-
On American and Chinese Cultural Differences from Face Perspective
- 上一篇：课堂提问在小学和初中英语教学中使用情况的对比分析
- 下一篇：英语委婉语的功能与效果研究
I. Introduction
Politeness is a symbol of human civilization and the feature of all the civilized society. Politeness, which is thought to be one of the moral aspects, is referred to the practical application of good manners or etiquette. It is a culturally-defined phenomenon, and therefore what is considered polite in one culture can sometimes be quite rude or simply eccentric in another cultural context. Similarly, face perspective, as one of the basic factors of politeness, is unexceptionally different under the different cultural contexts in China and America. If people know nothing about these differences, they won’t be able to have effective communication in intercultural context.24035
Two countries like America and China have different cultures which lead to different realization on politeness. As one theory of politeness principle, the face perspective is also different. The paper introduces the different face perspectives between America and China and analyzes cultural differences behind them and their corresponding reasons. At first, this paper tries to introduce different concepts of face between America and China by quoting and analyzing some scholars’ opinions on face, such as Goffman, Brown & Levinson and Hu Hsienchin’s. Next step, this paper tries to discuss the cultural conflicts behind different concepts of face, for instance, American inpidualism and Chinese collectivism, American negative face and Chinese positive face and American equality and Chinese hierarchy, and analyzes the reasons from different aspects including history, culture, thinking patterns, national characters and traditional ideology, etc. Finally, in order to reduce barriers caused by different concepts of face in cross-cultural communication, this paper further suggests that it is necessary to understand mutual different concepts of face by trying to be direct when among the Americans and trying to be euphemistic when among the Chinese.
In this thesis, cultural differences between American and Chinese face perspectives are discussed in three aspects: the introduction of different concepts of face under different cultural backgrounds between America and China, the analysis of cultural differences reflected by different concepts of face and their causes, and some suggestions to reduce barriers caused by different concepts of face in cross-cultural communication so as to promote mutual understanding between the two nations.
II. An Approach to Different Face Perspectives
“Face” is a ubiquitous concept that exists in all cultures. However, in different cultural context, the concept of “face” has been defined in many different ways. Goff man (1955) conceptualized it as “something that is diffusedly located in the flow of events.” People experience face concerns in different social situations.
Brown and Levinson (1978) in their classic work of “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomenon”, present face as “the public self-image that every member of a society wants to claim for himself/herself.” Face is a social image that inpiduals would like to preserve for themselves. At other times, inpiduals have to fight to preserve their face.
And the Chinese scholar, Lin Yutang (1968) defines it as “a psychologically image that can be granted and lost and fought for and presented as a gift.” This definition includes the concern for dignity, honor, and status.
2.1 The American Face Perspective
In terms of American face perspective, the Canadian sociologist, Erving Goff man and English scholars, Brown and Levinson, are typical, and their relative ideas on face concerns are popular among Americans.
2.1.1 Erving Goff Man’s Opinion on Face Perspective
In 1950s, Erving Goffman, a Canadian sociologist, came up with his face perspective from angle of sociology in his article: On Face-work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. According to Goff man, face is defined as a kind of positive social value one person pursues in social interaction, which is also known as the positive image of self that inpiduals have when interacting with others. According to Goffman (1955), face is a sociological construct of interaction and once inpiduals give out a positive self image of themselves, they would have to keep that set image. When inpiduals can not keep the image they claim to be, they risk being embarrassed and also they will be considered to be odd and perverse.