Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Historical Pragmatics
Vol. 25:1 (2024) ► pp.1–32

The pragmatics of royal discourse in William Shakespeare’s Henry vi

ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University

Politeness (Brown and Gilman 1989; Rudanko 1993; Kopytko 1995) and impoliteness (Culpeper 1996, 2001; Bousfield 2007) have a prominent place in the reading of Shakespearean drama and serve as a means of characterisation. In this study, I utilise (im)politeness and face theory to characterise the royal discourse in 1, 2, 3 Henry vi . The study aims to analyse the linguistic behaviour of King Henry vi to see how well his royal discourse reflects his kingship and how his linguistic inadequacy contributes to his political failures. I investigate Henry’s use of (im)politeness and facework to handle political negotiations and I evaluate his level of awareness of the “political face”, which is the king’s desire to preserve a positive public image and to save face in social interactions. I look at the examples of Henry’s inadequate linguistic behaviour and try to establish why this behaviour was inefficient in a given scene and context.

Keywords: history play, impoliteness, politeness, political face, pragmatics of Early Modern politics, royal discourse, Shakespeare
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background: (Im)politeness
    • 2.1Pragma-stylistics and literary characterisation
  • 3.King Henry vi or Dignitas non moritur(?)
    • 3.1 1 Henry vi : Redressive politeness
    • 3.2 2 Henry vi : Failing to (re)act
    • 3.3 3 Henry vi : A king with a crown in his heart
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Sources
  • References
Published online: 20 October 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.19012.kiz
References

