This paper analyses a corpus of compliment responses in Turkish according to the conversational maxim approach (Leech 1983, 2003) and the face-management approach (Brown and Levinson 1987) with a view to extending the conceptualisation of self-presentation in theorising on politeness. It observes that the two theories ground politeness on consideration for alter and give precedence to politeness in the sense of displaying deference and solidarity at the expense of self-politeness, described in the present study as speaker need for display of competence, self-confidence, and individuality in interaction, besides the need for non-imposition.
Regarding the maxim approach, the paper argues that conversational implicatures triggered by a variety of responses ultimately tie to the Tact Maxim and more specifically to the Sympathy Maxim in the Turkish context. The analysis reveals that compliment responses may override the Politeness Principle, that self-presentational concerns are crucial motivating factors, and that face concerns need to be incorporated into the model. From the perspective of the face-management approach, the study supports the claim in O’Driscoll (1996) and Spencer-Oatey (2000) that the notions of positive and negative face as need for community and autonomy need to be disentangled from the theory’s conceptualisation of face as public self-image. With the incorporation of a number of self-politeness strategies, the face-theoretic analysis builds on this distinction and integrates it with the concept of interactional imbalance by extending an analytic framework adapted from Bayraktaroğlu (1991). The paper concludes with suggestions on how the two theories may complement each other.
(1962) How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
(1996) A study of interlanguage pragmatics: Compliment responses by learners of Japanese and English as a second language. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, UMI No.: 9719290.
Bach, Kent, and Robert M. Harnish
(1979) Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Massachusetts/London: MIT Press. BoP
Barnlund, Dean C., and Shoko Araki
(1985) Intercultural encounters: The management of compliments by Japanese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 16.1: 9-26.
(1991) Politeness and interactional imbalance. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 921: 5-34.
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1993) Responding to compliments: A contrastive study of politeness strategies between American English and Chinese speakers. Journal of Pragmatics 201: 49-75. BoP
(2001) Self-politeness: A proposal. Journal of Pragmatics 331: 87-106. BoP
(1996) Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics 251: 349-67. BoP
(2001) A critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St. Jerome's Press. BoP
Ensari, Nurcan, and Norman Miller
(1998) Effect of affective reactions by an out-group on preferences for crossed categorization discussion partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 751: 1503-1527.
(1962) Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
(1990) Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 219-236. BoP
(1982) Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon Books. BoP
(2002) German compliment responses. Journal of Pragmatics 341: 547-571.
(1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts.New York: Academic Press, pp. 41-58.
Haugh, Michael, and Carl Hinze
(2003) A metalinguistic approach to deconstructing the concepts of ‘face’ and ‘politeness’ in Chinese, English and Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1581-1611. BoP
(1996) Compliments, compliment responses, and politeness in an African-American community. In J. Arnold, R. Blake, B. Davidson, S. Schwenter, and J. Solomon (eds.), Sociolinguistic variation: Data, theory and analysis, selected papers from NWAV 23 at Stanford.Stanford, CA: Center for Language and Information, pp. 195-208.
Herbert, Robert K
(1990) Sex-based differences in compliment behaviour. Language in Society 191: 201-224. BoP
Herbert, Robert K
(1997) The sociology of compliment work in Polish and English. In N. Coupland and A. Jaworski (eds.), Sociolinguistics: A reader and coursebook.London: Macmillan, pp. 487-500.
Hess, Jon A
(2000) Maintaining nonvoluntary relationships with disliked partners. Human Communication Research 26.3: 458-488.
(1998) Masculinity/femininity as a dimension of culture. In G. Hofstede (ed.), Masculinity and femininity: The taboo dimension of national cultures.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 3-28.
(1986) Compliments and compliment responses in New Zealand English. Anthropological Linguistics 28.4: 485-508. BoP
(1995) Women, men and politeness. London, New York: Longman. BoP
(1996) The autonomous-relational self: A new synthesis. European Psychologist. 1.3: 180-186.
(1990) Linguistic politeness – current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics 141: 193-218.
(1983) Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman. BoP
(2003) Towards an anatomy of politeness in communication. International Journal of Pragmatics XIV1: 101-124.
(1995) Sociocultural transfer and its effects on second language speakers’ communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 19.2: 253-265.
Manes, Joan, and Nessa Wolfson
(1981) The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (ed.), Conversational routines: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned Speech.The Hague: Mouton Publishers, pp. 115-132.
Mao, LuMing Robert
(1994) Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics 211: 451-486.
(1995) Passages of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 241: 381-392.
(1996) About face: A defence and elaboration of universal dualism. Journal of Pragmatics 251: 1-32.
Pérez Hernández, Lorena
(1999) Grounding politeness. Journal of English Studies 11: 209-236.
(1978) Compliment responses. In Jim Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp. 79-112.
(1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred and dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis.New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-101.
Rogers, Priscilla S, and Song Mei Lee-Wong
(2003) Re-conceptualizing politeness to accommodate dynamic tensions in subordinate-to-superior reporting. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 17.4: 379-412.
(2000) Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures.London: Continuum, pp. 11–46. BoP
(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. BoP
(2005) (Im)Politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research 11: 95-119. BoP
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, Patrick Ng, and Li Dong
(2000) Responding to compliments: British and Chinese evaluative judgements. In H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures.London: Continuum, pp. 53-65. BoP
Spencer-Oatey, Helen, and Wenying Jiang
(2003) Explaining cross-cultural pragmatic findings: Moving from politeness maxims to sociopragmatic interactional principles (SIPs). Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1633-1650. BoP
(1974) Türklerle ilgili stereotipler (kalıp yargılar) ve Türk değerleri üzerine bir deneme [The stereotypes about Turks and a study on Turkish values]. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Yayınları.
(1995) Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. London: Longman. BoP
Ting-Toomey, Stella, and A. Kurogi
(1998) Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22.2: 187-225. BoP
(2003) On the universality of face: Evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1679-1710.
(2003) Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
(1991) Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. BoP.
(1983) An empirically based analysis of complimenting in American English. In N. Wolfson, E. Judd (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Newbury House Publishers, Rowley/London/Tokyo: Newbury House Publishers, pp. 82-95. BoP
Cited by 20 other publications
Aksan, Mustafa & Yeşim Aksan
2018. Linguistic Corpora: A View from Turkish. In Turkish Natural Language Processing [Theory and Applications of Natural Language Processing, ], ► pp. 291 ff.
2021. VARIATIONS IN COMPLIMENT RESPONSES ACROSS GENDER IN DIFFERENT DISCOURSAL SETTINGS. Dil Dergisi 172:1 ► pp. 86 ff.
Chen, Rong & Dafu Yang
2010. Responding to compliments in Chinese: Has it changed?. Journal of Pragmatics 42:7 ► pp. 1951 ff.
Culpeper, Jonathan & Kevin Pat
2021. Compliment responses in Hong Kong: an application of Leech’s pragmatics of politeness. Text & Talk 41:5-6 ► pp. 667 ff.
2021. Complimenting on-the-go: Features from colloquial Algerian Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics 172 ► pp. 270 ff.
DİLEK, Tuba Karagöz
2020. Pragmatic transfer in Turkish EFL learners’ compliments and compliment responses from L1 Turkish to L2 English. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi 16:3 ► pp. 1264 ff.
2007. Emic conceptualisations of (im)politeness and face in Japanese: Implications for the discursive negotiation of second language learner identities. Journal of Pragmatics 39:4 ► pp. 657 ff.
Hernández Toribio, María Isabel & Luis Deltell Escolar
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 september 2023. 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.