语用学论文—罗马假日

Chapter 1 Introduction

This research studies politeness principle in Roman Holiday. The study of politeness has attracted scholarly attention since the late 1970s. According to Jenny Thomas (1995: 149), the following separate but

related types of phenomena have been investigated in relation to the term “politeness”: politeness as a real-world goal, politeness as deference,

politeness as an utterance-level phenomenon, and politeness as a pragmatic phenomenon. The PP is not just another principle to be added to the CP, but a necessary complement that may rescue the CP from serious trouble in theorizing(Leech, 1983:80).

Roman Holiday is really classical movie . It’s so famous that the scholars

have done many researches on the language of it. Further more,Roman Holiday tells a typical life of a girl from a princess to a civilian, so it’s worth being researched. From the study of PP in Roman Holiday, we can know more about the politeness and interaction of language and have a better understanding of the way in which people communicate.

1.1Definition of politeness Principle

Pragmatics refers to the study of how speakers of a language use sentences to effect successful communication. Pragmatics is a comparatively new branch of study in the area of linguistics; its development and establishment in the 1960s and 1970s resulted mainly from the expansion of the study of linguistics, especially that of semantics. (Dai Weidong, 2002)

PP is one of the Pragmatic theories. Geoffrey Leech once put it that far from being a superficial matter of “being civil”, politeness is an important missing link between the CP and the problem of how to relate sense to force. He defines politeness as forms of behaviour that establish and maintain comity. That is the ability of participants in a social interaction to engage in interaction in an atmosphere of relative harmony.

According to Geoffrey Leech’s maxim “Be polite”, there are three rules of politeness (or rapport) or politeness strategies (Lakoff, 1990:35)

(1) Don’t impose (Distance)

(2) Give options (Deference)

(3) Be friendly (Camaraderie).

Leech formulated the Politeness Principle in both positive and negative forms (ibid., 81)

(1)Maximize (other things being equal) the expression of polite beliefs

(2) Minimize (other things being equal) the expression of impolite beliefs.

Under the two general requirements, Leech lists six specific maxims:

(1) Tact Maxim

(2)Generosity Maxim

(3)Approbation Maxim

(4)Modesty Maxim

(5)Agreement Maxim

(6)Sympathy Maxim

Grice is aware that speakers do not always follow these maxims. In fact they often violate them and thus produce some implicature. However, the Cooperative Principle is not enough to explain how people talk. It can only explain how the implicature is produced, but not why people produce so many indirect utterances. Then, the Politeness Principle is created. On the whole, it can be defined as “try to use more polite expressions” or “try to lessen the impolite expression”.

1.2 Introduction to Roman Holiday

The film's bittersweet story is a charming romantic-comedy, a kind of Cinderella tale in reverse (with an April-October romance). A runaway princess (Hepburn) rebels against her royal obligations and escapes the insulated confines of her royal prison to find a 'Prince Charming' commoner - an American reporter (Joe) covering the royal tour in Rome. The story was reportedly based on the real-life Italian adventures of British Princess Margaret.

Joe met Ann——the princess, in the street and found her drunk. He didn’t want to see her sleeping in the street and took her home. The following day he read the newspaper and realized that the girl in his house was the princess. Therefore he wanted to have an exclusive interview with Ann so that he could be a famous reporter and earned a lot of money. However, he fell in love with Ann after spending one day with her. In order to keep the princess’ fame, he gave up the opportunity and ask his friend to return the photos to the her. Finally, he just pretended to be a stranger when he saw the princess in the press conference. The princess love Joe too but she can’t because she had duty for her country and her family. They love each other but they can’t be together. This is really sad in a way.

1.3 Research Methodology

All the examples in the case analys is are selected from the conversation of Roman Holiday. They are all typical in the sense that they observe or violate the maxims of PP and generate the conversational interaction. The target conversations are classified into different categories according to the PP and they are therefore possible to conduct a comparative study.

