论文总字数：36832字

摘 要

在英语课堂中，英语不仅仅是一种教学手段，更是学生学习的内容，它具有

十分重要的作用。为了学生能更好地学习，教师需要更好发挥师生互动的作用。因此，决定整个英语课堂效率的师生互动能否有效促进生生互动、激发和维持学生的学习动机就成为十分具有研究价值的课题。课堂教学离不开言语交际，尤其是语言教学课堂中，语言既是教学目的，又是教学工具。教师话语在英语课堂中非常重要，一方面它是学生接触英语的主要来源，另一方面它是教师进行知识点讲解和指导学生学习的主要手段，师生的双向沟通要想流畅地进行下去，就不能离开礼貌原则，这就显示了礼貌原则在课堂中的重要性。教师如果能将礼貌原则与英语教学有效的结合，营造高效、愉快而又轻松的课堂环境，就能提高教学质量。

本文主要通过课堂观察和课后访谈收集数据，经过深入分析收集到的语音材料以及访谈结果，发现教师在教学过程中能够运用礼貌原则，同时也尝试在师生互动中运用多种形式的的教师话语来更好地实践礼貌原则。研究发现礼貌原则确实对于英专学生的学习有积极作用，并期冀更多的教师能认识到礼貌原则的积极作用。

关键词：礼貌原则；师生互动；英语课堂

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements 2

Abstract 3

摘要 4

Chapter One Introduction 7

1.1 Background 7

1.2 Significance of the Research 7

1.3 Layout of the Thesis 8

Chapter Two Literature Review 9

2.1 Theories about Politeness 9

2.1.1 Positive face and Negative face 9

2.1.2 Leech’s Politeness Principle 10

2.1.3 Differences and Similarities between the Two Theories 11

2.2 Research about Politeness Theories and Foreign Language Teaching at

home and abroad 12

2.2.1 Related researches abroad 12

2.2.2 Related researches in China 13

2.3 Summary 14

Chapter Three Research Methodology ₁₅

3.1 Theoretical Framework 15

3.2 Research questions 15

3.3 Participants 16

3.4 Instruments 16

3.4.1 Class observation 16

3.4.2 Interview 17

3.5 Data Collection and Data Analysis 17

Chapter Four Results and Discussion ₁₉

4.1 Application of The Politeness Principle 19

4.1.1 The Maxim of Tact 19

4.1.2 The Maxim of Generosity 20

4.1.3 The Maxim of Approbation 20

4.1.4 The Maxim of Modesty 21

4.1.5 The Maxim of Agreement 21

4.1.6 The Maxim of Sympathy 21

4.2 The Influence of Politeness Principle 22

4.2.1 Positive Influence 22

4.2.2 Negative Influence 22

Chapter Five Conclusion 23

5.1 Major Findings 23

5.2 Implications for English Teaching 23

5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Study 24

References 26

Appendices 28

Appendix 1 28

Appendix 2 29

Chapter One Introduction

This chapter gives a short introduction to the general research background at the beginning and then expounds the importance of the present study. Then a layout of the thesis is provided.

1.1 Background

Educationalists and linguistics have attached great importance to researches concerned with the second language acquisition and second language teaching. Since the 1970s, the process of language acquisition has been a hot topic of studies related to classroom interactions between teaching and learning.

For both teachers and students to have efficient interactions with each other, teachers have to use polite language to meet students’ wants. Politeness plays undoubtedly an important role in human communications. Communications can be more or less influenced by the choices of different politeness strategies, which also work in teacher-student interactions. Recently, the phenomenon of politeness used in classroom has been given much focus and many related theories have been put forward. Although many researches have been done on Politeness, few has been conducted from the perspective of teacher-student interaction. This thesis is going to do a research on the usage of Politeness Principle in English major class of Southeast University.

1.2 Significance of the Research

English is of great significance in modern China as a foreign language. For students of English major, it is especially necessary to learn English well. They learn from teachers in class, which makes it crucial to enhance the efficiency of class by making effective teacher-student interactions, which is for one thing a main way in which students get in touch with English, and for another thing a principal means of teaching process.

The purpose of this research is to use pragmatic-based theory, that is politeness principle, to make teachers aware of the significance of interaction with their students . And at the same time, the thesis may make it easier for teachers to arouse and maintain interactions successfully. As a result of teacher’s language and strategies that apply to politeness principle, together with their predominant role in class, teachers can gradually influence their students and awaken their idea of politeness, which will eventually contributes to successful teacher-student interaction abiding to politeness principle.

