1 |
The metalinguistics of offence in (British) English:A corpus-based metapragmatic approach
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
The metalinguistics of offence in (British) English: a corpus-based metapragmatic approach
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
The metapragmatics of consideration in (Australian and New Zealand) English
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
“The apology seemed (in)sincere”: Variability in perceptions of (im)politeness
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
Indexical and sequential properties of criticisms in initial interactions: implications for examining (Im) politeness across cultures
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Modulating troubles affiliating in initial interactions the role of remedial accounts
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
Conversational lapses and laughter: towards a combinatorial approach to building collections in conversation analysis
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
The interactional achievement of speaker meaning: Toward a formal account of conversational inference
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
Divided by a common language? Jocular quips and (non-)affiliative responses in initial interactions among American and Australian speakers of English
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
Afterword: Theorizing (im)politeness
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
The shift to a middle ground between classic and discursive approaches to politeness has opened up space for the proliferation of various different theoretical accounts of (im) politeness. While this diversity can lead to different insights into the same dataset, as we have seen in this special issue, it does beg the question of whether the field of (im) politeness research remains a coherent enterprise. After pointing out that different theories of (im) politeness inevitably not only afford but also constrain what we observe and the explanations that can be developed to account for those observations, I suggest that in light of the increasing proliferation of theoretical approaches in the field, a greater focus on metatheorization is in order. After briefly discussing some of the key questions such a metatheoretical discussion should address, I conclude that metatheorizing enables us to systematically examine what different theories of (im) politeness bring to the field, thereby also drawing attention to what areas appear to be in particular need of further theoretical development and empirical study.
|
|
Keyword:
1203 Language and Linguistics; 3207 Social Psychology; 3310 Linguistics and Language; 3315 Communication; 3316 Cultural Studies; Interpersonal Pragmatics; Order; Politeness Research
|
|
URL: https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:721325
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
18 |
Malefactive uses of giving/receiving expressions: the case of te-kureru in Japanese
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Accusations and interpersonal conflict in televised multi-party interactions amongst speakers of (Argentinian and Peninsular) Spanish
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
The interactional achievement of speaker meaning: toward a formal account of conversational inference
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|