Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 8:1 (2017) ► pp.61–84

The impact of face systems on the pragmalinguistic features of academic e-mail requests

 | University of Reading, UK
This study investigates the impact of power/distance (PD) variables operationalized as face systems on the pragmalinguistic features of academic e-mail requests. A corpus of 90 academic e-mails was classified into four face system groups: hierarchical (sender +P), hierarchical (recipient +P), deference, and solidarity. Request perspectives, strategies, and mitigating supportive moves were analyzed. The analysis revealed that the speaker and hearer dominance were the most frequent request perspectives in the hierarchical (recipient+P) and deference groups. The impersonal perspective was more common in the hierarchical (sender+P) group. The preparatory was the dominant request strategy in all groups, relatively more frequent in the hierarchical (recipient+P) and deference groups. The most common supportive move was the grounder, which occurred more frequently than other supportive moves. The findings of the study indicate that face systems influence the request patterns in academic e-mail communication. The study has implications for future research on pragmatics of computer-mediated communication (CMC).
Keywords: face systems, power/distance (PD), e-mails, requests, computer-mediated communication (CMC)
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Review of literature
  • 3.Theoretical framework
    • 3.1Face systems
    • 3.2The CCSARP project and the speech act of request
  • 4.Methodology
    • 4.1E-mail corpus
    • 4.2Data analysis
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Request perspectives
    • 5.2Request strategies
    • 5.3Request mitigating supportive moves
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 25 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.8.1.04asl
References (29)
References
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2006. Introduction: sociolinguistics and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10, 4: 419–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Online Data Collection. In Data Collection in Sociolinguistics: Methods and Applications, Christine Mallinson, Becky Childs, and Gerard van Herk (eds.), 237–249. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Baron, Naomi S. 1998. Letters by phone or speech by other means: the linguistics of email. Language and Communication 181: 133–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biesenbach-Lucas, Sigrun. 2007. Students writing e-mails to faculty: an examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning and Technology 11, 2: 59–81.Google Scholar
Bjørge, Anne. K. 2007. Power distance in English lingua franca email communication. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 17, 1: 60–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bloch, Joel. 2002. Student/teacher interaction via email: the social context of Internet discourse. Journal of Second Language Writing 111: 117–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana & Elite Olshtain. 1984. Requests and apologies: a cross cultural study of speech act realization patterns. Applied Linguistics 51: 196–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House, and Gabriele Kasper (eds.) 1989. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bou-Franch, Patricia. 2006. Solidarity and deference in Spanish Computer-Mediated Communication: A Discourse-Pragmatic Analysis of Students’ Emails to Lecturers. In Ways into discourse, Patricia Bou-Franch (ed.), 61–79. Granada: Comares.Google Scholar
. 2011. Openings and closings in Spanish email conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 431: 1772–1785. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1978. Universals of Language Use: Politeness Phenomena. In Questions and Politeness, Esther N. Goody (ed.), 56–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Chi-Fen E. 2001. “Making e-mail requests to professors: Taiwanese vs. American students”. Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, St. Louis, Mo.
Crystal, David. 2001. Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Economidou-Kogetsidis, Maria. 2011. “Please answer me as soon as possible”: pragmatic failure in non-native speakers’ email requests to faculty. Journal of Pragmatics 431: 3193–3215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
French, John R.P., and Bertram Raven. 1959. The Bases of Social Power. In Studies in Social Power, Dorwin Cartwright (ed.), 150–167. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Hassall, Tim. 2001. Modifying requests in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL) 391: 259–283.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan C. 2003. Computer-mediated Discourse. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton. 612–634. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
2007. A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@internet 4, 1: 1–37.Google Scholar
Hofstede, Geert. 2001. Culture’s Consequences (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.Google Scholar
Liu, Yichun. 2011. Power perceptions and negotiations in a cross-national email writing activity. Journal of Second Language Writing 201: 257–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2010. Introduction: Politeness and impoliteness in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Politeness Research 61: 1–5. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, Brian. 2012. Discourse Analysis (2nd ed.). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Panteli, Niki. 2002. Richness, power cues and email text. Information & Management 40, 2: 75–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron, Suzanne W. Scollon and Rodney H. Jones. 2012. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach (3rd ed.). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Selvi, Ali F. & Bedrettin Yazan. 2013. Teaching English as an international language. Alexandria, Va.: TESOL Press.Google Scholar
Soler, Eva A. 2013. Pragmatic variation in British and international English language users’ e-mail communication: a focus on requests. Revista española de lingüística aplicada 261: 25–44.Google Scholar
Varner, Iris and Linda Beamer. 2005. Intercultural Communication in the Global Workplace (3rd ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Aslan, Erhan & Sylvia Jaworska
2024. Standing ‘in’ and ‘out’ from the Crowd in a Small Genre: Proximity and Positioning in Applied Linguists’ Email Signatures. Applied Linguistics DOI logo
Baxter-Webb, Ibi
2024. A closer look at refusers’ counters: Benefactive changes, design constraints, and interpersonal implications. Journal of Pragmatics 220 ► pp. 20 ff. DOI logo
Li, Jie & Yanling Lin
2023. Parentheses used as pragmatic strategies in Chinese online socialization. Pragmatics and Society 14:3 ► pp. 442 ff. DOI logo
Xie, Chaoqun, Francisco Yus & Hartmut Haberland
2021. Introduction. In Approaches to Internet Pragmatics [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 318], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 december 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.