1.3 Layout of the Thesis

The thesis consists of five chapters. Starting with a brief introduction, followed by main theories and status in quo in China and aboard, the paper then introduces research methodologies consisting of class observation and interviews . Then it moves on to the results discussion of the influence of politeness principle. The thesis concludes in the end with a summary of major findings and suggestions for further study.

Chapter Two Literature Review

In this chapter, the notion of politeness and several theories will be studied firstly. Then the focus moves on to Face Theory and Politeness Principle, the difference and similarities between which are discussed in the end.

2.1 Theories about Politeness

The exploration of politeness with a common theory known simply as "politeness theory." It was formally developed and put forth by Goffman in the 1950s with the concept of “face” and “face work”. The theory was then introduced into academia by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in 1987, named politeness theory, which has become very influential for decades. Another theory was put forth by Geoffrey Leech (1983) , in which he listed six maxims in all, including the maxim of tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement, and sympathy.

This thesis will elaborate Brown and Levinson’s face theory as well as Leech’s Politeness Principle.

2.1.1 Positive face and Negative face

By now, Brown and Levinson’s face theory (1978,1987), namely, positive face and negative face, is one of the most influential theory about politeness. According to Brown and Levinson (1987), face is “the public image that every member want s to claim for himself” (1987: 61). In their opinion, face is something that is easily affected by emotion and could be saved, preserved, enhanced, lost or threatened and it must be constantly taken care of through interactions. Brown and Levinson’s face theory consists of mainly three basic notions: face, face threatening acts (FTAs) and politeness strategies. The first notion will be elaborated in this part. Why just the first notion?

Brown and Levinson (1987) differed two types of face according to participant wants: positive face and negative face. The definition of positive face was given by Brown and Levinson in two ways, as “the want of every member that his wants be desirable to at least some others”, or in another way, “the positive consistent self-image or ‘personality’ (crucially including the desire that this self-image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants” (1987: 64). That is to say, positive face is relevant with one’s will to be appreciated and approved of by others. Negative face also has two definitions, as “the want of every “competent adult member” that his actions be unimpeded by others”, or “the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction-i.e. The freedom of action and freedom from imposition” (198: 64).

Face wants is in fact the desire to be appreciated and maintained. Enough attention should be paid to both a person’s positive face and negative face in the course of interaction.

2.1.2 Leech’s Politeness Principle

Leech (1983) formulates Politeness Principle, aiming at remedying Grice’s (1975)

Cooperative Principle, which is believed to be unable to explain conversational implicature. That is why, people have a tendency to use indirect ways of saying things. To Leech, it is politeness that contributes it. For example, social acts like competitive ones demand politeness far more than other kinds like convivial ones or collaborative ones in that the former makes a threat to the audience’s face, or negative face. Various politeness strategies, as a result, are employed to mitigate the face-threatening power. According to Leech, the greater the cost an act is, whether it is verbal or non-verbal, to the audience, the more polite the speaker ought to try to make the utterance.

According to Leech, politeness principle has six maxims:

1. Tact Maxim: Minimize cost to hearer; maximize benefit to hearer.
2. Generosity Maxim: Minimize benefit to speaker; maximize cost to speaker.
3. Approbation Maxim: Minimize dispraise of hearer; maximize praise of hearer.
4. Modesty Maxim: Minimize praise of speaker; maximize dispraise of speaker.
5. Agreement Maxim: Minimize disagreement between speaker and hearer; maximize agreement between speaker and hearer.
6. Sympathy Maxim: Minimize antipathy between speaker and hearer; maximize sympathy between speaker and hearer. (Leech: P. 132)

Briefly, the principle requires people to minimize impolite behaviors. For tact maxim, if we are asked for advice by a poor man to choose between train and plane, we may say “you can travel by train as it is safer” rather than “you can take the morning flight, it is more expensive”. For Generosity Maxim, we should say “I can offer you my car if you need it” rather than “ You can offer me your car because I need it”. For Approbation Maxim, we had better say “What a marvelous meal you cooked !” not “what an awful meal you cooked!”. For Modesty Maxim, we will say “I am rather inexperienced” instead of “I am very good at it.” if someone tell us “This is the best article I’ve ever read”, to obey Agreement Maxim, we will not say “I don’t think so”, but “It is brilliant” instead. For the last Maxim of sympathy, if we know that a cat is dead, we should say “I am sorry to hear that” instead of “Glad to hear that”.

