Politeness Theory in Depth

Politeness theory addresses one of the most fundamental questions in pragmatics: why do speakers so often express themselves indirectly rather than stating exactly what they mean? The answer, according to politeness theorists, lies in the concept of face — the public self-image that every person wants to maintain. The most influential model was developed by Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson (1978, revised 1987), building on the sociologist Erving Goffman's concept of face.

---

Goffman and the Concept of Face

The sociologist Erving Goffman (1967, Interaction Ritual) introduced the concept of face into social science, drawing on Chinese and English folk concepts. Goffman defined face as:

"The positive social value a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a particular contact."

In simpler terms, face is the public self-image that every competent adult member of a society claims for themselves. It is the image of ourselves that we project to others and that we want others to accept and respect.

Goffman observed that social interaction involves a constant, largely unconscious effort to maintain one's own face and the face of others. When face is threatened, participants engage in face-work — strategies to repair, protect, or restore face.

Key Definition: Face (Goffman, 1967) — the public self-image that every person claims for themselves in social interaction: their sense of self-esteem, dignity, and social identity as it is presented to and recognised by others.

---

Brown and Levinson's Politeness Theory

Brown and Levinson (1987, Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage) developed the most detailed and influential model of linguistic politeness. They divided face into two related aspects:

Positive Face

Positive face is the desire to be liked, approved of, and respected — the wish for one's self-image, personality, desires, and values to be appreciated and accepted by others.

• The desire to be included in a group
• The desire for one's opinions to be valued
• The desire to be seen as competent, attractive, or interesting
• The desire for one's achievements to be recognised

Negative Face

Negative face is the desire for autonomy, freedom of action, and freedom from imposition — the wish not to be impeded, constrained, or told what to do.

• The desire not to be imposed upon
• The desire to be free to act as one chooses
• The desire for one's territory (physical, emotional, temporal) to be respected
• The desire not to be obligated to others

Key Definition: Positive face — the desire to be liked, approved of, and respected. Negative face — the desire for autonomy, freedom of action, and freedom from imposition. Together, they constitute the two aspects of face (Brown and Levinson, 1987).

---

Face-Threatening Acts (FTAs)

A face-threatening act is any action or utterance that potentially damages or threatens the face of the speaker, the listener, or both. Brown and Levinson argued that many common speech acts are inherently face-threatening.

Acts That Threaten the Listener's Positive Face

These acts suggest that the speaker does not value or approve of the listener:

• Criticisms — "Your essay is poorly argued."
• Insults — "You're an idiot."
• Disagreements — "I think you're wrong about that."
• Complaints — "You never listen to me."
• Accusations — "You broke my computer."
• Contradictions — "That's simply not true."

Acts That Threaten the Listener's Negative Face

These acts impose on the listener's autonomy or freedom of action:

• Requests — "Could you lend me twenty pounds?"
• Orders/Commands — "Sit down."
• Advice — "You should see a doctor about that."
• Suggestions — "Why don't you try a different approach?"
• Offers — "Let me carry that for you." (creates obligation)
• Reminders — "Don't forget you owe me that report."

Acts That Threaten the Speaker's Own Face

• Apologies — "I'm sorry I forgot your birthday." (threatens speaker's positive face)
• Confessions — "I made a terrible mistake." (threatens speaker's positive face)
• Accepting a compliment — can be awkward because it may seem immodest (threatens speaker's positive face)
• Accepting an offer of help — acknowledges the speaker's inability (threatens speaker's negative face)

Key Definition: Face-threatening act (FTA) — any action or utterance that potentially damages or threatens the positive or negative face of the speaker or the listener.

---

Brown and Levinson's Politeness Strategies

Brown and Levinson proposed a hierarchy of strategies for performing face-threatening acts, ranging from the most direct to the most indirect:

Strategy 1: Bald On-Record (Without Redressive Action)

The speaker performs the FTA directly, clearly, and unambiguously, without any attempt to soften the threat to face.

• "Give me your pen."
• "Close the door."
• "You're wrong."

This strategy is used when the face threat is minimal, the relationship is very close, urgency overrides politeness, or the speaker has significantly more power than the listener. It is also used in emergencies: "Watch out!" "Stop!"

Strategy 2: Positive Politeness

The speaker performs the FTA while also attending to the listener's positive face — expressing approval, solidarity, and inclusion. Positive politeness strategies include:

Strategy	Example
Attend to the listener's interests/needs	"You look tired — have a rest."
Use in-group identity markers	"Hey, mate, can you lend us a hand?"
Claim common ground	"We both know how tough this job can be."
Seek agreement	"Great weather, isn't it?"
Avoid disagreement	"Well, you're sort of right, but..."
Joke	"How about lending me your car — just for the decade?"
Compliment	"That's a really smart idea. Could you also...?"
Use inclusive 'we'	"Let's have a look at this together, shall we?"
Give reasons	"I need to borrow your notes because I was ill last week."
Offer/promise reciprocity	"I'll wash up if you cook tonight."