Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 34:2 (2024) ► pp.264–292

How face is perceived in Chinese and Japanese

A contrastive study

ORCID logo | Northeast Normal University
ORCID logo | Northeast Normal University

This study aims to examine how Chinese and Japanese speakers perceive face-enhancement and face-threat from a value-construct perspective. A mixed-method research design consisting of a questionnaire and structured interviews was employed. The results suggest that the values which trigger face-enhancement and face-threat are differently distributed between the two linguacultures in face-threatening and face-enhancing situations. Both Chinese and Japanese participants agreed that competence was the top value for face-enhancement. The Chinese participants considered status superiority as the more sensitive triggering value of face-enhancement, whereas the Japanese participants believed that good public image, self-esteem, and pride were the main factors. In face-threatening scenarios, the Japanese participants paid more attention to self-abasement and shame, inconsideration and irresponsibility, whereas the Chinese were more sensitive to incompetence. We attribute these differences in individuals’ perspectives on interpersonal relationships as a possible cause of their divergent perceptions of face.

Keywords: face-enhancement, face-threat, values, Chinese, Japanese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Defining ‘face’ in Chinese and Japanese
    • 2.2Previous empirical studies of face in Chinese and Japanese
  • 3.Data and methods
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Instruments
    • 3.3Procedures
    • 3.4Data coding and analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Prominent triggering values of face-enhancement and face-threat
    • 4.2Comparison between Chinese and Japanese participants
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1The asymmetry of triggering values in face-enhancement and face-threat scenarios
    • 5.2Perceptions of face-enhancement and face-threat by Chinese and Japanese
    • 5.3Face perception and interpersonal relationship in Chinese and Japanese linguacultures
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 January 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.22075.xia
References
Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca
2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1453–1469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bogdanowska-Jakubowska, Ewa
2011 “Cultural Variability in Face Interpretation and Management.” In Politeness Across Cultures, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 237–357. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, Wei-Lin Melody
2018 “Emotivity and Face: Displaying and Soliciting Emotivity in Chinese Mediation Interactions.” Lingua 2131: 43–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Xinren
2019 “ ‘Family-Culture’ and Chinese Politeness: An Emancipatory Pragmatic Account.” Acta Linguistica Academica 66 (2): 251–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diegoli, Eugenia
2022 “The Speech Act of Apologising in Japanese Online Communication: A Corpus-Assisted Study on the Use of Gomen in Written, Computer-Mediated Settings.” East Asian Pragmatics 7 (1): 123–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doi, Takeo
1971 Amae no Kozo [The Construction of Interdependence]. Tokyo: Koobundoo.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan M., Kei Nakamura, and Jiansheng Guo
1996 “Shifting Face from Asia to Europe.” In Essays in Semantics and Pragmatics, ed. by Masayoshi Shibatani, and Sandra A. Thompson, 32–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fei, Xiaotong
1992 From the Soil, the Foundations of Chinese Society: A Translation of Fei Xiaotong’s Xiangtu Zhongguo, with an Introduction and Epilogue. (Gary G. Hamilton, and Zheng Wang, Trans.) Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Feldman, Ofer, and Ken Kinoshita
2019 “Ignoring Respect: The Effects of Threat to Face on Replies and the Ensuing Questions During Broadcast Political Interviews in Japan.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 38 (5–6): 606–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fukushima, Saeko
2020 Metapragmatics of Attentiveness: A Study in Interpersonal and Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. Bristol: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fukushima, Saeko, and Michael Haugh
2014 “The Role of Emic Understandings in Theorizing Im/Politeness: The Metapragmatics of Attentiveness, Empathy and Anticipatory Inference in Japanese and Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics 741: 165–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geyer, Naomi
2010 “Teasing and Ambivalent Face in Japanese Multi-Party Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (8): 2120–2130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1967 Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Gu, Yueguo
1990 “Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2): 237–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gudykunst, William B., Yuko Matsumoto, Stella Ting-Toomey, Tsukasa Nishida, Kwangsu Kim, and Sam Heyman
1996 “The Influence of Cultural Individualism-Collectivism, Self Construals, and Individual Values on Communication Styles Across Cultures.” Human Communication Research 22 (4): 510–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasegawa, Yoko
2012 “Against the Social Constructionist Account of Japanese Politeness.” Journal of Politeness Research 8(2): 245–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugh, Michael
2005 “What Does ‘Face’ Mean to the Japanese? Understanding the Import of ‘Face’ in Japanese Business Interactions.” In Asian Business Discourse(s), ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Gotti Maurizio, 211–238. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
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): 657–680. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
He, Ming, and Shaojie Zhang
2011 “Re-Conceptualizing the Chinese Concept of Face from a Face-Sensitive Perspective: A Case Study of a Modern Chinese TV Drama.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (9): 2360–2372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinze, Carl G.
2002 “Re-Thinking ‘Face’ Pursuing an Emic-Etic Understanding of Chinese Mian and Lian and English Face.” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Queensland.
