Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
On the Politeness Strategies in Chinese Internet Relay Chat Communication
College of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
School of Foreign Studies, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, China
- 1 College of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 2 School of Foreign Studies, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, China
Open Journal of Modern Linguistics·Volume 06 (2016)·Pages 293–301·Published 19 July 2016·DOI10.4236/ojml.2016.64030
Copy link · social · email
Abstract
As a prevalent synchronous form of CMC communication, internet relay chat (IRC) is a major mode of real-time CMC communication in today’s Chinese society. Under the framework of Brown and Levinson’s face theory, this study investigated the politeness strategies in public Chinese QQ chat groups where most of the interlocutors were anonymous with high social distance. Politeness strategies in public Chinese QQ chat groups include positive politeness strategy, negative politeness strategy, bald-on-record and off-record strategy.
KeywordsPoliteness StrategiesAnonymousQQChinese Internet Relay ChatFace TheoryComputer-Mediated Communication
- Al-Shalawi, H. G. (2001). Politeness Strategies in Saudi ESL Computer-Mediated Communication. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 3969B.
- Blum-Kulka, S. (1989). Playing it Safe: The Role of Conventionality in Indirectness. In S. Blum-Kulka, J. House, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies (pp. 37-70). Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
- Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Clark, H. H. (1992). Arenas of Language Use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet (2th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487002
- Ervin-Tripp, S. (1972). Sociolinguistic Rules: Alteration and Co-Occurrence. In: J. Gumperez, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics (pp. 213-250). Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
- Farall, K. (2012). Online Collectivism, Individualism, and Anonymity in East Asia. Cyber-Surveillance in Everyday Life, 9, 424-440.
- Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
- Gu, Y. (1992). Politeness, Pragmatics and Culture. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4, 2.
- Herring, S. C. (2010). Computer-Mediated Conversation: Introduction and Overview. Language@Internet, 7, Article 2. http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2010/2801
- Hiemstra, G. (1982). Teleconferencing, Concern for Face, and Organizational Culture. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication Yearbook (pp. 874-904). Sage: Newbury Park, CA.
- Holtgraves, T., & Yang, J. (1992). Interpersonal Underpinnings of Request Strategies: General Principles and Differences Due to Culture and Gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 246-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.246
- Joos, M. (1962). The Five Clocks. New York: Harcourt Brace.
- Lakoff, R. (1973). The Logic of Politeness, or Minding Your P’s and Q’s. Chicago Linguistics Society, 9, 292-305.
- Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
- Lorenzo-Dus, N., Blitvich, P., & Bou-Franch, P. (2011). On-Line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings Sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube Video. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2578-2593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005