29
4.3. Factors Influencing the Choice of Strategies:
1. The payoffs: a priori considerations. Here is the list of the payoff associated
with each of the strategies, derived on a priori grounds. a
Bald on record payoffs: Efficiency, Clarity, perspicuous, Demonstrable non manipulativenes. Example: yes you may enter the room. By uttering
that, the speaker can get the advantage of getting the acclaim of honesty, for indicating that he trusts the addressee. Brown Levinson 71
b Positive politeness payoffs: To satisfy H‟s positive face, in some respect.
Example: what a beautiful house, it just like a princess’ castle. The
speaker can reduce FTA by declaring the hearer that he considers himself to be
„of the same kind‟.71 c
Negative politeness payoffs: To satisfy H‟s negative face, in some degree. Example:
“Can you possibly help me with this?” 189 the speaker can thereby avoid incurring a future debt.72
d Off record payoffs: speaker can satisfy negative face to a degree greater
than that afforded by the negative politeness strategy. The speaker can avoid the inescapable accountability, the responsibility for his action, that
on record strategies entail. Example: I can ’t open this jar. The speaker can
avoid the potential threat of ordering the hearer to help him open the jar.72
e Do not do the FTA payoffs: speaker avoids offending hearer at all. 72
30
2. The Circumsance: Sociological factor. Brown and Levinson argue that the
assessment of the seriousness involves the following factors in many and perhaps all culture:
a
The social distance D of S and H a symmetric relation. Example:
1. “Excuse me, would you by any chance have the time?”
2. “Got the time, mate?” 80
Where speaker and hearer are strangers, speaker could use 1 and where speaker and hearer are close, speaker could use 2. The distance of the
speaker and hearer is the variable that changes 1 to 2 and vice versa.
b
The relative power P of S and H an asymmetric relation. Example:
1. Excuse me sir, would it be all right if I take it?
2. Mind if I take it?
In the same situation, 1 might be said by an employee to his boss, while 2 might be said by the boss to the employee. Power of the hearer which
greater than speaker is the only variable that changes 2 to 1 and vice versa
c
The absolute ranking Rx of imposition in particular culture. Example:
1. Look, I‟m terribly sorry to bother but would there be any chance of
your borrowing me your phone? I must have lo st my phone and I can‟t
go home without calling my husband. 2.
Hey, can I use your phone? Both might be said in the airport by a traveler to a stranger. The only
variable is R, and it must because the value of R is lower in 6 that the language applicable to a low FTA value is employed there. 80-81
3.
The integration of assessment of payoff and weighting of risk in the choice of strategies.
If it is empirically the case that FTA danger is assessed by
estimating P, D, and R values. Then the speaker will choose a higher numbered strategy as the threat increase. 84
31
CHAPTER III RESEARCH FINDINGS
1. Data Description
The data for this research was collected from an interview between Ellen DeGeneres and Barrack Obama. The interview held on February 12, 2016 has
duration 21 minutes 49 seconds and broadcasted for Ellen DeGeneres Talk Show. The data is from Ellen‟s and Obama‟s utterance which contain politeness strategy
and transcript into a script form. Below are the corpus data the writer has obtained:
Table 3.1. politeness strategies in corpus data
No. Politeness Strategies
Observance of Politeness Strategies
1 Bald on record
- 2
Positive politeness 17
3 Negative politeness
4 4
Off record -
5 Do not do the FTA
-
Total 21
Ellen as the host of talk show and Obama as the guest made utterances in
the form of question and statement. Through their words the writer analyzed strategies employed by them. The analysis is divided into three parts the first one
is Ellen‟s politeness strategy, the second is Obama‟s politeness strategy, and the last is the speaker‟s factors of for using some kinds of strategies. The theories
31
Kategori