This thesis proposes to conduct a qualitative case analysis from the approach of pragmatics. With some of the conversations from Roman Holiday as the basis and the PP as the guideline, this thesis is chiefly concerned with both the observing and non-observance of the PP maxims. The in-depth analysis itself, however, reveals how pragmatics theory can be possible applied into this classic movie Roman Holiday

1.4 Literature Review

The issue of politeness has become one of the most active areas of research in language use. Among the various politeness theories in western literature, the Face Theory proposed by Brown & Levinson (1978, 1987) claims to have universal validity and Leech’s (1983) Politeness Principle has also received enormous attention. The focus will be the face theory by Brown & Levinson, which serves as a theoretical basis of this thesis. Among the Chinese scholars who have contributed significantly to the study of politeness, Gu should be mentioned. His “Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese”, is an influential treatise widely cited by scholars both at home and abroad on Chinese politeness.

Leech’s Politeness Principle, although widely acclaimed, has received some criti cisms. Among others, his use of the term “maxim” is questioned for its moral and imperative connotations. Thus Leech (2005) reformulate the six maxims into something that sounds more like pragmatic constraints. One single super-constraint he invents is the Grand Strategy of Politeness (GSP for short). Leech concludes that despite some differences, there is no East-West divide in politeness.

In Peter Grundy’s view, politeness as a term can be used to “describe the extent to which actions, including the way things are said, match others’ perceptions of how they should be performed”(Grundy, 1995:129). To him, every instance of language in communication involves more or less politeness. One utterance may be polite in one context but not in another. Politeness is something subjective, personal, and dynamic.

Chapter 2 Six Maxims of Politeness Principle

As Grice’s Cooperative Principle fails to explain, among other things, why speakers choose not to be direct in saying what they mean, Geoffrey Leech put forward the PP with six maxims of tact, generosity, approbation, modesty, agreement and sympathy. The PP explains why people are sometimes indirect in conveying what they mean. Thus, the PP is not just another principle to be added to the CP, but a necessary complement that may rescue the CP from serious trouble in theorizing(Leech, 1983:80).

2.1 T act Maxim

The category of generosity maxim is used in directives and commissives. Tact maxim follows the two sub-maxims:

1.Minimize cost to other

2.Maximize benefit to other.

The first part of this maxim fits in with Brown and Levinson's negative politeness strategy of minimising the imposition, and the second part reflects the positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearer's interests, wants, and needs. It achieves illocutionary goals, the immediate, primary goals of linguistic communication, such as getting someone to do something.

Example:

(a). Could I interrupt you for a second?

(b). If I could just clarify this then.

2.2 Generosity Maxim

The category of generosity maxim is also used in directives and commissives and under it fall the following submaxims:

1.Minimize benefit to self

2.Maximize cost to self

Unlike the tact maxim, the maxim of generosity focuses on the speaker, and says that others should be put first instead of the self. It also achieves illocutionary goals.

Example:

(a).You relax and let me do the dishes.

(b).You must come and have dinner with us.

2.3 Approbation Maxim

The category of generosity maxim is used in expressives and representatives. And two more specific submaxims are:

1.Minimize dispraise of other

2.Maximize praise of other

The operation of this maxim is fairly obvious: all things being equal, we prefer to praise others and if we cannot do so, to sidestep the issue, to give some sort of minimal response (possibly through the use of euphemisms), or to remain silent. The first part of the maxim avoids disagreement; the second part intends to make other people feel good by showing solidarity. It achieves social goals, the long-term, secondary goals of our linguistic communication, such as maintaining friendly relations with others.

Example:

(a). I heard you singing at the karaoke last night. It was, um...

different.

(b).John, I know you're a genius - would you know how to

solve this math problem here?

2.4 Modesty Maxim

The category of generosity maxim is used in expressives and representatives and under it fall the following submaxims:

1.Minimize praise of self

2.Maximize dispraise of self

This maxim is quete effective because it achieves both social goals and illocutionary goals.

Example:

(a).Oh, I'm so stupid - I didn't make a note of our lecture! Did you?

2.5 Agreement Maxim

The category of generosity maxim follows two submaxims:

1.Minimize disagreement between self and other

2.Maximize agreement between self and other

It is in line with Brown and Levinson's positive politeness strategies of 'seek agreement' and 'avoid disagreement,' to which they attach great importance. However, it is not being claimed that people totally avoid disagreement. It is simply observed that they are much more direct in expressing agreement, rather than disagreement.

Example:

A: I don't want my daughter to do this, I want her to do that.

B: Yes, but ma'am, I thought we resolved this already on your

last visit.

