Cover not available
Article published In:
Estrategias atenuantes en géneros discursivos del español: Interfaz semántico-pragmática
Edited by Marta Albelda Marco
[Spanish in Context 15:2] 2018
► pp. 258–280

Atenuación, género discursivo e imagen

| Universitat de Barcelona
La imagen constituye un fenómeno que puede abordarse desde múltiples perspectivas y que involucra distintos componentes de carácter cognitivo, psicológico, social, cultural e interpersonal. El presente trabajo persigue un doble objetivo: por una parte, ofrecer una definición multidimensional e interdisciplinar de la imagen que resulte aplicable al estudio de determinadas operaciones pragmáticas, como la atenuación lingüística; por otra, establecer la relación entre género discursivo e imagen, a partir del examen de las estrategias de atenuación en cinco géneros distintos (conversación coloquial, artículos académicos, foros en línea, mesa redonda de expertos en TV y debates presidenciales). El análisis revela que los mecanismos lingüísticos de atenuación constituyen índices de los atributos individuales de la imagen reclamados por los participantes en cada modalidad discursiva.
Keywords: imagen, géneros discursivos, atenuación lingüística, variables culturales y situacionales, agenda de autopresentación
Article outline
  • 1.Introducción
  • 2.Hacia una definición operativa de imagen
    • 2.1Dimensión social de la imagen
      • 2.1.1Las variables culturales transnacionales
      • 2.1.2Las variables situacionales
    • 2.2Variables individuales
      • 2.2.1El yo en la cultura: El constructo del yo
      • 2.2.2Autopresentación (self-presentation)
  • 3.Atenuación, actividad de imagen y género discursivo
    • 3.1Metodología
      • 3.1.1Corpus
      • 3.2.2Procedimiento
  • 4.Resultados y discusión
  • 5.Reflexiones finales
  • Notas
  • Referencias

Article language: Spanish

Published online: 19 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.00014.fig
References (65)
Referencias
Albelda, Marta. Este volumen. “Sobre la incidencia de la imagen en la atenuación pragmática”. Spanish in Context.
Albelda, Marta, Antonio Briz, Ana Cestero, Dorota Kotwica y Cristina Villalba. 2014. “Ficha metodológica para el análisis pragmático de la atenuación en corpus discursivos del español. ES.POR.ATENUACIÓN”. Oralia 171: 1–44.Google Scholar
Argyle, Michael, Adrian Furnham y Jean Ann Graham. 1981. Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arundale, Robert B. 2010. “Constituting face in conversation: face, facework, and interactional achievement”. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (8): 2078–2105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013a. “Conceptualizing ‘interaction’ in interpersonal pragmatics: Implications for understanding and research”. Journal of Pragmatics 581: 12–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013b. “Face as a research focus in interpersonal pragmatics: Relational and emic perspectives”. Journal of Pragmatics 581: 108–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca. 2003. “Face and politeness: New (insights) for old (concepts)”. Journal of Pragmatics 35(10–11): 1453–1469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benet, Verónica y Niels G. Waller. 1995. “The Big Seven Factor Model for personality description: Evidence for its cross-cultural generality in a Spanish sample”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60 (4): 701–718. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas y Susan Conrad. 2009. Register, Genre, and Style. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blake, Robert R. y Jane Mouton, 1964. The Managerial Grid. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Bravo, Diana. 1996. La risa en el regateo: Estudio sobre el estilo comunicativo de negociadores españoles y suecos. Stockholm: Institutionen för spanska och portugisiska.Google Scholar
. 1999. “¿Imagen positiva vs. Imagen negativa?: Pragmática social y componentes de face”. Oralia 21: 155–184.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Actividades de cortesía, imagen social y contextos socioculturales: una introducción”. En La perspectiva no etnocentrista de la cortesía: identidad sociocultural de las comunidades hispanohablantes ed. por Diana Bravo, 98–108. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
. 2004. “Tensión entre universalidad y relatividad en las teorías de cortesía”. En Pragmática sociocultural: estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español ed. por Diana Bravo y Antonio Briz, 15–37. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope y Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calvi, Maria Vittoria. 2010. “Los géneros discursivos en la lengua del turismo: una propuesta de clasificación”. Ibérica 191: 9–32.Google Scholar
Coleman, Nicole V. y Patti Williams. 2013. “Feeling like my self: Emotion profiles and social identity”. Journal of Consumer Research 40 (2): 203–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cupach, William R. y Tadasu Todd Imahori. 1993. “Identity management theory: Communication competence in intercultural episodes and relationships”. En Intercultural Communication Competence ed. por Richard L. Wiseman y Jolene Koester, 112–131. Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage.Google Scholar