Sources

King Henry VI, Part 1. William Shakespeare
2000 (Edited by Edward Burns.) London: Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
King Henry VI, Part 2. William Shakespeare
2001 (Edited by Ronald Knowles.) London: Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
King Henry VI, Part 3. William Shakespeare
2001 (Edited by John D. Cox and Eric Rasmussen.) London: Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
King Richard II. William Shakespeare
2002 (Edited by Charles R. Forker.) London: Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
King Richard III. William Shakespeare
2006 (Edited by Anthony Hammond.) London: Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
The Prince. Niccolò Machiavelli
2007 In Peter Constantine (editor and translator), The Essential Writings of Machiavelli, 3–100. New York: The Modern Library.Google Scholar
Archer, Dawn and Derek Bousfield
2010 “ ‘See Better, Lear’? See Lear Better! A Corpus-Based Pragma-Stylistic Investigation of Shakespeare’s King Lear ”. In Beatrix Busse and Dan McIntyre (eds), Language and Style, 183–203. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, Dawn, Jonathan Culpeper and Paul Rayson
2009 “Love – ‘A Familiar or a Devil’? An Exploration of Key Domains in Shakespeare’s Comedies and Tragedies”. In Dawn Archer (ed.), What’s in a Word List? Investigating Word Frequency and Keyword Extraction, 137–158. Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Arundale, Robert
2006 “Face as Relational and Interactional: A Communication Framework for Research on Face, Facework, and Politeness”. Journal of Politeness Research 2 (2): 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bousfield, Derek
2007 “ ‘Never a Truer Word Said in Jest’: A Pragmastylistic Analysis of Impoliteness as Banter in Henry IV, Part 1 ”. In Marina Lambrou and Peter Stockwell (eds), Contemporary Stylistics, 209–220. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
2008a Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008b “Impoliteness in the Struggle for Power”. In Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher (eds), Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, 127–154. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Researching Impoliteness and Rudeness: Issues and Definitions”. In Miriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham (eds), Interpersonal Pragmatics, 101–134. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger and Albert Gilman
1989 “Politeness Theory and Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies”. Language in Society 18 (2): 159–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bull, Peter
2012 “The Microanalysis of Political Discourse”. Philologia Hispalensis 26 (1–2): 79–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burns, Edward
(ed) 2000 William Shakespeare’s King Henry VI, Part 1. London: The Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
Chernaik, Warren
2007 The Cambridge Introduction to Shakespeare’s History Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Amy
2011 “Cognitive Interplay: How Blending Theory and Cognitive Science Reread Shakespeare”. In Mireille Ravassat and Jonathan Culpeper (eds), Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches, 246–268. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan
1996 “Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness”. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (3): 349–367. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 Language and Characterisation: People in Plays and Other Texts. Harlow, UK: Pearson.Google Scholar
2002 “Computers, Language and Characterisation: An Analysis of Six Characters in Romeo and Juliet ”. In Ulla Melander-Marttala, Carin Ostman and Merja Kytö (eds), Conversation in Life and in Literature: Papers from the ASLA Symposium, 11–30. Uppsala: Association Suédoise de Linguistique Appliquée.Google Scholar
2005 “Impoliteness and Entertainment in the Television Quiz Show: The Weakest Link ”. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (1): 35–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Reflections on Impoliteness, Relational Work and Power”. In Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher (eds), Impoliteness in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, 17–44. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 “Conventionalised Impoliteness Formulae”. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (12): 3232–3245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Carolina Fernandez-Quintanilla
2017 “Fictional Characterisation”. In Miriam A. Locher and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Pragmatics of Fiction, 93–128. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Claire Hardaker
2017 “Impoliteness”. In Jonathan Culpeper, Daniel Haugh and Dániel Z. Kádár (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, 199–226. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja Kytö
2010 Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan, Derek Bousfield and Anne Wichmann
2003 “Impoliteness Revisited: With Special Reference to Dynamic and Prosodic Aspects”. Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1545–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eelen, Gino
2001 A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
Falco, Raphael
1999 “Charismas in Conflict: Richard II and Henry Bolingbroke”. Exemplaria 11 (2): 473–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner
2002 The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce
1990 “Perspectives on Politeness”. Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2): 219–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 “Threatening Revisited”. Forensic Linguistics 5 (2): 159–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
2005 (1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behaviour. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Hattaway, Michael
(ed.) 2006 The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s History Plays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael
2007 “The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative”. Journal of Politeness Research: Language, Behaviour, Culture 3 (2): 295–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heinze, Eric
2009 “Power Politics and the Rule of Law: Shakespeare’s First Historical Tetralogy and Law’s Foundations”. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 29 (1): 139–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howard, Jean E.
1997 “The First Part of Henry the Sixth”. In Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard and Katherine Eisaman Maus (eds), The Norton Shakespeare: Histories. Based on the Oxford Edition, 247–254. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Hydén, Margareta
1995 “Verbal Aggression as Prehistory of Woman Battering”. Journal of Family Violence 10 (1): 55–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z. and Michael Haugh
2013 Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kantorowicz, Ernst H.
1957 The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kasper, Gabriele
1990 “Linguistic Politeness: Current Research Issues”. Journal of Politeness 14 (2): 193–218.Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred
2008 “Impoliteness and Emotional Arguments”. Journal of Politeness Research 4 (2): 243–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kizelbach, Urszula
2014 The Pragmatics of Early Modern Politics: Power and Kingship in Shakespeare’s History Plays. New York and Amsterdam: Brill/Rodopi.Google Scholar
2017 “(Im)politeness in Fiction”. In Miriam A. Locher and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Pragmatics of Fiction, 425–454. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020 “Blunders and (Un)intentional Offence in Shakespeare”. In Andreas H. Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Manners, Norms and Transgressions in the History of English, 75–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knowles, Ronald
(ed.) 2001 William Shakespeare’s King Henry VI, Part 2. London: The Arden Shakespeare.Google Scholar
Kopytko, Roman
1995 “Linguistic Politeness Strategies in Shakespeare’s Plays”. In Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), Historical Pragmatics: Developments in the History of English, 515–541. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lachenicht, L. G.
1980 “Aggravating Language: A Study of Abusive and Insulting Language”. International Journal of Human Communication 13 (4): 607–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey
1980 Explorations in Semantics and Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1983 Principles of Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Leggatt, Alexander
1988 Shakespeare’s Political Drama: The History Plays and the Roman Plays. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lim, Tae-Seop
1994 “Facework and Interpersonal Relationships”. In Stella Ting-Toomey (ed.), The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, 209–229. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Limberg, Holger
2009 “Impoliteness and Threat Responses”. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (7): 1376–1394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loncraine, Richard
1995 Richard III. (Directed by Richard Loncraine.) UK and USA: Guild Film Distribution.Google Scholar
Lull, Janice
2006 “Plantagenets, Lancastrians, Yorkists, and Tudors: 1–3 Henry VI, Richard III, Edward III ”. In Michael Hattaway (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s History Plays, 89–105. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Dan
2008 “Integrating Multimodal Analysis and the Stylistics of Drama: A Multimodal Perspective on Ian McKellen’s Richard III ”. Language and Literature 17 (4): 309–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Dan and Derek Bousfield
2017 “(Im)politeness in Fictional Texts”. In Jonathan Culpeper, Daniel Haugh and Dániel Z. Kádár (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, 759–783. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manheim, Michael
1973 The Weak King Dilemma in the Shakespearean History Play. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Mills, Sara
2003 Gender and Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porter, Joseph A.
1979 The Drama of Speech Acts: Shakespeare’s Lancastrian Tetralogy. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rackin, Phyllis
2006 “Women’s Roles in the Elizabethan History Plays”. In Michael Hattaway (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s History Plays, 71–85. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reese, M. M.
1961 The Cease of Majesty: A Study of Shakespeare’s History Plays. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Rudanko, Juhani
1993 Pragmatic Approaches to Shakespeare: Essays on Othello, Coriolanus and Timon of Athens. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.Google Scholar
2006 “Aggravated Impoliteness and Two Types of Speaker Intention in an Episode in Shakespeare’s Timon of Athens ”. Journal of Pragmatics 38 (6): 829–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “Concepts for Analyzing Deception in Discourse Intended to be Persuasive: Two Case Studies from Shakespearean Drama”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8 (1): 109–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen
2002 “Managing Rapport in Talk: Using Rapport Sensitive Incidents to Explore the Motivational Concerns Underlying the Management of Relations”. Journal of Pragmatics 341: 529–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Face, (Im)Politeness and Rapport”. In Helen Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, 11–47. (Second edition.) London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina
2005 “Beyond the Micro-Level in Politeness Research”. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (2): 237–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Toward a Unified Theory of Politeness, Impoliteness, and Rudeness”. In Derek Bousfield and Miriam A. Locher (eds), Impoliteness in Language: Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice, 45–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 “Perceptions of the In-Group”. In Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini and Michael Haugh (eds), Face, Communication and Social Interaction, 269–288. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Tillyard, E. M. W.
1959 The Elizabethan World Picture. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
1962 Shakespeare’s History Plays. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Watts, Richard J.
2003 Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar