Cover not available
Part of
Exploring Future Paths for Historical Sociolinguistics
Edited by Tanja Säily, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin and Anita Auer
[Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 7] 2017
► pp. 109–127

Discord in eighteenth-century genteel correspondence

This chapter studies representations of discord in the correspondence of eighteenth-century English gentry. The study aims at charting various ways in which the upper classes negotiated conflict situations and cases where norms of society were challenged, by mapping the social meaning of relevant labels according to the three themes of discord, disgrace, and disorder. The methodological starting point is in Nevalainen and Tissari’s (2010) study of the shifting cultural keywords courtesy, civility, and politeness, which we also study here along with the lexemes discord, disgrace, embarrassment, mortification, and shame. The results show that civility, politeness, and shame all function as tools for social control and critical evaluation of self and others.
Keywords: discord, conflict, eighteenth-century gentry, socio-cultural terminology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Polite society of eighteenth-century England
    • 2.2Discord in the eighteenth century: Linguistic and socio-cultural background
  • 3.Relationships between politeness and discord: Methods
    • 3.1Socio-cultural embedding of politeness terminology (Nevalainen & Tissari 2010)
    • 3.2Discord terminology in the current study
  • 4.Case studies: Discord in eighteenth-century correspondence
    • 4.1Discord proper
    • 4.2Disgrace
    • 4.3Disorder
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ahs.7.05nev
References (37)
References
Primary sources
Bluestocking Corpus. Compiled by Anni Sairio at the Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.
CEECE = Corpus of Early English Correspondence Extension. Compiled by Terttu Nevalainen, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Mikko Laitinen, Minna Nevala, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin, Tanja Säily and Anni Sairio at the Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.
Secondary sources
Bousfield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briggs, Asa. 1959. The age of improvement. London: Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Bryson, Anna. 1998. From courtesy to civility: Changing codes of conduct in early modern England. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, Peter. 1992. The language of orders in early modern Europe. In Michael L. Bush (ed.), Social orders and social classes in Europe since 1500: Studies in social stratification, 1–12. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 2000. A civil tongue: Language and politeness in early modern Europe. In Peter Burke, Brian Harrison & Paul Slack (eds.), Civil histories: Essays presented to Sir Keith Thomas, 31–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Anna. 2004. The sexual politics of the British Constitution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Davison, Kate. 2014. Occasional politeness and gentleman’s laughter in 18th-century England. The Historical Journal 57. 921–945. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickie, Simon. 2003. Hilarity and pitilessness in the mid-eighteenth century: English jestbook humor. Eighteenth-Century Studies 37. 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2000. Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12. 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology 41. 87–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
French, H. R. 2000. Social status, localism and the ‘middle sort of people’ in England 1620–1750. Past and Present 166. 66–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gatrell, Vic. 2006. City of laughter: Sex and satire in eighteenth-century London. New York: Walker & Co.Google Scholar
Grundy, Isobel. 1999. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 2012. Changes in politeness cultures. In Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds.), The Oxford handbook of the history of English, 422–433. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kakavá, Christina. 2001. Discourse and conflict. In Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis, 650–670. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kinservik, Matthew J. 2007. Sex, scandal and celebrity in late eighteenth-century England. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2004. Power and politeness in action: Disagreements in oral communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, Carey. 1998. The evolution of English prose, 1700–1800: Style, politeness, and print culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munck, Thomas. 2000. The enlightenment: A comparative social history 1721–1794. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Nevala, Minna. 2010. Keeping up appearances: Face work in self- and addressee-oriented reference. In Jonathan Culpeper & Daniel Z. Kádár (eds.), Historical (im)politeness, 147–173. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Heli Tissari. 2010. Contextualising eighteenth-century politeness: Social distinction and metaphorical levelling. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: ideology and change, 133–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plax, Julie-Anne. 2013. Watteau’s witticisms: Visual humor and sociability. In Elizabeth C. Mansfield & Kelly Malone (eds.), Seeing satire in the eighteenth century, 63–80. Oxford: SVEC.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy. 1990. English society in the eighteenth century. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
. 2000. Enlightenment: Britain and the creation of the modern world. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Royle, Edward. 1987. Modern Britain: A social history 1750–1985. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Sairio, Anni. Forthcoming. ‘Now to my distress’: Shame discourse in eighteenth-century English letters. A special issue of Journal of Historical Pragmatics , ed. by Matylda Włodarczyk & Irma Taavitsainen.
Scheff, Thomas J. 1994. Microsociology: Discourse, emotion and social structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2012. Disagreements, politeness and face. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 1554–1564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma & Andreas H. Jucker. 2010. Expressive speech acts and politeness in eighteenth-century English. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Eighteenth-century English: Ideology and change, 159–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A. 2009. Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watts, Richard. 2002. From polite language to educated language: The re-emergence of an ideology. In Richard J. Watts & Peter Trudgill (eds.), Alternative histories of English, 155–172. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, R. K. 1980. Modern England: From the eighteenth century to the present. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Wilson, Ben. 2007. Decency and disorder 1789–1837. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Withington, Phil. 2007. Company and sociability in early modern England. Social History 32. 291–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Jucker, Andreas
2020. Politeness in the History of English, DOI logo
Jucker, Andreas H.
2020. The discourse of manners and politeness in Restoration and eighteenth-century drama. In Manners, Norms and Transgressions in the History of English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 312], ► pp. 102 ff. DOI logo
Jucker, Andreas H.
2024. Conduct politeness versus etiquette politeness: a terminological distinction. Journal of Politeness Research 20:1 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.