Domenici, Kathy y Stephen W. Littlejohn. 2006. Facework: Bridging Theory and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Fant, Lars. 1992. “Scandinavians and Spaniards in negotiation”. En Culture and Management in the Field of Ethnology and Business Administration ed. por Annick Sjögren y Lena Janson, 125–153. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics. Institute of International Business.Google Scholar
Gao, Ge. 1998. “An initial analysis of the effects of face and concern for OTHER in chinese interpersonal communication”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22 (4): 467–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giltrow, Janet y Dieter Stein. 2009. Genres in the Internet: Issues in the Theory of Genre. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1955. “On face-work: an analysis of ritual elements in social interaction”. Psychiatry: Journal of the Study of Interpersonal Processes 18 (3): 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
Gudykunst, William B., Yuko Matsumoto, Stella Ting-Toomey, Tsukasa Nishida, Kwangsu Kim y 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
Haugh, Michael. 2009. “Face and interaction”. En Face, Communication, and Social Interaction ed. por Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini y Michael Haugh, 1–30. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Hernández Flores, Nieves. 1999. “Politeness ideology in Spanish colloquial conversation: the case of advice”. Pragmatics 9 (1): 37–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. La cortesía en la conversación española entre familiares y amigos. La búsqueda del equilibrio entre la imagen del hablante y la imagen del destinatario. Aalborg: University of Aalborg.Google Scholar
. 2013. “Actividad de imagen: caracterización y tipología en la interacción comunicativa”. Pragmática Sociocultural 1 (2): 175–198.Google Scholar
Ho, David Yau-Fai. 1994. “Face dynamics: From conceptualization to measurement”. En The Challenge of Facework ed. por Stella Ting-Toomey, 269–285. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, Thomas M. 2002. Language as Social Action: Social Psychology and Language Use. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kim, Min-Sun, John E. Hunter, Akira Miyahara, Ann-Marie Horvath, Mary Bresnahan y Hei-Jin Yoon. 1996. “Individual- vs. culture-level dimensions of individualism and collectivism: Effects on preferred conversational styles”. Communication Monographs 631: 29–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markus, Hazel R. y Shinobu Kitayama. 1991. “Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation”. Psychological Review 98 (2): 224–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1994. “A collective fear of the collective: Implications for selves and theories of selves.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 201: 568–579 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. “Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 5 (4): 420–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCrae, Robert R., y Paul Costa. 1990. Personality in adulthood. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Miller, Lynn Carol, Michael J. Cody y Margaret L. McLaughlin. 1994. “Situations and goals as fundamental constructs”. En Handbook of Interpersonal Communication ed. por Mark L. Knapp y Gerald R. Miller, 162–197. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage.Google Scholar
Morisaki, Seiichi y William B. Gudykunst. 1994. “Face in Japan and the United States”. En The Challenge of Facework: Cross-cultural and Interpersonal Issues ed. por Stella Ting-Toomey, 47–94. Albany: State University of New York.Google Scholar
Oetzel, John. 1999. “The influence of situational features on perceived conflict styles and self-construals in work groups”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 23 (4): 679–695. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oetzel, John, Stella Ting-Toomey, Tooko Masuoto, Yumiko Yokochi, Xiaohui Pan, Jiro Takai y Richard Wilcox. 2001. “Face and facework in conflict: A cross-cultural comparison of China, Germany, Japan, and the United States”. Communication Monographs 68 (3): 235–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oyserman, Daphna. 2001. “Self-concept and identity”. En The Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology ed. por Abraham Tesser y Norbert Schwarz, 499–517. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Putnam, Linda, y Poole, Marshall S. 1987. “Conflict and negotiation”. En Handbook of Organizational Communication: An interdisciplinary perspective ed. por Fredric Jablin, Linda Putnam, Karlene Roberts y Lyman Porter, 459–499. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage.Google Scholar
Rahim, Afzalur. 1983. “A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict”. Academy of Management Journal 261: 368–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Managing Conflict in Organizations (2a. edición). Westport, Conn.: Praeger.Google Scholar