In English, Politeness Principle accounts also for “white lines”. If someone is invited to a party but he himself doesn’t want to go, there is a larger possibility that he will say “ I am so sorry but I am occupied” instead of “No, I hate your party”. White lies must of course be properly deceptive. White lies must be properly deceptive. If the rejection is “I think I am going to have a headache”, it’s transparently a failure as it breaks the law of politeness principle and it may be even more impolite than a simple direct refusal.

2.1.3 Differences and Similarities between the Two Theories

The two theories are all concerning interactions for the benefits of one side or both and as a result, similarities also exists between them. Firstly, both of the two theory are used in. Secondly, all the strategies or maxims are not mutually exclusive. It is claimed that a few of these techniques may be used in more than one type of situation or more than one at a time. Additionally, a given speech act can have multiple consequences, rather than affecting only positive face or negative face as the current theory suggests. Thirdly, both of them may differ according to culture, social background or individual habits. For example, people have different standards for politeness in the USA and China. On the other way, since politeness principle and face theory were put forth by different linguistics, so there are definitely differences.

Both of them have cross-cultural validity, however, everyone has face wants and they may use various strategies to accomplish these wants or mitigate face threats based on their culture. This intercultural difference does exists. But Brown and Levinson argued that their theory is universal while Leech doubted if there was any ‘divide’. According to him, differences lie in the social parameters of politeness like age, sex, rank of imposition represented by the saying, social distance between the two people or sides, relative power of one person over the other, and so on (Leech 2005).

Another difference may be that, in Politeness Principle, the observation of one maxim may violates another one. But in face theory, the positive face and negative face are completely antagonistic.

2.2 Research about Politeness Theories and Foreign Language Teaching at home

and abroad

Over the last decades, face and politeness have been among the most heavily debated notions in pragmatic and social linguistic research. Different kinds of theoretical arguments and debates concerning these notions have been proposed. It is beyond the limits of this paper to give an exhaustive overview of politeness-related research.

2.2.1 Related researches abroad

Researches have been done since the formulation of the theories. A great number of critical and thorough overviews and analyses of politeness studies have been presented. Goffman (1955) coined the term “face”. Grice (1975) put forward the Cooperative Principle. Lakoff (1979) developed politeness theory and established three rules of politeness,namely, don’t impose, give options and be friendly. Leech (1983) set up his own politeness principle , trying to rescue Grice’s Cooperative Principle. Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) set forth an influential theory concerning politeness. Watts (2003) assumes that politeness and face are different kinds of notions, although they are related in many ways. There are especially a lot of criticisms about face theory as it is based only on three languages.

The researches on Politeness Principle is to some extent, ripe. However, the theory does have different kinds of exhibitions varying with culture, society, customs and so on. There is still a long way of perfection to go.

2.2.2 Related researches in China

In China ,studies about politeness began in the early 1980s. Chen (1986) was the first one to introduce Brown and Levinson’s theory into China successfully. Xu (1992: 2) put forward his theory, that is “attention to the articulators , respect for the interlocutors and concern with the others”. Shu and Wang (1993) studied the relationship between “ rising as praises and falling as devaluing” and “ politeness principle”. Li (1994: 26) said that “appropriateness in the most critical principle in pragmatics”. Gao (1996) claimed that the previous researcher focused on the politeness strategies while neglected the studies on the articulators. One of the most important progress of the development of Politeness Principle was conducted by Gu, Y,G,(1992). He published a passage named “The Usage of Politeness and Culture” After the recalling of the history and origin of politeness in China, and in accordance with the Han culture of virtue, words, and the request of courtesy as well as taking into account the individual characteristics in different text, five criteria was summed up, known as the "Chinese characterized Politeness Principle”, including the principle of derogatory, calling, elegance and so on. Other Chinese scholars, represented by Gu, Mao and Lim, have also done a lot of researches on this topic. Many have provided thorough and consistent critiques. One of the major criticisms, presented by Gu (1990), Mao (1994) and Lim (1994), is that Brown and Levinson assume an individualistic concept of face, which is not appropriate to cultures with broad value tendencies in emphasizing the importance of ingroup interests over individual wants. Wang and Peng (2004) said that in many situations, Politeness Principle is overused and thus is insincere. Xie and He (2005) queried Politeness Principle from the perspective of philosophy. According to Guo Wei(2005), people always try unconsciously to take measures to be politeness so that the discourse can flow smoothly.