2.6 Sympathy Maxim

The category of generosity maxim has two submaxims:

1.Minimize antipathy between self and other

2.Maximize sympathy between self and other

This includes a small group of speech acts such as congratulation, commiseration, and expressing condolences - all of which is in accordance with Brown and Levinson's positive politeness strategy of attending to the hearer's interests, wants, and needs.

Example:

I was sorry to hear about your father.

It is to be noted that the six maxims and their sub-maxims are not equally important. This seems to suggest that politeness tends to favor other than self. Within the six maxims, it also seems true that the avoidance of discord is a more constant need than the creation of concord.

2.7 Clashes and tradeoffs between the maxims

Sometimes, the adherence to one maxim of the CP may run counter to that of another. Compare John’s two possible responses in the following conversation:

(1) May: What a nice shirt you’re wearing!

Tom1: Oh, it’s a very old one.

Tom2: Y es, it’s beautiful, isn’t it?

Clearly , in (1), while observing the Modesty Maxim, Tom1 breaches the Agreement Maxim. Tom2goes the other way: It respects the Agreement Maxim but ignores the Modesty Maxim.

Conflicts may also arise between a certain maxim of the Politeness Principle and one maxim of the Cooperative Principle.

(2) Kate: This was a marvelous show.

Ann: Well, the first part was quite wonderful.

In (2), while expected to give feedback to Kate’s comment on the concert, Ann is less informative because he only talks about the first piece. Thus, his positive feedback satisfies the Agreement Maxim at the expense of the Quantity Maxim.

When clashes between maxims are inevitable, some tradeoffs must be sought. We will have to allow one maxim to take priority over the other. Different cultures may prioritize different maxims in this regard.

Chapter 3 Case Analysis: Roman Holiday

3.1 Tact Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.1.1 Observing Tact Maxim

In the daily communication, we must observe the tact maxim to make the communication more effectively and successfully. Now let us see an example of observing the tact maxim.

Example 1:

Joe: Swell! thanks a lot. Oh er, Giovanni, er... How would you like to make some money?

Giovanni: Money?

Joe: Y eah. That's the stuff. Now look, I've got a sure thing: double your money back in two days.

Giovanni: Double my money?

Joe: Yeah well, I need a little investment capital to swing the deal.

Now, if you'll just lend me a little cash, I--.

This dialogue happens between Joe and Giovanni,an caretaker of his apartment. The poor reporter-Joe wanted to borrow some money from Giovanni so that he could entertain the princess. If he succeeded in interviewing the princess he would get lots of money. He promised that the money would be double if Giovanni lent it to him. In this way, he minimized the cost to Giovanni and maximized the benefit of him.

3.2 Generosity Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.2.1 Observing Generosity Maxim

In the daily communication, the way people say may bring some positive or negative reaction to the participants. Therefore, we must maximize cost to self so the listener may easier do as the we tell him. This is observing the Generosity Maxim. Here is the axample from Roman Holiday.

Example:

Irving: Irving Radovich, C.R. Photo Service.

Ann: How do you do?

Irving: Er, may I present Y our Highness with some commemorative photos of your visit to Rome?

Ann: Thank you so very much.

This is the dialogue happened in the press conference. The princess greeted the reporters and shook hands with them. When she shook hands with Irving, Joe’s friends, he returned the pictures to the princess without

anything. As the pictures were so important that he could be rich and famous at a moment. While he gave up all the benefits, in the contrary, he maximize the benefits of Joe and the princess. It is really a great action.

3.3 Approbation Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.3.1 Observing Approbation Maxim

Approbation maxim is much workable when showing one’s emotion. Nobody can reject the sweet words. However, note to it that approbation must be made sincerely and honestly. Follows are the example of how approbation maxim works.

Example:

Mario delani: Oh! Finalmentez: there you are! Er, scusatmitanto. I

look for you long time--I think maybe you not come Ann: Oh, it's nice without, isn't it? Cool.

Mario delani: Oh, very, very good.

This is the dialogue between Mario delani, the barber, and the princess. When Mario delani cut hair for the princess, he invited her to attend the party. The moment he found that the princess was in the party, he expressed his desire to meet the princess and praise her. He complimented her directly and expressed his love for her. His words made the princess very delighted.