Roccas, Sonia, Lilach Sagiv, Shalom H. Schwartz y Ariel Knafo. 2002. “The Big Five personality factors and personal values”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (6): 789–801. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sabah, Senay. 2017. “The impact of self-construal and self-concept clarity on socially motivated consumption: the moderating role of materialism”. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science 271: 31–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, Barry y Beth Pontari. 2000. “The strategic control of information: impression management and self-presentation in daily life”. En Psychological Perspectives on Self and Identity ed. por Tesser, Abraham, Jerry M. Suls y Richard B. Felson, 199–232. Washington: American Psychological Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Shalom H. 1992. “Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 251: 1–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. “A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications”. Comparative Sociology 5 (2–3): 137–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Shalom H. y Anat Bardi. 2001. “Value hierarchies across cultures. Taking a similarities perspective”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32 (3): 268–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Shalom H. y Wolfang Bilsky. 1990. “Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58 (5): 878–891. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, Bernd. 2004. Identity in modern society. A social psychological perspective. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singelis, Theodore M. 1994. “The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20 (5): 580–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singelis, Theodore M. y William J. Brown. 1995. “Culture, self, and collectivist communication: Linking culture to individual behavior”. Human Communication Research 211: 354–389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2005. “(Im)Politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: Unpackaging their bases and interrelationships”. Journal of Politeness Research 1 (1): 95–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. “Theories of identity and the analysis of face”. Journal of Pragmatics 391: 639–656. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, Robert y Diane M. Dobson. 1987. “Resolving interpersonal conflicts: An analysis of stylistic consistency”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 521: 794–812. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Kenneth W. y Ralph H. Kilmann, 1974. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Mountain View, Cal.: Xicom.Google Scholar
Thurén, Britt-Marie. 1988. Left hand left behind The changing Gender System of a Barrio in Valencia, Spain. Stockholm: Stockholms Studies in Social Anthropology.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella. 1988. “Intercultural conflicts: A face-negotiation theory”. En Theories in Intercultural Communication ed. por Young Yun Kim y William B. Gudykunst, 213–235. Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage.Google Scholar
. 1997. “Intercultural conflict competence”. En Competence in Interpersonal Conflict ed. por William R. Cupach y Daniel J. Canary, 120–147. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
. 2005. “Identity negotiation theory: Crossing cultural boundaries”. En Theorizing about Intercultural Communication ed. por William B. Gudykunst, 211–233. Thousand Oaks, Cal.: Sage.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella y Atsuko Kurogi. 1998. “Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 221: 187–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella, John G. Oetzel y Kimberlie Yee-Jung. 2001. “Self-construal types and conflict management styles”. Communication Reports 14 (2): 87–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Triandis, Harry C. 1995. Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, Col.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Gancedo Ruiz, Marta & M.ª Amparo Soler Bonafont
2023. Patrones relacionales de la expresión de la epistemicidad y la gestión de la imagen en el español peninsular. Spanish in Context 20:3 ► pp. 550 ff. DOI logo
Míguez, Vítor
2022. On epistemic modality and discourse strategy: Evidence from Galician adverbs. Journal of Pragmatics 201 ► pp. 32 ff. DOI logo
Albelda Marco, Marta & Maria Estellés Arguedas
2021. Mitigation revisited. An operative and integrated definition of the pragmatic concept, its strategic values, and its linguistic expression. Journal of Pragmatics 183 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Escobar, Alonso & Silvana Guerrero
2021. Funciones pragmático-discursivas de oraciones escindidas del tipo “lo que pasa es que” en narraciones conversacionales de hablantes chilenos. Pragmática Sociocultural / Sociocultural Pragmatics 9:2 ► pp. 158 ff. DOI logo
Figueras Bates, Carolina
2021. Mitigation in discourse: Social, cognitive and affective motivations when exchanging advice. Journal of Pragmatics 173 ► pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Albelda Marco, Marta
2020. On the Mitigating Function of the Spanish Evidential se ve que. Corpus Pragmatics 4:1 ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Figueras Bates, Carolina & Dorota Kotwica
2020. Introduction: Evidentiality, Epistemicity and Mitigation in Spanish. Corpus Pragmatics 4:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kotwica, Dorota
2020. Mitigation and reinforcement in general knowledge expressions. Journal of Pragmatics 169 ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Villalba Ibáñez, Cristina
2020. Recognising mitigation: Three tests for its identification. Journal of Pragmatics 167 ► pp. 68 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. Revisiting Modality [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 40], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 september 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.