The studies concerning Politeness Principle have been a hot topic in the field of academia. More and more scholars have payed attention to it. Besides, Politeness Principle is becoming more and more practical in fields where interactions take place.

2.3 Summary

Scholars in and abroad have been researching the notion of politeness for decades. However, most of the research are based on mixed theories, the research of which do show that politeness makes difference. We cannot know which theory works better and more effective. So divided research based on just one theory concerning politeness is definitely a must. But few has been really based on just one simple theory. This thesis is based on Politeness Principle only.

Chapter Three Research Methodology

This study is intended to explore the employment of politeness principle in teacher talk in Chinese college EFL classroom by means of classroom observations and interview. To describe the procedures in a step-by-step way, this chapter is divided into four sections, with their respective focus on the research questions, participants, instruments and data collection and analysis.

3.1 Theoretical Framework

Although both face theory and Politeness Principle are mentioned before, the whole research of this thesis is based on Politeness Principle, on the basis of which the teacher-student interaction is analyzed. In detail, the six maxims are listed one by one and then combined with examples,from which what kind of expressions the teacher uses and the students’ response will all be showed. The reason why Leech’s Politeness Principle is chosen as the theoretical basis is that compared with other theories, Politeness Principle is widely accepted and more well-known, thus the research can be of practical significance.

3.2 Research questions

Many scholars have done a number of studies on Face Theory and teacher talk in speech communication. However, few scholars have ever stepped into teacher talk in Chinese college EFL teaching with reference to Politeness principle. Therefore, this research intends to examine the use of Politeness principle in teacher talk in Chinese EFL teaching classroom and provide some suggestions for English teaching. Based on Leech’s Politeness principle, the present study tries to address the following questions:

1. Are Chinese EFL teachers aware of being polite in their classroom teaching?
2. What types of politeness principles do teachers employ between teacher-student interaction in EFL classroom?

3.3 Participants

Participants in this research include 1 male Chinese college EFL teachers in a university of Southeast University and his 20 EFL students in the same university. The teacher is a Chinese as well as non-native English speaker at the age of 40. The teacher is an associate professor and he has many years' teaching experience. The 40 EFL participants were 20 students of English majors. They are all sophomores whose ages range from 19 to 21 in Southeast university. 12 of them are female and 8 are male.

3.4 Instruments

According to Cohen (2001), there is no method that can evaluate the whole behaviors in question. Thus, the ideal data collection has been perceived as one that contains several collection approaches. Based on this view, more than one instrument has been adopted in the present study to enhance the credibility of the results. The main data collection instruments in this study are classroom observation and interview.

3.4.1 Class observation

The researcher went to the classes with the EFL teacher's permission, sitting at the back of the classroom without being noticed by other students with a phone to record both what the EFL teacher said and what the students responded during the whole teaching processes. Altogether four 45-minute EFL teaching class sections were recorded. The real purpose of the classroom recording wasn’t told in order to make sure that there were usual interactions in class. The performances and reactions of both the EFL teacher and the students in class were observed carefully and some notes were properly taken to obtain more comprehensive results.

3.4.2 Interview

In this study, the EFL teacher has been interviewed about his teaching activities. And the interview questions are mainly adapted from Lei (2004) with a little bit of adjustments to collect strategies used in teacher talk in the classroom.

The interview sheet is composed of 9 open questions. Questions one to three are made to check teachers' awareness of politeness in class; questions four to six intend to investigate the politeness strategies used by the teacher in teaching; questions seven to nine are designed to collect the information about the effects of politeness strategies used in EFL teaching.

In order to guarantee that there is no misunderstanding between the researcher and teacher, the interview has been undertaken in Chinese harmoniously. When the interview finishes, all the notes taken have been confirmed to be clear and proper by the interviewee.

3.5 Data Collection and Data Analysis

The data collection procedure consists of two steps, namely, collecting data of classroom observation and EFL teacher's interview.

The first step is to observe the class interactions. The researcher went to the class and sat at the back . And a recorder was used to record conversations authentically in the four classes in detail. The second step is to interview the teacher personally and the interview was successful. Notes were taken in detail as well. The analysis of the data has two steps. Firstly, through the analysis of the recorded materials gained from class observations, the situation of theory application can be shown. Secondly, the interview sheet of the teacher is gathered and analyzed to see strategies applied during the whole class . By class observation, a simple summary of the usage of Politeness Principle can be made, however, the result of which will also be confirmed further by the result of interviews.