3.3.2 Non-observance of Approbation Maxim

However, sometimes people can’t help making some dispraising words especially when facing a dislike person. Moreover, when we are unhappy, we will behave rudely. Here is another example that violates the approbation maxim.

Hennessy: In view of the fact that you just left her, of course. But here it is, Mr. Bradley all over the front page of every

newspaper in Rome!

Joe: Alright, alright; I overslept. It can happen to anybody!

Hennessy: If you ever get up early enough to read a morning paper you might discover little news events --little items of

general interest. That might prevent you in the future

from getting immersed in such a gold-plated,

triple-decked, star-spangled lies as you have just told

me! If I was you, I would try some other line of

business--like mattress testing.

This dialogue happened in the morning Joe was late for work. His superior critized him and suggested him to try other line of business—like mattress testing. It suggested that Joe was late for work because of

oversleep, in other words, his superior thought that he was lazy. Hennessy violates PP because he was really angry at that moment. Joe made a long piece of lies before he told him the reason why he was late.

3.4 Modesty Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.4.1 Observing Modesty Maxim

In our daily communication, we can always hear some people praising themselves and dispraising others. The non-observance of the Modesty Maxim is called arrogance. Now let us see an example of observing the modesty maxim.

Example:

Hennessy: What do you care? you've got about as much chance of getting--.

Joe: I know, but if I did, how much would it be worth?

Hennessy: Oh, just a plain talk about world conditions, it might be worth two hundred and fifty. Her views on clothes of

course would be worth a lot more--maybe a thousand.

Joe: Dollars?

Hennessy: Dollars.

Joe: I'm talking about her views on everything:: 'The Private and Secret Longings of a Princess'; her innermost thoughts as

revealed to your own correspondent in a private, personal,

exclusive interview. Can't use it, huh? I didn't think you'd like

it.

Joe found that the girl was the princess and he told his superior that he could get everything about the princess. Actually, he exaggerated his ability. He wanted to dispraise Hennessy and held down his courage. His words was unbelievable to Hennessy.

3.5 Agreement Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.5.1 Observing Agreement Maxim

In the daily communication, sometimes we require to agreee with what other says or admit the fact and what we have promised, this is observing the Agreement Maxim. Follows are the axample from Roman Holiday.

Example:

Ann: Have I been here all night...alone?

Joe: If you don't count me, yes.

Ann: So I've spent the night here--with you.

Joe: Oh, well, now, I- I don't know if I'd use those words exactly, but er, from a certain angle, yes.

When Ann tried to make sure that whether she had been alone all night, Joe said yes with a condition ” If you don’t count me”. He tried to made the princess feel comfortable by saying yes. Although the meaning remain the same, the result after the princess heard it.

3.6 Sympathy Maxim in Roman Holiday

3.6.1 Non-observance of Sympathy Maxim

In our daily life, there are always something unhappy or dispirited happens, we should show our kind heart and smpathy to others. Now, let’s look at a non-observance example in Roman Holiday.

Example:

Ann: That's alright, thank you; I can find the place. Thank you for letting me sleep in your bed.

Joe: Oh, that's alright; think nothing of it.

Ann: It was very considerate of you-- you must have been awfully uncomfortable on that couch.

Joe: No, no--do it all the time.

This conversation is between Ann and Joe. Ann said “It was very considerate of you-- you must have been awfully uncomfortable on that couch. ”in sympathy. She put herself to the Joe’s position and appreciated him very much..She was so kind that she never treat herself as a princess.

3.7 Clashes and T radeoffs Between Maxims in Roman

Holiday

Sometimes in our conversations clashes between maxims is inevitable. while observing this maxim, it may breach another maxim. Now let’s look at an example that illustrates the clashes and tradeoffs between maxim in Roman Holiday.

Example:

Ann: It was very considerate of you-- you must have been

awfully uncomfortable on that couch.

Joe: No, no--do it all the time.

Ann woke up and found herself in Joe’s bed, so she thanked him. That time Joe faced the problem of observing the tact maxim or agreement maxim. In fact, Joe pushed Ann to the sofa the previous day and took her to his bed the following day after knowing Ann was the missing princess. At last, he chose to follow agreement principle and expressed his pleasure to let Ann to sleep on his bed.

