Dániel Z. Kádár, Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction

IF 1.1 Q3 COMMUNICATION Internet Pragmatics Pub Date : 2019-12-03 DOI:10.1075/ip.00034.wan
Jiayi Wang
{"title":"Dániel Z. Kádár, Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction","authors":"Jiayi Wang","doi":"10.1075/ip.00034.wan","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Daniel Z. Kadar has been the most vocal scholar of ritual in the field of pragmatics. His recently published monograph epitomises his ground-breaking exploration of the broad interface that exists between politeness, impoliteness and ritual. Its aim is to provide a research framework that captures the interface area. Specifically, it sets up the first (im)politeness-focused interactional model of ritual. Ritual is not a completely new concept for politeness researchers due to the fundamental impact of the works of renowned sociologist Erving Goffman (1955, 1967) on the theorising of politeness. Brown and Levinson (1978/1987) loosely adopted the notion of face from Goffman to build their seminal theory of politeness, which has been widely adopted and criticised, and recently there has been a call to return to the original Goffmanian notion of face (see Wang and Spencer-Oatey 2015 for a detailed discussion). Goffman used ritual to refer to all types of interpersonal interactions that involve face work. Within politeness research, it is Kadar and colleagues who, through a series of published studies (e.g. Kadar 2013; Kadar and de la Cruz 2016; Kadar and Ran 2015; Kadar and Robinson Davies 2016), have brought ritual to the fore of our attention. This volume defines it as a recurrent, emotively invested action that reinforces or transforms interpersonal relationships (p.12). Kadar’s definition is somewhat different from Goffman’s in that it aims to ‘capture the formal and functional interactional characteristics of ritual practices from the politeness researchers’ data-driven perspective’ (p.54). By focusing on the relational function of ritual action, Kadar approaches this phenomenon through an analysis of its role in maintaining a perceived communal moral order in interactions.","PeriodicalId":36241,"journal":{"name":"Internet Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00034.wan","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Daniel Z. Kadar has been the most vocal scholar of ritual in the field of pragmatics. His recently published monograph epitomises his ground-breaking exploration of the broad interface that exists between politeness, impoliteness and ritual. Its aim is to provide a research framework that captures the interface area. Specifically, it sets up the first (im)politeness-focused interactional model of ritual. Ritual is not a completely new concept for politeness researchers due to the fundamental impact of the works of renowned sociologist Erving Goffman (1955, 1967) on the theorising of politeness. Brown and Levinson (1978/1987) loosely adopted the notion of face from Goffman to build their seminal theory of politeness, which has been widely adopted and criticised, and recently there has been a call to return to the original Goffmanian notion of face (see Wang and Spencer-Oatey 2015 for a detailed discussion). Goffman used ritual to refer to all types of interpersonal interactions that involve face work. Within politeness research, it is Kadar and colleagues who, through a series of published studies (e.g. Kadar 2013; Kadar and de la Cruz 2016; Kadar and Ran 2015; Kadar and Robinson Davies 2016), have brought ritual to the fore of our attention. This volume defines it as a recurrent, emotively invested action that reinforces or transforms interpersonal relationships (p.12). Kadar’s definition is somewhat different from Goffman’s in that it aims to ‘capture the formal and functional interactional characteristics of ritual practices from the politeness researchers’ data-driven perspective’ (p.54). By focusing on the relational function of ritual action, Kadar approaches this phenomenon through an analysis of its role in maintaining a perceived communal moral order in interactions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dániel Z.KáDár,礼貌、不礼貌与仪式:维护人际交往中的道德秩序
丹尼尔·z·卡达尔是语用学领域研究仪式的权威学者。他最近出版的专著集中体现了他对礼貌、不礼貌和仪式之间广泛界面的开创性探索。它的目的是提供一个捕捉界面区域的研究框架。具体而言,它建立了第一个以礼貌为中心的仪式互动模型。礼仪对于礼貌研究者来说并不是一个全新的概念,因为著名社会学家欧文·戈夫曼(Erving Goffman, 1955,1967)的研究对礼貌的理论化产生了根本性的影响。Brown和Levinson(1978/1987)粗略地采用了Goffman的面子概念来构建他们的开创性礼貌理论,该理论被广泛采用和批评,最近有一种呼吁回归到最初的Goffmanian面子概念(参见Wang和Spencer-Oatey 2015年的详细讨论)。戈夫曼用仪式来指代所有涉及面部表情的人际互动。在礼貌研究中,卡达尔及其同事通过一系列已发表的研究(如卡达尔2013;卡达尔和德拉克鲁兹2016;Kadar and Ran 2015;卡达尔和罗宾逊戴维斯2016),把仪式带到我们关注的前沿。本卷将其定义为一种经常性的、情感投入的行为,可以加强或改变人际关系(第12页)。Kadar的定义与Goffman的定义有些不同,因为它旨在“从礼貌研究人员的数据驱动角度捕捉仪式实践的形式和功能互动特征”(第54页)。通过关注仪式行为的关系功能,卡达尔通过分析其在互动中维持感知的公共道德秩序方面的作用来研究这一现象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Internet Pragmatics
Internet Pragmatics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
The invitation game “Resident superhero” Being sensible is now a radical concept I LOVE that quote haha “I’m only half Korean but I can relate to a lot of what you said” Flirting and winking in Tinder chats
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1