Chapter Four Results and Discussion

This chapter will discuss the results of the research data collected in the study. The qualitative research method is adopted in this research. Firstly, the interactions recorded will be analyzed in detail. Secondly, questions in interviews of teacher will be listed and discussed.

4.1 Application of The Politeness Principle

In this study, the focus of the record is interaction, that is what the teacher says after the students answer a question. Therefore, teacher’s feedback contains not only teacher's comments about students' answers, but also the questions that the teacher again raises according to the students' answer to the previous question as well as teacher's words for the purpose of communication with students about the initial question. Teacher-student interaction is studied in detail on the basis of Politeness Principle to find out how politeness principle is applied.

4.1.1 The Maxim of Tact

To realize the Tact Maxim, the teacher may seize every opportunity to help the students learn more, so they may have to express their criticisms indirectly or in another way even if their students have done something wrong in order not to make them feel awkward. As a result, the students will not feel embarrassed or discouraged.

For example:

(1) T: The boy in red, yes, yes, you please, could you tell me the thesis of this novel?

S: Uh, uh...

T: Ok, that’s all right. Actually the novel has got two thesis. One is human and the other is nature. Are you clear?

S: Yes.

In this example, maybe the student is distracted by other things like mobile phone. The teacher successfully applies the maxim of tact so he doesn’t criticize the student and instead, he drives the student’s attention back to the class by asking questions.

And therefore, the student misses no important points.

4.1.2 The Maxim of Generosity

To apply the Maxim of Generosity, teachers may try everything they can to teach regardless of their own benefits. For instance, they make jokes of their own to make students laugh and which will in turn make the students more impressed. For example, at the end of the class, the teacher says:” if you have any problem, you can call me or leave a message.” Here the teacher encourages his students to ask questions so they can learn better. However, for the teacher himself, he may have to sacrifice his spare time for batter learning of students.

4.1.3 The Maxim of Approbation

To apply this maxim, the teacher will say words of praising like “good” or “great” instead of “wrong” or “nonsense”. As a result, students will be inspired and motivated to take part in the class.

Here is an example:

(2) S: ...to the benefits of ourselves.

T: Ok, very good! Thank you. So you have given three answers with this topic, right? And how about you? What’s your choice?

In example (2) ,the teacher's response to the S's response is "Ok, very good! Thank you. So you have given three answers with this topic, right?" While the sentences " And how about you? What’s your choice?”indicate that the teacher expects more answers and different ideas for this topic. By saying "ok', "very good'', "thank you", the maxim of Approbation is used. In this way, the teacher may help the students to improve their answers and at the same time involves other students in the discussion.

4.1.4 The Maxim of Modesty

To apply this maxim, the teacher may make a verbal comparison between he himself and his students. He will try to make a conclusion that the students may perform better, he inspired the students to learn more actively. For instance, the teacher says:” Thank you all for your great presentation! You have done such a good job!” Upon hearing these words, students may feel proud of themselves.

4.1.5 The Maxim of Agreement

To apply this agreement maxim, the teacher may say words like “I do agree with you” or “I think you are right” when students do give good answers. Even of the students are wrong, the teacher will not respond completely negative. He also says “I think maybe you are right to some extent, but you may need some improvement”.

4.1.6 The Maxim of Sympathy

To apply this maxim, the teacher tries his best to understand his student’s feelings and he will express it in a similar way. And the students may feel that the teacher is on their side. So, a harmonious atmosphere can be built to help the students learn better. The situation is that students are have a debate. One of them failed for several times. Of course, he is sad and discouraged. At that moment, the teacher says:” don’t worry, I can see you have tried you best. So as long you have made efforts, the result is not that important right? I believe you can do better next time!” In this example, the teacher showed great sympathy to the student and from my observation, he is inspired greatly. So if the teacher doesn’t use the sympathy maxim to show his support and confidence, the student may be troubled by this event for a long time.

4.2 The Influence of Politeness Principle

Everything has two sides and Politeness Principle is no exception. Broadly speaking, its good points exceeds the bad ones.

