About face

A defence and elaboration of universal dualism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

88 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Of the various models of politeness which have been advanced, Brown and Levinson's is the one which most specifically claims its pancultural validity, and therefore its potential application to intercultural studies. However, a number of works have argued that this model is seriously flawed, in particular that its notion of face is culture-specific. This paper attempts an elaboration of the conception of positive and negative face with a view to upholding the claim that these are universal phenomena. In order to accommodate the objections which have been raised to this claim, a revision of the etiological basis and nature of the positive-negative distinction, and also of the characteristics of positive and negative, is necessary. In addition, since much of the criticism rests on an acceptance of other aspects of Brown and Levinson's model, it is necessary to disentangle the central claim from these other aspects.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-32
Number of pages32
JournalJournal of Pragmatics
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1996
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

politeness
criticism
acceptance
Dualism
Elaboration
Acceptance
Politeness
Criticism
Conception

Cite this

@article{0ab67e901e1c48e5b15332908bb4c1df,
title = "About face: A defence and elaboration of universal dualism",
abstract = "Of the various models of politeness which have been advanced, Brown and Levinson's is the one which most specifically claims its pancultural validity, and therefore its potential application to intercultural studies. However, a number of works have argued that this model is seriously flawed, in particular that its notion of face is culture-specific. This paper attempts an elaboration of the conception of positive and negative face with a view to upholding the claim that these are universal phenomena. In order to accommodate the objections which have been raised to this claim, a revision of the etiological basis and nature of the positive-negative distinction, and also of the characteristics of positive and negative, is necessary. In addition, since much of the criticism rests on an acceptance of other aspects of Brown and Levinson's model, it is necessary to disentangle the central claim from these other aspects.",
author = "Jim O'Driscoll",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/0378-2166(94)00069-X",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "1--32",
journal = "Journal of Pragmatics",
issn = "0378-2166",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

About face : A defence and elaboration of universal dualism. / O'Driscoll, Jim.

In: Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 25, No. 1, 01.01.1996, p. 1-32.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - About face

T2 - A defence and elaboration of universal dualism

AU - O'Driscoll, Jim

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - Of the various models of politeness which have been advanced, Brown and Levinson's is the one which most specifically claims its pancultural validity, and therefore its potential application to intercultural studies. However, a number of works have argued that this model is seriously flawed, in particular that its notion of face is culture-specific. This paper attempts an elaboration of the conception of positive and negative face with a view to upholding the claim that these are universal phenomena. In order to accommodate the objections which have been raised to this claim, a revision of the etiological basis and nature of the positive-negative distinction, and also of the characteristics of positive and negative, is necessary. In addition, since much of the criticism rests on an acceptance of other aspects of Brown and Levinson's model, it is necessary to disentangle the central claim from these other aspects.

AB - Of the various models of politeness which have been advanced, Brown and Levinson's is the one which most specifically claims its pancultural validity, and therefore its potential application to intercultural studies. However, a number of works have argued that this model is seriously flawed, in particular that its notion of face is culture-specific. This paper attempts an elaboration of the conception of positive and negative face with a view to upholding the claim that these are universal phenomena. In order to accommodate the objections which have been raised to this claim, a revision of the etiological basis and nature of the positive-negative distinction, and also of the characteristics of positive and negative, is necessary. In addition, since much of the criticism rests on an acceptance of other aspects of Brown and Levinson's model, it is necessary to disentangle the central claim from these other aspects.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029687592&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0378-2166(94)00069-X

DO - 10.1016/0378-2166(94)00069-X

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 1

EP - 32

JO - Journal of Pragmatics

JF - Journal of Pragmatics

SN - 0378-2166

IS - 1

ER -