parting behavior may be termed ritual since it follows patterned routines (…) and it has

adaptative value in facilitating social relationships. »

R.Firth 1972

The importance of face (and FTAs)

Face = key notion in routines

Negative F : want of member that his actions be unimpeded by others negative politeness

Positive F : want of member that his wants be desirable to -at least some- others positive politeness

Non-respect of Grice’s 4 maxims arises from attention to Face and FTAs! (cf. slide 7 & 8)

Risk / Routinization equivalent evolution

Maximum FTA risk uses maximum routinization conversely

Maximum routinization reveals maximum FTA risk

Formality and politeness display equivalent evolution to keep FTA at the same level

Circumstance variation existence of link between formality / politeness / risk / face

Paul Grice’s Cooperative principle

Grice’s 4 maxims› Quantity : be as informative as necessary› Quality : be truthful› Relation : be relevant› Manner : be clear, concise and unambiguous

Assumption : purpose of conversation = maximally effective exchange of information

Notion of conversational implicature arises : taking into account that the 4 maxims MUST be fulfilled… what is S doing?

Grice’s 4 maxims vs Politeness and Face

« One powerful and pervasive motive for not talking Maxim-wise is the desire to give some attention to face (…) Politeness is then a major deviation from such rational efficiency. »

Brown & Levinson 1978

Need for maximum efficiency : Help! , Fire! , … Imperative for actions directly in H’s interest :

Take care , Enjoy , Be good …

Ervin-Tripp’s flow chart

Formulaic greeting and parting

Follows Ervin-Tripp’s flow chart Address usage is reciprocal between equals

and non-reciprocal between unequals

Adult / non-adult Setting identity is official rather than personal Dispensation : higher rank accepting ‘closeness’ Relatives & well-acquainted / inferiors / children

= formulaic phrase

Conversational phases and Routine choice

Initial (marginal) : politeness ++ Medial (main conversational body): Grice’s

maxims + / politeness – Final (marginal) : politeness ++

Social status of H Degree of acquaintance between S/H Situational factors : occasion/setting Characteristics os S/H : age, gender, social class

Norm and deviation : conversational implicature

« When there is agreement about a normal address form to alters of specific statuses, then any deviation is a message. »

Ervin-Tripp 1969

« How can (the S’) saying what he did say be reconciled with the supposition that he is observing the overall Cooperative Principle?»

Grice 1975

Two movements :› Social step : acquaintance , intimacy growth› Social distancing

Phatic communion Laver : S can signal his perception of formality /

acquaintance / social relationship Initial + Final phases

Initial :› Defuse the hostilty of silence when speech is expected› Initiatory : cooperate, emotionally neutral, solidarity

(accepting interaction)› Exploratory : interaction consensus , mutual

acknowledgment Final :

› Cooperative parting› Consolidates relationship betwwen S/H

Initial phase : Acknowledgment and Re-negotiation

Neutral category : factors known to S+H (weather) Self-oriented : personal factors of S Other-oriented : factors of H

Any 3 : well-acquainted Neutral : anyone (no FTA) Other-oriented : S>H (threat : H’s F- / treat H’s F+) Self-oriented : S<H (threat : S’ F- / treat S’ F+)

Final phase : Mitigation and Consolidation

Reparatory acts for breaking the relationship Self and other –oriented (neutral very rare) Omission = implicature of rejection

Mitigatory = F- : external compulsion to leave / needs of H & external compulsion to leave

Consolidatory = F+ : esteem / arrangement for continuation of relationship / consolidation of network of acquaintances

Conclusion Importance of FTAs and Grice’s maxims

(their interplay) Norm & deviation implicature

Routines = strategies for negotiation and control of social identity and relationships.