2012 “Chinese Politeness Is Not about ‘Face’: Evidence from the Business World.” Journal of Politeness Research 8 (1): 11–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ho, David Yau-fai
1976 “On the Concept of Face.” American Journal of Sociology 81 (4): 867–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holtgraves, Thomas, and Brian Kraus
2018 “Processing Scalar Implicatures in Conversational Contexts: An ERP Study.” Journal of Neurolinguistics 461: 93–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hsu, Chuanhsi Stephen
1996 “ ‘Face’: An Ethnographic Study of Chinese Social Behavior.” Ph.D. dissertation. Yale University.
Hu, Hsien Chin
1944 “The Chinese Concepts of ‘Face’”. American Anthropologist 46 (1): 45–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hwang, Alvin, Anne Marie Francesco, and Eric Kessler
2003 “The Relationship Between Individualism-Collectivism, Face, and Feedback and Learning Processes in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 34 (1): 72–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, J. Bruce
1979 “A Preliminary Model of Particularistic Ties in Chinese Political Alliances: Kan-Ch’ing and Kuan-Hsi in a Rural Taiwanese Township.” The China Quarterly 781: 237–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jin, Yingzhe, and Xinren Chen
2020 “ ‘Mouren’ (‘Somebody’) Can Be You-Know-Who: A Case Study of Mock Referential Vagueness in Chinese Weibo Posts.” Journal of Pragmatics 1641: 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N.
2014 The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Hui
2020 “Towards an Emic Understanding of Mianzi Giving in the Chinese Context.” Journal of Politeness Research 16 (2): 281–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, Chun-Chi, and Susumu Yamaguchi
2008 “Japanese Folk Concept of Mentsu: An Indigenous Approach from Psychological Perspectives.” In Perspectives and Progress in Contemporary Cross-Cultural Psychology: Proceedings from the 17th International Congress of the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, ed. by Gang Zheng, Kwok Leung, and John G. Adair, 343–357.Google Scholar
Matsumoto, Yoshiko
1988 “Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese.” Journal of Pragmatics 12 (4): 403–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morisaki, Seiichi, and William B. Gudykunst
1994 “Face in Japan and the United States.” In The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. by Stella Ting-Toomey, 47–93. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Nakane, Chie
1970 Japanese Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Obana, Yasuko, and Michael Haugh
2018 “Malefactive Uses of Giving/Receiving Expressions: The Case of Te-Kureru in Japanese.” East Asian Pragmatics 3 (2): 201–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olsson-Collentine, Anton, Marcel A. L. M. van Assen, and Chris H. J. Hartgerink
2019 “The Prevalence of Marginally Significant Results in Psychology Over Time.” Psychological Science 30 (4): 576–586. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pan, Yuling, and Dániel Z. Kádár
2011 “Historical vs. Contemporary Chinese Linguistic Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (6): 1525–1539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ran, Yongping, and Linsen Zhao
2018 “Building Mutual Affection-Based Face in Conflict Mediation: A Chinese Relationship Management Model.” Journal of Pragmatics 1291: 185–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ren, Juanjuan, and Xinren Chen
2019 “Kinship Term Generalization as a Cultural Pragmatic Strategy among Chinese Graduate Students.” Pragmatics and Society 10 (4): 613–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Shalom H., Jan Cieciuch, Michele Vecchione, Eldad Davidov, Ronald Fischer, Constanze Beierlein, Alice Ramos, Markku Verkasalo, Jan-Erik Lönnqvist, Kursad Demirutku, Ozlem Dirilen-Gumus, and Mark Konty
2012 “Refining the Theory of Basic Individual Values.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103 (4): 663–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sueda, Kiyoko
1998 “Chugokujin Gakusei to Nihonjin Gakusei no “Mentsu” no Gainen oyobi Komyunikeshon Sutoratejii ni kansuru Hikaku no Ichi Jirei Kenkyuu [A Quantitative Analysis of Differing Perceptions of Mien-tzu/Mentsu between Chinese and Japanese Students: A Case Study].” Japanese Journal of Social Psychology 13 (2): 103–111.Google Scholar
Takiura, Masato
2013 Nihongo wa Shitashisa o Tsutae Rareru ka [Can Japanese Language Communicate Closeness?]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, Marina, Benjamin Weissman, and Joseph Roy
2020 “Different Scalar Terms are Affected by Face Differently.” International Review of Pragmatics 12 (1): 1–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Triandis, Harry C., Christopher McCusker, and C. Harry Hui
1990 “Multimethod Probes of Individualism and Collectivism.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59 (5): 1006–1020. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Jiayi, and Helen Spencer-Oatey
2015 “The Gains and Losses of Face in Ongoing Intercultural Interaction: A Case Study of Chinese Participant Perspectives.” Journal of Pragmatics 891: 50–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yabuuchi, Akio
2004 “Face in Chinese, Japanese, and U.S. American Cultures.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 14 (2): 261–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yuan, Zhoumin
2022 “Yanyu Jiaoyu Zhong de Guanxi Guanli Moxing: Bentu Yuyong Shijiao [Guanxi Management Model in Verbal Communication: An Indigenous Pragmatic Perspective].” Foreign Language Research 21: 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Xin-an, Qing Cao, and Nicholas Grigoriou
2011 “Consciousness of Social Face: The Development and Validation of a Scale Measuring Desire to Gain Face Versus Fear of Losing Face.” The Journal of Social Psychology 151 (2): 129–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Ling, and Shao-jie Zhang
2016 “Hanyu Wenhua Texing de Jiji Pingjia Mianzi yu Xiaoji Pingjia Mianzi Gainian Jiangou: Jiyu Shenfen Lilun de Shijiao [Constructing Positively-evaluated Face and Negatively-evaluated Face in Chinese Culture: An Identity Theory-based Approach].” Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 51: 41–49+145.Google Scholar
2017 “How Face as a System of Value-Constructs Operates through the Interplay of Mianzi and Lian in Chinese: A Corpus-Based Study.” Language Sciences 641: 152–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 “Reconstructing the Politeness Principle in Chinese: A Response to Gu’s Approach.” Intercultural Pragmatics 15 (5): 693–721. DOI logoGoogle Scholar