Universal politeness theory: application to the use of Japanese honorifics
Universal politeness theory: application to the use of Japanese honorifics
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.pragma.2003.11.006
复制
发表时间：
2004-11-01
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Asato, N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fukada, A;Asato, N
对Brown和Levinson提出的礼貌理论的一个主要反对意见[问题和礼貌：社会互动的策略》，剑桥大学出版社，1978年，第56-311页；礼貌：一些普遍的语言使用，剑桥大学出版社，剑桥，1987]，由松本提出[J.Pragmatics 12(1988)403；多语8(1989)207；日韩语言学，第2卷，语言和信息研究中心，斯坦福，第55-67页]和IDE[多语言8(1989)223]是基于涉及日语敬语的数据。问题是为什么敬语的使用应该出现在非自由贸易协定的话语中，布朗和莱文森将其归类为否定礼貌策略(给予尊重)。在证明布朗和莱文森的理论不能令人满意地解释日语敬语之后，艾德甚至提出了一种基于辨别概念的解释。这篇文章的目的有两个：(1)通过考虑日本社会的一个显著特征，即它的垂直和等级结构，可以提出一个与布朗和莱文森的理论一致的解释；(2)反对似乎得到了一些认可的辨别理论。本文将提出一系列论证，以证明基于礼貌理论的解释优于辨别解释。(C)2004爱思唯尔B.V.保留所有权利。
One major objection to Brown and Levinson's politeness theory [Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, Cambridge University Press, 1978, pp. 56-311; Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987] raised by Matsumoto [J. Pragmatics 12 (1988) 403; Multilingua 8 (1989) 207; Japanese/Korean Linguistics, vol. 2, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, pp. 55-67] and Ide [Multilingua 8 (1989) 223] is based on data involving Japanese honorifics. The issue is why honorifics, the use of which Brown and Levinson classifies as a negative politeness strategy ('Give deference'), should occur in non-FTA utterances. Having shown that Brown and Levinson's theory does not explain Japanese honorifics satisfactorily, Ide goes so far as to propose an account based on the concept of discernment. The purpose of this article is two-fold: (1) to show that by taking into consideration a salient feature of the Japanese society, namely, its vertical and hierarchical structure, it is possible to propose an account that is consistent with Brown and Levinson's theory; and (2) to argue against the discernment theory which seems to have gained some recognition. A series of arguments will be advanced to show that an account based on the politeness theory is superior to the discernment account. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.