Article published In:
Pragmatics and SocietyVol. 8:2 (2017) ► pp.208–230
Culture-generality and culture-specificity of face
Insights from argumentative talk in Iranian dissertation defenses
In theorizing face as relational and interactional, Arundale (2010) argues that face encompasses a dialectic of relational connection and separation, which is culture-general, but can be voiced differently in different cultures. This paper examines how Arundale’s Face Constituting Theory (FCT) relates to the culture-specific emic understanding of face in Persian culture in talk in dissertation defense sessions. The data are two argumentative excerpts of natural interaction from a corpus of 12 PhD defense sessions in Iran. It is first argued that relational connection and separation is voiced as bonding and differentiation. Second, it is shown how the Persian emic concept of aberu can be accommodated in FCT. The analyses, grounded in CA and FCT, show how the dialectic of bonding and differentiation is interactionally achieved in the practices of aberu.
Keywords: face constituting theory, relational connection and separation, dissertation defense, Persian,
aberu
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Persian emic concepts of face
- 2.1Aberu, shaxsiat, and heysiat
- 2.2Aberu as relational bonding and differentiation
- 2.3Aberu in dissertation defenses
- 3.Analysis
- 3.1Statistics
- 3.2Jingoism
- 4.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Transcription conventions
-
References
References
Ahmadi, Nader & Fereshteh Ahmadi
1998 Iranian Islam. London: Macmillan. 
Arundale, Robert B.
1999 An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics 91: 119–153.
2006 Face as relational and interactional: a communication framework for research on face, facework, and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research 21: 193–216.
2009 Face as emergent in interpersonal communication: an alternative to Goffman. In Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini & Michael Haugh (eds.), Face, Communication and Social Interaction, 33–54. London: Equinox.
2010 Constituting face in conversation: face, facework, and interactional achievement. Journal of Pragmatics 421: 2078–2105.
2013 Face as a research focus in interpersonal pragmatics: relational and emic perspectives. Journal of Pragmatics 581: 108–120.
Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca
2003 Face and politeness: new (insights) for (old) concepts. Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1453–1469.
Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson
1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Don, Zuraidah M. & Ahmad Izadi
2011 Relational connection and separation in Iranian dissertation defences. Journal of Pragmatics 431: 3782–3792.
2013 Interactionally achieving face in criticism criticism-response exchanges. Language and Communication 331: 221–231.
Drew, Paul & John Heritage
1992 Analyzing talk at work: an introduction. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work. Interaction in Institutional Settings, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eslami, Zohreh
2005 Invitations in Persian: Ostensible or genuine. Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (4): 453–480.
Geyer, Naomi
2008 Discourse and politeness: ambivalent face in Japanese. London: Continuum.
Goffman, Erving
1967 Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Anchor Books.
Haugh, Michael
2005 The importance of ‘place’ in Japanese politeness: Implications for cross-cultural and intercultural analyses, Intercultural Pragmatics 2 (1): 41–68.
2007 The discursive challenge to politeness research: an interactional alternative. Journal of Politeness Research 31: 295–317.
2012 Epilogue: The first order distinction in face and politeness research. Journal of Politeness Research 81: 111–134.
Haugh, Michael & Francisca Bargiela-Chiappini
2010 Face in interaction, Journal of Pragmatics 42 (8): 2073–2077.
Heritage, John
2005 Conversation analysis and institutional talk. In K. L Fitch & R. Sanders, (eds.), Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, 103–148. New York: Routledge.
Hyland, Ken
1998 Boosting, hedging and negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 181: 349–382.
Izadi, Ahmad
2012 Talk, Face and Politeness in Dissertation Defenses. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Malaya.
2015 Persian honorifics and [im]politeness as social practice. Journal of Pragmatics 851: 81–91.
2016 Over-politeness in Persion professional interactons. Journal of Pragmatics 1021: 13–23.
Koshik, Irene
2002 A conversation analytic study of yes/no questions which convey reversed polarity assertions. Journal of Pragmatics 341: 1851–1877.
2005 Beyond Rhetorical Questions: Assertive Questions in Everyday Interaction. New York: Academic Press.
Koutlaki, Sofia
2002 Offers and expressions of thanks as face enhancing acts: tae’arof in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics 34 (12): 1733–1756.
Locher, Miriam
2004 Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2003 Grammar and social organization: yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 681: 939–967.
Ruhi, Sükriye
2010 Face as an indexical category in interactions. Journal of Pragmatics 42(8): 2131–2146.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1992 On talk and its institutional occasions. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work, 101–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sharifian, Farzad
2007 L1 cultural conceptualization in L2 learning: the case of Persian-speaking learners of English. In Farzad Sharifian & Gary Palmer (eds.), Applied Cultural Linguistics, 32–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by
Cited by 12 other publications
Barabadi, Elyas, Kay Brauer, René T. Proyer & Mohsen Rahmani Tabar
2023. Examining the role of gelotophobia for willingness to communicate and second language achievement using self- and teacher ratings. Current Psychology 42:6 ► pp. 5095 ff. 
Farahandouz, Farbod & Shima Moallemi
2023. Chapter 6. Multimodal manifestation of ta’ârof in Persian. In Multimodal Im/politeness [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 333], ► pp. 163 ff.
Izadi, Ahmad
2018. The epistemic grounds of face in institutional argumentative talk-in-interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 134 ► pp. 45 ff.
Izadi, Ahmad
2023. On the moral grounds of professional argumentative talk: English-mediated talk in Iranian PhD dissertation defences. Discourse Studies 25:3 ► pp. 342 ff.
Izadi, Ahmad
2023. On Face and Face-Work in Iran: From Etic Theories to Emic Practices. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 24:3 ► pp. 199 ff.
Jalilifar, Alireza & Nadia Mayahi
2023.
Referral for re-submission: Scholarly Expectations of EFL Applied Linguistics Doctoral Defense Sessions. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 11:1 ► pp. 160 ff.
Lantsoght, Eva O. L.
2021. Students’ Perceptions of Doctoral Defense in Relation to Sociodemographic Characteristics. Education Sciences 11:9 ► pp. 463 ff.
Lantsoght, Eva O. L.
2023. Doctoral defence formats. Studies in Higher Education 48:2 ► pp. 343 ff.
Mayahi, Nadia & Alireza Jalilifar
Mayahi, Nadia & Alireza Jalilifar
2023. The in-group ritual of self-denigration in Iranian doctoral defense sessions: applied linguists’ attitudes, functions and perceptions in focus. Journal of Politeness Research 0:0
Rodziewicz (مجدلينا رودزييفيتش), Magdalena
2022. The Status of Ābirū in Contemporary Iranian Shīʿī Narratives. Journal of Islamic Ethics 6:2 ► pp. 257 ff.
Sadeghi, Karim & Zahra Jalilzadeh Mohammadi
2021. Compliment Response (CR) patterns among English vs. Persian teachers: Cultural transmission of CR behavior?. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 17:1-2 ► pp. 153 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 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.