1. ____________________________________________________________________ Linguistic Politeness: Editor as diplomat TECM 5195 Dr. Chris Lam

2. ____________________________________________________________________ Poll! Text ChrisLam138 to 22333 OR Go to pollev.com/chrislam138

3. ____________________________________________________________________ Linguistic Politeness Theory Brown and Levinson (1987) Founded in pragmatics and based on speech act theory (Austin, 1962) All utterances perform a locutionary act and an illocutionary act Locutionary act is the act of saying something Illocutionary act is the underlying or intended meaning Does this need salt?

4. ____________________________________________________________________ Face and Face-threatening acts Face is positive self-image and is considered universal by many (Goffman, 1967) Negative face- need for autonomy/individualism Positive face- need for social approval

5. ____________________________________________________________________ Relationships between writers and editors Relationships between writers and editors are often contentious Writers don’t want editors to “demand a single solution” Editors can be seen as “controlling” or taking “control of a paper” Important for editors to be language experts AND diplomats

6. ____________________________________________________________________ Editing as an FTA Editing is inherently an FTA Telling a writer to make a change impedes negative face Criticizing a writer’s specific choices (explicitly or implicitly) impedes positive face So where does politeness come into play? Linguistic politeness refers to using language to tend to both positive and negative face needs

7. ____________________________________________________________________ So, what’s the dilemma? Relationships between writers and editors is already contentious Editing is inherently an FTA SO, editors must balance clarity and politeness

8. ____________________________________________________________________ Continuum of Politeness Most Clear / Least PoliteLeast Clear / Most Polite

9. ____________________________________________________________________ Two main ways to alter politeness 1.Syntactically 2.Semantically

10. ____________________________________________________________________ Poll!

11. ____________________________________________________________________ Syntactic or Levels of directness 1.Direct- Unambiguous Include a table here 2.Conventionally indirect- Creates pragmatic ambiguity (2 possible meanings) Can you include a table? 3.Nonconventionally indirect (hints)- Creates pragmatic vagueness (many meanings) Graphic aids create interest

12. ____________________________________________________________________ Semantic Politeness Markers 1.Downgraders 2.Supportive Moves

13. ____________________________________________________________________ Downgraders Can be added to both direct or indirect utterances Fine tune the level of indirectness of an utterance Can be stacked Lexical or phrasal (word-level) I think (Subjectivizer) Maybe/Perhaps (Hedge) Possibly (Downtoner) OK? (Appealer) You know, (Cajoler) Just (Understater)

14. ____________________________________________________________________ Supportive Moves Can be added to direct and indirect strategies Mitigate FTAs Add semantic content (move beyond word or phrase-level) This will help the reader find your work experience more easily (payoff statement) This is a good start, but (compliment)

15. ____________________________________________________________________ Poll!

16. ____________________________________________________________________ Direct Options 1.Bald-on-record 2.Locution-derivable 3.Opinion statement

17. ____________________________________________________________________ Bald-on-record Example: Insert work experience here Most face-threatening, but also most clear Some non-native speakers actually prefer bald-on-record Suggestions for bald-on-record Mitigate with downgraders ( Insert work experience here, OK?) Mitigate with compliments ( I like what you’ve listed, but insert work experience here) Mitigate with payoff statement ( Insert work experience here. The reader will be able to access it more easily)

18. ____________________________________________________________________ Locution-derivable Example: You should include your work experience here. The locution (force or obligation) can be derived by the hearer Insert a high-value modal verb Should, will, or ought Suggestions for locution-derivable Avoid passive voice locution-derivable ( The table ought to be inserted here.) Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with downgraders ( You know, you should include a table here) Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with compliments ( The content is good for this section, but you should include a table here.) Mitigate active voice locution-derivable with payoff statements ( You should include a table here; it will make it easier for the audience)

19. ____________________________________________________________________ Opinion statement strategy Changes the point-of-view, while remaining direct and unambiguous “I would include a table here” Suggestions Use them! ( I would put my work experience before education)

20. ____________________________________________________________________ Conventionally indirect strategies Preparatory Interrogative

21. ____________________________________________________________________ Preparatory Example: You could insert your work experience here. Refers to some condition that must be true for the hearer to be prepared to perform the directive More polite than most direct strategies, but introduces ambiguity Use low-value modal verbs Can and Could Suggestions Avoid preparatory strategies when intent is to convey obligations Reserve for possibility or options ( You could remove your references)

22. ____________________________________________________________________ Interrogative strategy Example: Can you include work experience here? Less direct than all previous States directive as a question Suggestions Avoid when obligation is intended. Reserve for actual inquiries ( Can you include more information for each work entry?)

23. ____________________________________________________________________ Non-Conventionally Indirect Strategies Example: Work experience is typically included here. Strong hints ( This section has a lot of information) Mild hints (Tables can help when you have a lot of information) Suggestions AVOID!

24. ____________________________________________________________________ Conveying possibility and not obligation Use illocutionary-force indicating device (explicitly state purpose) Use with preparatory strategies You might include more information about your work experience. This is just a suggestion, however.