| dc.identifier.citation | Bousfield, D. 2008. Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Brewer, M. B., and Gardner, W. 1996. Who is this “we”?: Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71, 83–93. Brown, P dan Levinson, S. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cashman, L. 2006. Impoliteness in children's interaction in a Spanish/ English bilingual community of practice. Journal of Politeness Research 2, 217-246. Culpeper, J. 1996. Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics 25, 349-367. ----------. 1998. ----------. 2001. Language and Characterization: People in Plays and other Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ----------. 2005. Impoliteness and entertainmentin thetelevisionquiz show: The weakest link. Journal of Politeness Research 1, 35-72. Bousfield, Derek. 2008. Impoliteness in Interaction. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on face-to-face Behavior. New York: Anchor Books. Lakoff, R. 1989. The Limits of Politeness: Therapeutic and Courtroom Discourse. Multilingua 8, 101-129. Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman. Spencer-Oatey, H. 2002. Managing Rapport in Talk:Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the managementof relations. Journal of Pragmatics 34( Watts, Richard J. 2003. Politeness: Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | This paper attempts to briefly review state of the art of the theory of impoliteness. The most notable figure in the field is Jonathan Culpeper whose model of impoliteness was initially introduced as a parallel to Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness. The theory can be traced back to Goffman’s theory of face. Using Goffman’s theory face as a departure, Brown and Lavinson propose politeness principles in terms of conflict avoidance; this is the strategy to maintain face when face attack happens. There are, however, still other times in which people use linguistic strategies to attack face which tend to be impolite. Culpeper refers impoliteness to communicative strategies used to attack face, and thereby create social disruption. He classified five super strategies of impoliteness including Bald on record impoliteness, Positive impoliteness, Negative impoliteness, Sarcasm or mock politeness, and Withhold politeness. | en_US |
