Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T20:34:28.850Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Power

from Part II - Topics and Settings in Sociopragmatics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2021

By
Michiel Leezenberg
Edited by
Michael Haugh ,
Dániel Z. Kádár  and
Marina Terkourafi
Michael Haugh
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Dániel Z. Kádár
Affiliation:
Hungarian Research Institute for Linguistics, and Dalian University of Foreign Languages
Marina Terkourafi
Affiliation:
Leiden University
Get access

Summary

Proceeding from the conviction that the concept of power remains seriously undertheorized, this chapter explores the notions of power implicit or explicit in a number of currently dominant paradigms in pragmatics, and in sociopragmatics more specifically, and suggests some alternatives and possible further lines of development. First, after an overview of different concepts of power (as presented by, among others, Bourdieu and Foucault), it argues the linguistic and the social are more deeply mutually implicated than is often realized and that, hence, the study of language use may benefit from a closer attention to questions of power. Next, it addresses questions concerning power and legitimacy in Speech Act Theory as developed by Austin and Searle; these questions are posed anew and answered in a rather different way in the study of pornography as a kind of speech act. Finally, it discusses the conceptions of power employed in the study of polite and impolite language use, arguing that some of the currently dominant frameworks in Politeness Theory rest on a number of language-ideological assumptions that appear to elide, neutralize or naturalize power relations.

Keywords

powersocial practicespeech acts(im)politeness
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics , pp. 363 - 384
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities. 2nd ed. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. ([1962] 1975). How to Do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Edited by Urmson, J. O. and Sbisà, M.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaver, D. and Zeevat, H. (2007). Accommodation. In Ramchand, G. and Reiss, C., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 503–37.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bousfield, D. and Locher, M. (eds.). (2008). Impoliteness in Language: Studies on Its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, J. (1999). Performativity’s Social Magic. In Shusterman, R., ed., Bourdieu: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 113–28.Google Scholar
Butler, J. (1997). Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Culpeper, J. (2008). Reflections on impoliteness, relational work and power. In Bousfield, D. and Locher, M., eds., Impoliteness in Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 17–44.Google Scholar
Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Durkheim, É. ([1895] 1982). The Rules of Sociological Method. Edited by Lukes, S.. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Eelen, G. (2001). A Critique of Politeness Theories. Manchester, UK: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Ehlich, K. (1992). On the historicity of politeness. In Watts, R. J., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K., eds., Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory, and Practice. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 71–108.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1978). The Will to Knowledge. The History of Sexuality vol. 1. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. ([1978] 1994). La philosophie analytique de la politique. In Dits et écrits, vol. III. Paris: Gallimard, pp. 538–54.Google Scholar
Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1986). The Theory of Communicative Action. 2 vols. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Ide, S. (1992). On the notion of Wakimae: Toward an integrated framework of linguistic politeness. In Mosaic of Language. Mejiro Linguistic Society, pp. 298–305.Google Scholar
Ide, S. (1991). Comments from Outside Europe for Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Sociolinguistica: International Yearbook of European Sociolinguistics, pp. 160–61.Google Scholar
Jucker, A. (2011). Positive and negative face as descriptive categories in the history of English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 12, 178–97.Google Scholar
Kroskrity, P. V. (ed.). (2000). Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
Langton, R. (2009). Sexual Solipsism: Philosophical Essays on Pornography and Objectification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langton, R. (2018). The authority of hate speech. In Gardner, J. A. O., ed., Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law, vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 123–52.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (2007). Politeness: Is there an East–West divide? Journal of Politeness Research, 3(2), 167–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leezenberg, M. (2002). Power in communication: Implications for the semantics–pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 893–908.Google Scholar
Leezenberg, M. (2005). Greek tragedy as impolite conversation: Towards a practice approach in linguistic theory. In Marmaridou, S. and Drossou, M., eds., Reviewing Linguistic Thought: Converging Trends for the Twenty-first Century. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leezenberg, M. (2006). Gricean and Confucian pragmatics: A contrastive analysis. Journal of Foreign Languages, November 2006, 2–21. (Reprinted in D. F. Shu and K. P. Turner (eds.). (2010). Contrasting Meaning in Languages of the East and West. Berlin: Peter Lang, pp. 3–32)Google Scholar
Leezenberg, M. (2013). Power in speech actions. In Sbisà, M. and Turner, K. P., eds., Pragmatics of Speech Actions, Handbooks of Pragmatics 2. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 263–88.Google Scholar
Leezenberg, M. (in prep.). Politeness as symbolic violence.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. (1979). Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8, 339–59.Google Scholar
Locher, M. A. (2004). Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Locher, M. A. (2006). Polite behaviour within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multilingua, 25, 249–67.Google Scholar
McGowan, M. K. (2004). Conversational exercitives: Something else we do with our words. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 93–111.Google Scholar
McLellan, D. (ed.). (1971). Marx’s Grundrisse. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1976). Capital. Vol. 1. Translated by Fowkes, Ben. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
McGowan, M. K. (2009). On pragmatics, exercitive speech acts and pornography. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 5(1), 133–55.Google Scholar
Mills, S. (2017). English Politeness and Class. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Saussure, F., de. ([1916] 1983). Course in General Linguistics. Translated by Harris, Roy. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Sbisà, M. (1984). Illocutionary types. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 93–112.Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1975). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1995). The Construction of Social Reality. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M. (2000). Whorfianism and the linguistic imagination of nationality. In Kroskrity, P. V., ed., Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press, pp. 85–138.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, M. (2001). Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A frame-based approach, unpublished PhD diss., University of Cambridge, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Terkourafi, M. (2011). From Politeness1 to Politeness2: Tracking norms of im/politeness across time and space. Journal of Politeness Research, 7(2), 159–85.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J., Ide, S. and Ehlich, K. (eds.). (1992). Politeness in Language: Studies in Its History, Theory, and Practice. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2002). From polite language to educated language: The re-emergence of an ideology. In Watts, R. and Trudgill, P., eds., Alternative Histories of English. London: Routledge, pp. 155–72.Google Scholar
Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, M. ([1925] 1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wolf, E. R. (1990). Distinguished lecture: Facing power—old insights, new questions. American Anthropologist, 92(3), 586–96.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×