Face in conflict
Studies of conflict and conflict resolution rarely concern themselves with the ways in which conflictive situations are triggered. Corsaro and Rizzo (1990), in considering interpersonal conflict and aggression do suggest that conflict begins with one antagonist taking challenging opposition to an ‘antecedent event’. Further, within linguistics, even those studies which take a perspective on the role of language in the genesis, conduct, and consequences of mass violence (see the collection of papers in Dedaic and Nelson 2003) ignore the role that ‘face’ (Goffman 1967), and facework can have at any stage. The main contentions of this paper, therefore, are that the concept of “face” cannot be ignored at any level or stage of interaction, that face and identity whilst distinct and discrete concepts interlink, and, finally, that both concepts apply in instances of ethnic or international conflict and aggression. As such, it is argued that face and identity must henceforth be considered central to research or theorising on all aspects of aggression, conflict and conflict resolution.
Keywords: aggression, impoliteness, identity, conceptual metonymy, conflict, face
Published online: 28 June 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.1.03bou
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.1.03bou
Cited by
Cited by 13 other publications
Blitvich, Pilar Garcés-Conejos & Alex Georgakopoulou
Bou-Franch, Patricia & Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
Bousfield, Derek & Dan McIntyre
Bova, Antonio & Francesco Arcidiacono
Dobs, Abby Mueller
Fuentes Rodríguez, Catalina
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar & Maria Sifianou
Hopkinson, Christopher
Hopkinson, Christopher
Horgan, Mervyn
SturtzSreetharan, Cindi, Sarah Trainer & Alexandra Brewis
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. 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.