{"title":"Facing differences in conceptualizing “Face” in everyday interacting","authors":"Robert B. Arundale","doi":"10.1515/ip-2024-4001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ever since Goffman examined “face” in social interaction in 1955, researchers in intercultural and sociocultural pragmatics have employed the concept in many ways, and have developed a number of different positions on what the concept entails and on how to study it. Following Goffman, face is uniformly conceptualized as a phenomenon apparent in everyday interacting, but in focusing on the characteristics of face, researchers have routinely overlooked their conceptualizations of everyday interaction. This article examines twelve current conceptualizations of face, focusing particularly on their conceptualizations of everyday interacting and their implications for examining face, and providing researchers with bases for choosing a conceptualization that will be productive in addressing their research questions regarding face in everyday interacting.","PeriodicalId":13669,"journal":{"name":"Intercultural Pragmatics","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intercultural Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2024-4001","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Ever since Goffman examined “face” in social interaction in 1955, researchers in intercultural and sociocultural pragmatics have employed the concept in many ways, and have developed a number of different positions on what the concept entails and on how to study it. Following Goffman, face is uniformly conceptualized as a phenomenon apparent in everyday interacting, but in focusing on the characteristics of face, researchers have routinely overlooked their conceptualizations of everyday interaction. This article examines twelve current conceptualizations of face, focusing particularly on their conceptualizations of everyday interacting and their implications for examining face, and providing researchers with bases for choosing a conceptualization that will be productive in addressing their research questions regarding face in everyday interacting.
期刊介绍：
Intercultural Pragmatics is a fully peer-reviewed forum for theoretical and applied pragmatics research. The goal of the journal is to promote the development and understanding of pragmatic theory and intercultural competence by publishing research that focuses on general theoretical issues, more than one language and culture, or varieties of one language. Intercultural Pragmatics encourages ‘interculturality’ both within the discipline and in pragmatic research. It supports interaction and scholarly debate between researchers representing different subfields of pragmatics including the linguistic, cognitive, social, and interlanguage paradigms. The intercultural perspective is relevant not only to each line of research within pragmatics but also extends to several other disciplines such as anthropology, theoretical and applied linguistics, psychology, communication, sociolinguistics, second language acquisition, and bi- and multilingualism. Intercultural Pragmatics makes a special effort to cross disciplinary boundaries. What we primarily look for is innovative approaches and ideas that do not always fit into existing paradigms, and lead to new ways of thinking about language. Intercultural Pragmatics has always encouraged the publication of theoretical papers including linguistic and philosophical pragmatics that are very important for research in intercultural pragmatics.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
