Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Psychology of Language and Communication

The Journal of University of Warsaw

3 Issues per year


SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.192
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.241
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.313

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2083-8506
See all formats and pricing




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

Elahe Goudarzi
  • English Department, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
  • :
/ Behzad Ghonsooly
  • Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
/ Zahra Taghipour
  • Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
Published Online: 2015-05-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0004

Abstract

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

References

  • 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.

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

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

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

  • 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.

  • Goffman, E. (1976). Replies and responses. Language in Society, 5 (3), 257-313. [Crossref]

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

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

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

  • 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.

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

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

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

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

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


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, May 2015

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

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.