Politeness In Shakespeare

Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson have proposed that power (P), distance (D), and the ranked extremity (R) of a face-threatening act are the universal determinants of politeness levels in dyadic discourse. This claim is tested here for Shakespeare's use of Early Modern English in Much Ado about Nothing, Measure for Measure, The Taming of the Shrew, and Twelfth Night. The comedies are used because: (1) dramatic texts provide the best information on colloquial speech of the period; (2) the psychological soliloquies in the comedies provide the access to inner life that is necessary for a proper test of politeness theory; and (3) the comedies represent the full range of society in a period of high relevance to politeness theory. The four plays are systematically searched for pairs of minimally contrasting dyads where the dimensions of contrast are power (P), distance (D), and intrinsic extremity (R). Whenever such a pair is found, there are two speeches to be scored for politeness and a prediction from theory as to which should be more polite. The results for P and for R are those predicted by theory, but the results for D are not. The two components of D, interactive closeness and affect, are not closely associated in the plays. Affect strongly influences politeness (increased liking increases politeness and decreased liking decreases politeness); interactive closeness has little or no effect on politeness. The uses of politeness for the delineation of character in the comedies are illustrated.

Seminar paper from the year 1999 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 2,0, University of Cologne, course: Functions in English grammar, 29 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: As well as being an important social and cultural phenomenon, politeness may also be regarded as a function of speech, i.e. a set of principles, rules or maxims governing a competent speaker's use of language. Although this is clearly manifested in the structure and actual use of utterances in a given conversation context, far mote than Saussure's langue and parole arc involved in that historical, sociological and psychological aspects have to be taken into account. Thus, in analysing politeness in a fictional text it is essential to establish the historical setting as well as to examine the social hierarchy and valid conventions; as far as psychology is concerned, a scrutiny of the characters is necessary. Moreover, the course their interaction takes is crucial: "Every choice A makes affects the force of B's options, and vice versa, so even politeness is determined jointly" (Clark 1996: 316). These methodological premises imply that, even though the emphasis in this paper is on linguistic results, external factors cannot be ignored without distorting the outcome. However, it seems legitimate to integrate these factors only to the degree to which they contribute to the linguistic enterprise undertaken here. As to the theories of politeness that are utilized, it must be noted that they all fall short of explaining the evidence satisfactorily, but they nevertheless allow for interesting inferences and are therefore useful heuristic tools. 1 ...]

Using the Devil with Courtesy analyses Renaissance forms of (im)politeness through Shakespeare. Adopting a historical pragmatic perspective drawing in particular on Brown and Levinson (1987), Jucker (2010) and Culpeper (2011), the book focuses specifically on Hamlet (c. 1601) and The Taming of the Shrew (c. 1594).

Seminar paper from the year 2011 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Linguistics, grade: 1,7, University of Münster (Englisches Seminar), language: English, abstract: Today, the concept of politeness is not associated with class consciousness or social discrimination anymore, but in the sixteenth century this term was commonly linked to deference and showing respect (Watts 34). Thus appropriate language behaviour was of utmost importance to Elizabethan society. People of that time were always anxious to please their interlocutors, especially with reference to forms of address. Those address formulae had to be chosen accurately as they were very meaningful: Not only did they give information concerning personal relationships (Bruti 44) and emotions towards each other, but also about social ranks and hence power relations between speaker (S) and hearer (H). In Early Modern English times forms of address reflected the social hierarchy (Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg 547; Replogle 102). So every title was assigned to a certain social status. To avoid using titles in an inappropriate or even impolite way, a lot of courtesy and conduct manuals were published (Watts 36). In the following attention will be drawn on Shakespeare’s tragedy Othello (OTH) and the author’s use of address terms, particularly relating to salutations used by husband and wife and that between friends. Is Shakespeare’s choice of nominal address forms in accordance with Elizabethan conventions? By concentrating on the marital relationship between the characters Othello and Desdemona as well as on that between the two “friends” Othello and Iago, this term paper aims at answering this question. But before comparing Elizabethan conventions to Shakespeare’s dramatis personae, it is necessary to illuminate Brown and Levinson’s politeness concept that provides a basis for dealing with terms of address.

This study investigates the morpho-syntactic variability of the second person pronouns in the Shakespeare Corpus, seeking to elucidate the factors that underlie their choice. The major part of the work is devoted to analyzing the variation between you and thou, but it also includes chapters that deal with the variation between thy and thine and between ye and you. Methodologically, the study makes use of descriptive statistics, but incorporates both quantitative and qualitative features, drawing in particular on research methods recently developed within the fields of corpus linguistics, socio-historical linguistics and historical pragmatics. By making comparisons to other corpora on Early Modern English the work does not only contribute to Shakespeare studies, but on a broader scale also to language change by providing new and more detailed insights into the mechanisms that have led to a restructuring of the pronoun paradigm in the Early Modern period.

Shakespeare and Social Dialogue deals with Shakespeare's language and the rhetoric of Elizabethan letters. Moving beyond claims about the language of individual Shakespearean characters, Magnusson analyses dialogue, conversation, sonnets and particularly letters of the period, which are normally read as historical documents, as the verbal negotiation of specific social and power relations. Thus, the rhetoric of service or friendship is explored in texts as diverse as Sidney family letters, Shakespearean sonnets and Burghley's state letters. The book draws on ideas from discourse analysis and linguistic pragmatics, especially 'politeness theory', relating these to key ideas in epistolary handbooks of the period, including those by Erasmus and Angel Day and demonstrates that Shakespeare's language is rooted in the everyday language of Elizabethan culture. Magnusson creates a way of reading both literary texts and historical documents which bridges the gap between the methods of new historicism and linguistic criticism.

Speech Act Theory and Shakespeare delves deeper than linguistic ornamentation to illuminate the complex dynamics of thanking as a significant speech act in Shakespearean plays. The word “thanks” appears nearly 400 times in 37 Shakespearean plays, calling for a careful investigation of its veracity as a speech act in the 16th-century setting. This volume combines linguistic analysis to explore the various uses of thanks, focusing on key thanking scenes across a spectrum of plays, including All’s Well That Ends Well, Romeo and Juliet, The Merchant of Venice, Timon of Athens, The Winter’s Tale, and the Henriad. Shakespeare’s works indicate the act of thanking to be more than a normal part of dialogue; it is an artistic expression fraught with pitfalls similar to those of negative speech acts. The study aims to determine what compels the characters in Shakespeare to offer thanks and evaluates Shakespeare’s accomplishment in imbuing the word “thanks” with performance quality in the theatrical sphere. This work adds to our comprehension of Shakespearean plays and larger conversations on the challenges of language usage in theatrical and cultural settings by examining the convergence of gratitude with power dynamics, political intrigue, and interpersonal relationships, drawing on a multidisciplinary approach that includes pragmatics, philosophy, religion, and psychology.