Conclusions

Having studied Roman Holiday with the focus on the language used, this thesis finds it necessary and significant to study the politeness and interaction systematically from the perspective of pragmatics. A Pragmatic theory, Leech’s Politeness Principle is then elaborated.

Leech PP observes a set of rules which people are supposed to abide by in the ordinary conversation. But actually people often breach certain conversational maxims assumedly governing the conversational interaction. This is really interesting phenomenon in language study. The violation of the rules often generates some humor.

Case analysis is applied following the theory study. Some typical examples from Roman Holiday are selected under investigation. They are classified into different categories in accordance with different linguistic realizations of off-record strategies. They are all the employments of politeness of interaction.

Through this thesis, we can enjoy the elaboration created by the conversational politeness tactics in Roman Holiday. PP is so important in our conversation that we must study it deeply. we can better understand how to communicate politely and it clarifies the validity of taking pragmatic theory into text analysis.

Bibliography

[1]刘森林.语用策略，社会科学文献出版社，2007

Liu Senlin. Pragmatic Strategies [M], Social Sciences Academic Press (China), 2007

[2]He Zhaoxiong. Pragamatics for Readings Selected[C]. Shanghai:

Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2003.

[3]Kramsch, C. Language and Culture[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign

Language Education Press, 2000.

[4]Leech, G.N. Principles of Pragmatics[M]. London: Longman. 1983.

[5]陶胜. 礼貌原则及其在言语交际中的实际运用[J]. 双语学习,

2007,(06) e

[6]Liu Yang. Analysis of Conversational Implicature in Pride and

Prejudice from the Perspective of the Cooperate Principle and the Politeness[D]. Master Degree. University of International Business and Economics. 2004.

[7] Sadock, J.M. “On Testing for Conversational Implication[A]”. In

P.Cole and J.L.Morgan (eds). Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics[C].

New York: Academic Press, 1978.

[8]于根元. 应用语言学前沿问题[M]. 北京:中国经济出版社, 2006.

[9]贾秀珍，中英两种文化中的礼貌原则的区别，无锡南洋学院学报，

2007，9月，第三期.

Qingdao, Shandong 266109.

[10] 尹娇，何青芒，英汉礼貌准则的差异及英汉礼貌用于的互译策

略，2009，2月。

Appendix

T able 2 1. Scarlett has got married with Charles, Franklin and Rhett, however during her three marriages, she never gives up her love for Ashley. She doesn’t realize that the man she really loves is not Ashley but Rhett until Melanie dies.

2. Melanie is Ashley's wife. A kind woman unable to turn away anyone who needs help, Melanie is well liked by a swath of society that ranges from community leaders to the local madam. Melanie foolishly sees Scarlett as a supportive sister-in-law and defends her at every opportunity. However Melanie dies later.

3. Charles is Melanie's brother and Scarlett's first husband. Ashley's sister, India is in love with him. A rash idealist who is instantly enamored of Scarlett, Charles is completely unaware of his wife's feelings for Ashley.

4. Franklin is Scarlett's second husband. A shy man whom Scarlett tricks into marrying her, Frank is truly in love with Scarlett's younger sister Suellen. Frank's marriage makes his life miserable.

5. Stuart and Brent Tarleton are Twin brothers. Two of Scarlett's many admirers, Stuart and Brent predict that the coming war will be short and glorious for the South. Later, they are included among the lists of the dead.

Bibliography

[1] Brown, P. and Levinson, S.(1987) Politeness: Some Universals in

Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[2] Dai Weidong & He Zhaoxiong. A New Concise Course on Linguistics

for Students of English[M].Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2002

[3] George Yule. Pragmatics[M]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language

Education Press, 2000.

[4] Leech, G.N. Principles of Pragmatics[M]. London: Longman. 1983.

[5] Levinson, S.C. Pragmatics[M]. London: Cambridge University Press.

1983.

[6] Searle, J.R. Speech Acts: an Essay in the Philosophy of Language[M].

London: Cambridge University Press.1979.

[7] Thomas, J. (1995) Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to

Pragmatics. New York: Longman Group Ltd.

[8] 文秋芳.英语语言学研究方法与论文写作.[M] 北京: 外语教学与

研究出版社, 2001.

Wen Qiufang. English Pragmatics Research Methodology and Thesis Writin g[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001