This study investigates politeness phenomena in Chinese service encounters, contrasting the use of facework in two types of service encounters: state-run vs. privately-owned stores. I argue that politeness is a dynamic process, which involves participants’ perception of a social setting and the assumed interpersonal relationship in a given situation. It is shown that social distance and the type of social relationship play an essential role in Chinese politeness behavior and that the use of facework in service encounters signals a change in discursive practice due to social and economic changes in China.
2006. English or Spanish?! Language accommodation in New York City service encounters. Intercultural Pragmatics 3:1
Callahan, Laura
2009. Accommodation to Outgroup Members’ Use of an Ingroup Language: A Comparison of Service Encounters in Person and Over the Telephone. International Multilingual Research Journal 3:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Callahan, Laura
2014. Face Work in Spanish Language Service Encounters between Native and Nonnative Speakers in the United States. In Spanish and Portuguese across Time, Place, and Borders, ► pp. 215 ff.
Cardon, Peter W.
2009. A model of face practices in Chinese business culture: Implications for western businesspersons. Thunderbird International Business Review 51:1 ► pp. 19 ff.
Pan, Yuling & Dániel Z. Kádár
2011. Historical vs. contemporary Chinese linguistic politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 43:6 ► pp. 1525 ff.
2012. Shifting practices and emerging patterns: Telephone service encounters in Shanghai. Language in Society 41:4 ► pp. 417 ff.
Yang, Na & Zihe Wang
2022. Addressing as a gender-preferential way for suggestive selling in Chinese e-commerce live streaming discourse: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Pragmatics 197 ► pp. 43 ff.
Ye, Zhengdao
2019. The politeness bias and the society of strangers. Language Sciences 76 ► pp. 101183 ff.
Zhu, Weihua
2014. Managing relationships in everyday practice: The case of strong disagreement in Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics 64 ► pp. 85 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 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.