Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Psychology of Language and Communication

1 Issue per year

CiteScore 2016: 0.24

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.200
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.380

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Politeness Strategies in English Business Letters: a Comparative Study of Native and Non-Native Speakers of English

Elahe Goudarzi / Behzad Ghonsooly / Zahra Taghipour
Published Online: 2015-05-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0004


This study investigated the use of politeness strategies in a corpus of English business letters written by Iranian non-native speakers in comparison with business letters written by English native speakers. The positive and negative politeness strategies proposed by Brown and Levinson’s (1978) theory were employed. A corpus of 46 business letters written by non-native employees of four companies and 46 letters written by native speakers who were in correspondence with these companies were analyzed to examine their use of politeness strategies. Th e results collected from the analysis of letters written by nonnative parties as senders were compared to those written by native speakers as receivers in response. Th e findings showed that although both parties used both types of politeness strategies in their letters, non-native participants employed both types (negative and positive politeness strategies) more than native speakers, especially positive politeness strategies, which were found to be used more frequently than negative ones. Additionally, the results demonstrated that social distance plays an important role in the employment of different strategies, particularly in choosing the type of salutation, which is an act requiring the positive politeness strategy to reduce face threatening act. Th us, more frequent use of positive politeness strategies by non-native speakers could be an effect of this factor.

Keywords: Business letter; politeness strategy; social distance


  • Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody (Ed.), Qu estions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction (pp. 56-311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Carrell, P.L. & Konneker, B.H. (1981). Politeness: Comparing native and nonnative judgment. Language Learning, 31 (1), 17-30.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Eelen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar

  • Fraser, B. (2005). Whither politeness. In R. Lakoff& S. Ide (Eds.), Broadening the Horizon of Linguistic Politeness (pp. 65-83). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Gilks, K. (2010). Is the Brown and Levinson (1987) model of politeness as useful and infl uential as originally claimed? An assessment of the revised Brown and Levinson (1987) model. Innervate, 2, 94-102.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, E. (1976). Replies and responses. Language in Society, 5 (3), 257-313.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Guffey, M.E. & Loewy, D. (2012). Essentials of Business Communication (9th Ed.). Mason: South Western Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

  • Holmes, J. (1990). Hedges and boosters in women’s and men’s speech. Language and Communication, 10 (3), 185-205.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jansen, F. & Janssen, D. (2010). Effects of positive politeness strategies in business letters. Journal of Pragmatics, 42 (9), 2531-2548.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kitamura, N. (2000). Adapting Brown and Levinson’s politeness theory to casual conversation. In K. Allan & J. Henderson (Eds.), Proceedings of ALS2k, the 2000 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society (pp. 163-169). Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar

  • Koutlaki, S.A. (2002). Offers and expressions of thanks as face enhancing acts: tæ’arof in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics, 34 (12), 1733-1756.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Maier, P. (1992). Politeness strategies in business letters by native and non-native English speakers. English for Specific Purposes, 11 (3), 189-205.Google Scholar

  • Ming-Chung, Y. (2003). On the universality of face: evidence from Chinese compliment response behavior. Journal of Pragmatics, 35 (10), 1679-1710.Google Scholar

  • Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 10 (1), 1-35.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nickerson, C. (1999). The use of politeness strategies in business letters. In R. Geluykens & K. Pelsemakers (Eds.), Discourse in Professional Contexts (pp. 127-142). Munchen: Lincom.Google Scholar

  • Pikor-Niedzialek, M. (2005). A critical overview of politeness theories in discourse analysis: The scope of politeness - different approaches towards the politeness phenomena. Studia Anglica Resoviensia, 3, 105-113.Google Scholar

  • Pilegaard, M. (1997). Politeness in written business discourse: A text linguistic perspective on requests. Journal of Pragmatics, 28 (2), 223-244.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wadsorn, N. (2008). Thai and Non-Thai reader perceptions on politeness strategies in letters of request in English. Paper presented at the International Conference on Language: Language Diversity and National Unity. Royal Institute of Thailand, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar

  • Xinglian, C. (2006). Politeness and Business English Letters, Courtesy and English Business Letter. Academic Exercise. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2015-05-29

Published in Print: 2015-05-01

Citation Information: Psychology of Language and Communication, Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages 44–57, ISSN (Online) 2083-8506, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0004.

Export Citation

© by Elahe Goudarzi. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in