As has previously been mentioned, structures such as these are generally not perceived by participants as overt expressions of politeness,
even though they all make supportive contributions toward the facework being negotiated among the participants and thus contribute towards the
politic behavior of the interaction. Because of their frequent lack of salience for the participants, they structure that form part of the politic behavior
rather than expressions of politeness. However, if they are used in excess of what is necessary to maintain the politic behavior of an interaction, they are
open to evaluation as polite.
2.3.2. Expressions of Procedural Meaning EPMs
In order to achieve our communicative goals in social interaction, we carry out processes of pragmatic inferencing and, in doing so, linguistic
forms become so conventionalized that they begin to lose their flexibility of reference. Some become fixed as structural elements in the language system
itself grammaticalization, while others lose most or all of their propositional content and begin to function as metapragmatic ‘signposts’ or
‘instructions’ to the addressee on now to process propositions pragmaticalization. Watts Watts 2003: 180 called the pragmaticalized
linguistic expressions to signal procedural meaning Expressions of Procedural Meaning EPMs for short.
EPMs are essential feature of linguistic practice since they are largely responsible for generating inferences in the addressee that bear on
the interpersonal meaning greetings, terms of address, leave-taking, etc. or
Universitas Sumatera Utara
they instruct the addressee where and how to derive inferences from propositional values. EPMs are therefore part of the politic behavior of
different forms of the politic behavior of different forms of linguistic practice. The following structural categories, which are suggested by House
and Kesper, are represented by EPMs and thus frequently used to signal politeness and impoliteness:
1 Politeness markers, by which they mean expressions added to the
utterance to ‘show deference to the addressee and to bid for cooperative behavior’, e.g. politeness marker please, if you wouldn’tdon’t mind, tag
questions with the modal verb willwould following an imperative structure.
2 Play downs, by which they understand syntactic devices which ‘tone
down the perlocutionary effect an utterance is likely to have on the addressee’. For example, use the past tense I wondered if ..., I thought
you might …, progressive aspect together with past tense I was wondering whether … I was thinking you might…, an interrogative
containing a modal verb would it be a good idea …, could we …, a negative interrogative containing a modal verb wouldn’t it be a good
idea if …, couldn’t you …. 3
Consultative devices, by which they understand structures which seek to involve the addressee and bid for herhis cooperation, e.g. would you
mind …, could you …. 4
Hedges, by which they understand the avoidance of giving precise propositional content and leaving an option open to the addressee to
Universitas Sumatera Utara
impose herhis own intent, e.g. kind of, sort of, somehow, more or less, rather, and what have you.
5 Understaters, which is a means of underrepresenting the propositional
content of the utterance by a phrase functioning an adverbial modifier or also by an adverb itself, e.g. a bit, a little bit, a second, a moment,
briefly. 6
Downtoners, which ‘modulate the impact’ of the speaker’s utterance, e.g. just, simply, possibly, perhaps, really.
7 Committers, which lower the degree to which the speaker commits
herhimself to the propositional content of the utterance, e.g. I think, I believe, I guess, in my opinion.
8 Forewarning, which is a strategy that could be realized by a wide range
of different structures in which the speaker makes some kind of metacomment on an FTA e.g. pays a compliment or invokes a generally
accepted principles which she is about to flout, etc. For example, far be it for me to criticize, but …. You may find this a bit boring, but …. You
are good at solving computer problems, but …. 9
Hesitators, which are pauses filled with non-lexical phonetic material, e.g. err, uhh, ah, or an instance of stuttering.
10 Scope-stater, which express a subjective opinion about the state of
affairs referred to in the proposition, e.g. I’m afraid you’re in my seat, I’m disappointed that you couldn’t …. It was a shame you didn’t ….
11 Agent-avoiders, which refer to propositional utterances in which the
agent is suppressed or impersonalized, thereby deflecting the criticism
Universitas Sumatera Utara
from the addressee to some kind generalize agent, e.g. passive structures or utterances such as people don’t do X.
12 Cajolers, which help to increase, establish, or restore harmony between
interlocutors, e.g. I mean, you see, you know, actually, basically, really. 13
Appealers, which try to elicit some hearer confirmation and are characterized by rising intonation patterns, e.g. ok ay, right, yeah.
14 Steers, which try to steer the addressee towards fulfilling the interests of
the speaker, e.g. Would you mind making a pot of tea? 15
Grounders, which give reasons for the FTA, e.g. I’m thirsty. Get me a
coca cola, will you? 16
Preparators, i.e. meta-statement expressing what the speaker wants the
hearer to do, e.g. I’m going to test your knowledge now. What is …?
17 Overstaters, which are adverbial modifiers through which the
propositional content of the utterance is ‘overrepresented’, e.g. absolutely, purely, terribly, awfully, etc.
18 Intensifier, which are markers intensifying the degree to which an
element of the propositional content of the utterance, e.g. very, so, quite, really, just, indeed, etc.
When these EPMs are missing, their absence is easily interpretable as impoliteness, and when they are in excess of what is required by the
situation, they are easily interpretable as politeness. The evaluation of politeness might be positive or negative and to reach such a decision it
depends on being able to determine what constraints the politic behavior of a social interaction places in language usage.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY
Not a week goes without my telling lie, but I suppose that is the same
for most people. The polite but untrue compliments we offer can be dismissed as “white lies”—small lies we tell to protect ourselves and others from trouble or
embarrassment.
[Kyoko Mori, Polite Lies p. 211]
3.1. Method of Research
