- 上一篇：文化维度理论视域下的中美家庭教育观比较研究以《摩登家庭》和《家有儿女》
- 下一篇：《生活大爆炸》中科学话语与日常话语的对话性分析
2 Literature Review2.1 Politeness and impolitenessThe concept of politeness was first proposed by Goffman in his work Interaction ritual: Essaysin face-to-fance behavior and thus a heated debate on politeness was sparked. Lakoff（1973）believed that politeness is to reduce the friction generated by the community. In 1975, Griceproposed “Conversational Implicature” but he did not explain why people express themselves byflouting “Cooperative Principle.” Further, Leech （ 1983 ） saw politeness as strategic conflictavoidance and proposed “Politeness Principle” to support and remedy“ConversationalImplicature”and considered that the euphemistic discourse is out of politeness. Meanwhile, Brown& Levinson（1987）considered politeness as a strategy to reduce the face threat.It is debatable when it comes to the definition of impoliteness. Since 1996, when Culpeperpublished his research of impoliteness, more and more researchers have focused on it and there aresome definitions of impoliteness summarized by researchers.
(1) Impoliteness is behavior that is face-aggravating in a particular context (Locher andBousfield, 2008, p.3).(2) ...impoliteness, communicative strategies designed to attack face, and thereby cause socialconflict and disharmony ...(Culpeper et al., 2003, p.1546).(3) Impoliteness comes about when:(a) the speaker communicates face-attack intentionally, or(b) the hearer perceives and/or constructs behavior as intentionally face-attacking, or a combinationof (a) and (b)(Culpeper, 2005, p.38).(4) ...impoliteness constitutes the communication of intentionally gratuitous and conflictiveverbal face-threatening acts (FTAs) which are purposefully delivered:(a) unmitigated, in contextswhere mitigation is required, and/or,(b) with the face threat exacerbated, ‘boosted’, or maximised insome way to heighten the face damage inflicted (Bousfield, 2008, p.72).(5) ...verbal impoliteness [is] linguistic behavior assessed by the hearers as threatening her orhis face or social identity, and infringing the norms of appropriate behavior that prevail in particularcontexts and among particular interlocutors, whether intentionally or not (Holmes et al., 2008,p.196).