According to Nathan Bierma, there is a new journal about to debut: Journal of Politeness Research. He quotes Chris Christie (great name for a linguist!), linguist at Loughborough University and founding member of the Linguistic Politeness Research Group, as saying that researchers have begun to rethink their definition of politeness. For years, they assumed politeness was basically a way to avoid conflict and preserve social image. It can even be viewed as being phony: "I was just being polite!" However, Christie says that now researchers view politeness as speech and behavior that goes "beyond what is normally expected in a situation." Politeness is more than just manners; it's the extra work a person puts into building a relationship through communication. This new journal will track some of the research on politeness. It may have implications in domestic violence, managerial communications, or the apologies of politicians.

How do you view politeness? I haven't thought of it this seriously. I simply think of "polite" as a "please" or a "thank-you."

Well, being a great fan of Miss Manners, I take a great interest in etiquette (and she really has an exquisite turn of phrase!). On reading your post though, Kalleh, I was very surprised to see that "they assumed politeness was basically a way to avoid conflict and preserve social image" and that they've only recently have started to see it as more - as I've always seen it as the latter (always, for the pedants out there , as in since I started to think seriously about it). And I bet I'm not the only one.

It appears that the professionals are finally catching up with my brilliance .

I wonder what Miss Manners would say...

I like Miss Manners, too. I was just surprised that linguists were getting into "politeness" and even starting a journal about it!

quote:

the professionals are finally catching up with my brilliance

I doubt that any person could ever fully reach your status, my dear friend.

quote:

How do you view politeness?

If "politeness" and "good manners" mean the same thing (and I think that essentially they do) then I'm with Emerson who said "...Good manners are made up of petty sacrifices...."

In other words, to be polite often means that you need to make the small sacrifice of, say, dropping your litter into a bin rather than on the ground. The more petty sacrifices, the more politeness - and I think that's a good thing.

quote:

... He quotes Chris Christie (great name for a linguist!), linguist at Loughborough University ...

I went to Loughborough and studied Linguistics as well as Literature there, but I never came across him. He must be after my time.

quote:

How do you view politeness? I haven't thought of it this seriously. I simply think of "polite" as a "please" or a "thank-you."

Politeness, to me, is something that greases the bearings of life. As Richard English has said, it's making "petty sacrifices". It's thanking shop assistants or waiters, opening doors for people or giving up your seat on the bus for them, letting someone else have the last cake on the plate (even though you've had your eye on it for ages), letting someone get on or off a bus or train before you, letting someone through in front of you on the road (and acknowledging them if they do it to you) ... and so on and so on and so on.

To my mind, politeness is not really etiquette. Etiquette springs from rules and regulations which are often meant to demonstrate superiority over and impress others. For instance, using cutlery in a certain order dates from the time when wealthy people would hold lavish banquets and bring out all their valuables (which included lots of cutlery, because most people could only afford one knife or perhaps a spoon). It also showed that you could afford plenty of servants to clean it all afterwards.

Automatic, unpremeditated politeness springs from a genuine liking for people and it treats everyone the same. It is not to be confused with the self-serving creeping and grovelling which only manifests itself in the presence of those perceived to be of a higher status (and normally as the exact opposite when applied to "inferiors") or the feeling of inferiority which leads to being unable to say no and eventually to resentment.

quote:

Originally posted by Dianthus:

Automatic, unpremeditated politeness springs from a genuine liking for people and it treats everyone the same. .

I agree with you on this, Di, and also with you, Richard when you said that "the more petty sacrifices, the more politeness - and I think that's a good thing."

I partially agree with you about good manners being a petty sacrifice...the dropping of letters into the bin, for example. Yet, it isn't a sacrifice to say, "Please may I have some coffee" or "Thanks for the coffee," is it? You're just being polite.

Wow! Right at this minute your number of posts is bang on 8000, Kalleh! How cool!

Anyway, going back to the thread, one could say that using polite language is a 'sacrifice' of sorts, as it takes longer to say and requires more thought. Any neanderthal (with apologies to this long-dead species) can grunt 'more coffee' or just take it for themselves, with no effort involved.

I was just surprised that linguists were getting into "politeness" and even starting a journal about it!

I know what you mean, Kalleh - maybe they're socio-linguists or something, as I doubt it's something that could be looked at purely from a language point of view. Politeness is something that will have been already greatly studied by other disciplines, so I'm curious to what these linguists can add to the mix.

Etiquette springs from rules and regulations which are often meant to demonstrate superiority over and impress others.

Di, you really should read Miss Manners if you haven't already (see my link above) - she's really opened my eyes. True etiquette isn't about superiority and discomfort at all; indeed, it's considered incredibly bad form to make someone else feel inferior/excluded, or publicly correct someone's 'mistakes'/perceived rudeness, for example. Miss Manners can explain it far better than I can; unfortunately there are too many entries for me to find one of the few where she specifically addresses this issue.

Edit: I've just found one: http://women.msn.com/48771.armx

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Cat,

quote:

Originally posted by Cat:
Miss Manners ...http://women.msn.com/48771.armx

How sad that manners should be classified as a subject of interest mainly to women. But I don't doubt that the siting accurately reflects the readership.

Whereas men seem to read Dear Abby and other such columns, I agree that women tend to be the ones to read Miss Manners. I think it is partly because many of the columns, at least here in the US, pertain to showers, weddings, dinner invitations and parties, etc., where, let's face it, more women are involved with planning them.