4.2.1 Positive Influence

The positive influence of Politeness Principle in EFL class is transparent. Firstly, being polite, teachers shows respect to their students and as a result, they relationship will be more harmonious. Secondly, students get praises and encouragements from teachers, their will be more confident and thus become more interested and patient with English. Thirdly, students are hardly criticized so that they will not be afraid of speak in front of the whole class, which will involve makes more students in and create a good atmosphere and teachers will in turn be encouraged to be more polite. In general, if Politeness Principle is properly applied, it will benefit both teachers and students. And the most important of all, students will learn better.

4.2.2 Negative Influence

Although being polite and kind in EFL class is often beneficial, it is not suitable in some circumstances. For instance, if one student in the class is always distracted or naughty, teacher’s observation to Politeness Principle may be nonsense because the student may be unaware of his mistake id not strictly punished or criticized. Moreover, praises and agreements mislead students sometimes. If the answer given by students is completely wrong but the teacher has to obey Politeness Principle and he or she says “ok” or “good”, the student and other students may have a fuzzy impression of the exact answer.

Chapter Five Conclusion

5.1 Major Findings

Within the theoretical framework of Leech’s Politeness Principle, this empirical study aims at teacher-student interactions in English major classroom through classroom observations and teacher's interview. It tends to explore the EFL teacher's awareness of being polite, exhibiting teacher feedback and the strategies employed by EFL teachers during classroom teaching. In this chapter, major findings and implications of the study are presented. Limitations of the study and suggestions for future studies are finally provided.

From the analysis of the collected data through classroom observations and teacher's interview, the main findings are as follows:

Firstly, as for the first question in the research, most Chinese EFL teachers are aware of being polite in their classroom teaching, so some strategies are indeed adopted during teaching process to show respect for students. They have the common sense that it is very important to apply politeness in class. However, sometimes teachers may fail to employ the maxims systemically and flexibly.

Secondly, teachers can try different feedback to show their politeness to students in EFL classroom teaching . They may use simple approval, extension, explicit correction repetition and so on. Each type of feedback has its own function and all of them are of great significance. However. there still exist some problems such as lacking language variety, lacking sufficient information and etc.Therefore, EFL teachers should make improvement in both the theory and the practice of teacher talk.

5.2 Implications for English Teaching

The results of the research show that the study of Politeness Principle plays

an important role in classroom teaching. According to the analysis and findings, teachers will find it helpful for them to teach better. First of all, they should try to apply Politeness Principle in their own teaching courses to create a harmonious and comfortable atmosphere, as a result of which the students can learn better. Due to the exam-oriented system in China, students’ English pronunciation and expression abilities are relatively poor. These lead to the reluctance and unwillingness of the college students to speak in class. Therefore, teachers should make great efforts to encourage and inspire their students to speak as well as to build up their self-confidence. Besides, teachers often ask general questions which can be answered simply with ``yes" or ``no''. Students do not have the opportunity to output what they have learnt or express their ideas. As a matter of fact, students' output may accelerate their language ability. Therefore, it is necessary and essential for Chinese EFL teachers to provide more chances for their students to speak out during classroom teaching.

5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Study

Some limitations do exist in the present study and they should be addressed for further improvement.

Firstly, this research is carried out only in one class in Southeast University. The participants only include 1 teachers and his 20 students. The researcher can hardly present an entire and true conclusion with a too small number of subjects.

Secondly, as for the classroom observations, the four recordings are really a small size of sample, thus they are far from enough to be representative. The transcription of the four classes can not cover every detail and the sound quality is not very good as a result of the technical difficulties.

Finally, the analysis of the results might be lack of more convincing evidence and thus be a little subjective. More research should be done in detail.

Although this thesis has been finished, it is far from being enough. To begin with, the sample should be chosen at a larger scale so that more data can be collected.

Besides, the researching method needs to be improved to be more scientific and systematically.

References

Brown, P. amp; S. Levinson。 (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dunn, C. (2011). Formal forms or verbal strategies? Politeness Theory and Japanese Business Etiquette Training[J]. Journal of Pragmatics: doi:10.1013/j.pragma.2011.06.003

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. amp; Morgan, J. (eds.) Syntax and semantics[M]. New York: Academic.

Leech, G. amp; J. Svartvik, (1975). A Communicative grammar of English[M]. London: Longman.

Leech, G. N.(1983). Principles of pragmatics[M]. London: Longman.

Leech, G.N. (2005). Politeness: Is there an east-west divide?[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages. (6): 3-31.

剩余内容已隐藏，请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：36832字