Termout.org logo/LING


Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled.

Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) politeness (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: politeness


Is in goldstandard

1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines193 - : Politeness and modality: Discourse markers

2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines294 - : Illocutionary structure and politeness: Building knowledge and opinion in letters from readers of scientific topics

3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines313 - : In an analysis carried out in the early 1980's regarding the linguistic behaviour of Romanian speakers, Pietreanu (1984) noticed that using salutation formulas was not only a matter of individual freedom, but also a matter of adhering to the norms of behaviour that exist in a particular linguistic community at a certain moment. What is more, salutation formulas must take into account "the specific semantics of the situations in which a formula is actually used" (Pietreanu, 1984: 24). As a speech act, a greeting is defined as "communicative behaviour, either gestural or verbal (or both), that has a certain significance for a social micro- or macro-group, by means of which attention is paid, respect or politeness is shown to a person or to a group" (Pietreanu, 1984: 29 ).

4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines453 - : This section concentrates on offers in English. Such an illocutionary category (i.e. ‘offering’)is based on the social convention whereby we are expected to act in ways that are beneficial to other people. This social convention underlies what ^[108]Leech (1983) called the cost-benefit pragmatic scale within his theory of politeness: polite acts are those in which we maximize benefit and minimize cost to others . But the social convention is more complex. An accurate (and technical) formulation is provided in ^[109]Ruiz de Mendoza and Baicchi (2007) under the label of Cost-Benefit Cognitive Model. Here, for the sake of simplicity, we sketch out, in a non-technical way, some of its central assumptions:(i) if we identify a state of affairs that is not beneficial to other people, we should alter it in such a way that it becomes beneficial to them; (ii) if we are aware of a state of affairs that could be of benefit to others, we should do our best to bring it about, but (iii) if we suspect that

5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines474 - : A series of devices are presented below for the expression of verbal politeness, which will be observed throughout this study (^[28]Níkleva, 2011, ^[29]2015):

6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines474 - : These two strategies -hedging and intensification- are employed to achieve two types of politeness: Positive and negative . Negative politeness (mitigating) is utilized to compensate for possible aggression toward the negative face of the interlocutor. It makes use of hedging mechanisms and strategies. Positive politeness tries to establish a positive relationship in which the need of a person to be liked is respected. It refers to face-flattering acts. For this reason, it utilizes intensifying measures.

7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines474 - : These variables were selected because appropriateness is a manifestation of politeness, since it considers the circumstances of the communicative situation: The roles of the participants, age, communicative purpose, etc . In this sense, to be appropriate means to be polite at the same time.

8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines474 - : To the three factors that determine politeness (^[47]Brown & Levinson, 1987) - power, social distance and cultural context- the emotional relationship between the interlocutors must be added (^[48]Kienpointner, 2008). Kienpointner establishes a relation between politeness and emotional arguments. The strategies of (im)politeness are often used to “create or modify more or less pleasant emotions during the interaction” (^[49]Kienpointner, 2008: 27 ).

Evaluando al candidato politeness:


2) behaviour: 3
3) pietreanu: 3
4) positive: 3 (*)
5) communicative: 3 (*)
6) beneficial: 3
7) convention: 3 (*)
8) kienpointner: 3

politeness
Lengua: eng
Frec: 90
Docs: 27
Nombre propio: 1 / 90 = 1%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 3
Puntaje: 3.727 = (3 + (1+4.4594316186373) / (1+6.5077946401987)));
Candidato aceptado

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
politeness
: Arundale, R. (1999). An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics, 9(1), 119-153.
: Brown, L. (2011). Korean honorifics and politeness in second language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins .
: Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1978, 1987). Politeness. Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Bunz, U. & Campbell, S. W. (2004). Politeness accommodation in electronic mail. Communication Research Reports, 21(1), 11-25.
: Cordella, M. (2007). ‘No, no I haven’t been taking it doctor’: Compliance, face threatening acts and politeness in medical consultations. En M. E. Placencia & C. García (Eds.), Linguistic politeness in the Spanish-speaking world (pp. 191-212). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
: Dzameshie, A. (1993). The use of politeness strategies as solidarity and deference moves in Christian sermonic discourse. The SECOL Review, 17, 113-126.
: Dzameshie, A. (1995). Social motivations for politeness behavior in Christian sermonic discourse. Anthropological linguistics, 37(2), 192-215.
: Fraser, B. (1990). Perspectives on politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, XIV, 219-236.
: Hernández-Flores, N. (2008). Politeness and other types of facework: Communicative and social meaning in a television panel discussion. Pragmatics, 18(4) 577-603.
: Holmes, J. & Stubbe, M. (2003). Power and politeness in the workplace. A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Pearson Education.
: Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. Londres: Longamn. [158]https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845722
: Kádár, D. Z. & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
: Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your P's and Q's. Papers from the Ninth Regional Meeting (pp. 292-305). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
: Myers, G. (1989). Pragmatic politeness in scientific articles. Applied linguistics, 10, 1-35.
: Sifianou, M. (2012). Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1554-1564.
: Stephan, E., Liberman, N. & Trope, Y. (2010). Politeness and social distance: A construal level perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 268-280.