The Applicability of Linguistic Politeness Studies to Translation: A Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.199811015Abstract
The present paper picks up on some aspects of a complex attempt to approach politeness studies from a new angle: translation. The most relevant approaches to the study of politeness agree on its two-sided character, which entails, on the one hand, linguistic meaning and, on the other, social meaning. This twofold concept of politeness determines the close relationship between its linguistic expression and the cultural context within which such expression is used. The cultural-relativistic stand that this assumption implies in some ways contradicts or, at least, partly questions, the universal character ascribed to linguistic politeness by one of the seminal - theories in the field: the framework of Politeness theory devised by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson in their book Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage (1978, 1987). In my view, politeness theory and the discussion about what is universal and what is culturally-determined in politeness can benefit from contrastive studies in the field of translation, and translation can also profit from insights into the study of linguistic politeness, as it is my intention to illustrate here with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and La gata sobre el tejado de zinc caliente as corpora.
Downloads
References
BLUM-KULKA, S., and E. OLSHTEIN. 1984. “Requests and Apologies: A Criss-cultural Study of Speech Act Realization Patterns.” Applied Linguistics 5: 198-212.
BLUM-KULKA, S., J. HOUSE, and G. KASPER. 1989. Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood (NJ): Ablex.
BROWN, R., and A. GILMAN. 1989. “Politeness Theory and Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies.” Language in Society. 18.2: 159-212.
BRESNAN, J. 1982. “Control and Complementation.” In Bresnan (ed.): 282-390. ---, ed. 1982. The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relati Relations. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
CHOMSKY, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press
--. 1970. “Remarks on Nominalisation.” In Jacobs and Rosenbaum eds.: 184-221.
--. 1986. Lectures on Government and Binding. 1981. Dordrecht: Foris.
--. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
CORBETT, G 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
DIK, S. 1968. Coordination: Its Implications for the Theory of General Linguistics. Amsterdam: North Holland.
--. 1979. “Raising in a Functional Grammar.” Lingua 47: 119-140.
--. 1980. Studies in Functional Grammar. London and New York: Academic Press.
--. 1989. The Theory of Functional Grammar I: The Structure of the Clause. Dordrecht: Foris.
DIXON, R. 1990. “Subject and Object in Universal Grammar.” In Amold et al. eds.: 91-118.
--. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
DOWNING, A. and P. LOCKE. 1992. A University Course in English Grammar. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.
FAARLUND, J. T. 1988. “A typology of subjects.” In Hammond et al. 193-207.
FIRBAS, J. 1992. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
FOLEY, W. 1993. “The Conceptual Basis of Grammatical Relations.” In Foley, ed. 131-174.
--. The Role of Theory in Language Description. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
FOLEY, W. and R. VAN VALIN. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
GIVÓN, T. 1984/1990. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. 2 vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
--. 1993. English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. 2 vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
--. 1995. Functionalism and Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
GOLDBERG, A. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
HAEGEMAN, L. 1995. Introduction to Government and Binding Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
HALLIDAY, M. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Amold.
HAMMOND, M., et al., eds. 1988. Studies in Syntactic Typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
HANNAY, M. 1985. English Existentials in Functional Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris.
HUDDLESTON, R. 1976. An Introduction to English Transformational Syntax. London: Longman.
--. 1989. Introduction to the Grammar of English. 1984. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
HUMBOLDT, W. von 1988 (1836) On Language. 1836. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
JACOBS, R.A. and P.S. ROSENBAUM. 1970. English Transformational Grammar. Cambridge (MA): Ginn & Waltham.
KEENAN, E. L. 1975. “Some Universals of Passive in Relational Grammar.” Papers from the XIth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.
--. 1976. “Towards a Universal Definition of Subject.” In Li, ed.: 303-333.
LAMBRECHT, K. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
LANGACKER, R. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar II: Descriptive Application. Stanford (CA): Stanford UP.
--. 1976. Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press.
LI, Ch. and S. THOMPSON. 1976. “Subject and Topic: A New Typology of Language.” In Li, ed.: 457-489.
MARANTZ, A. P. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.
MITHUN, M. 1991. “Motivation in the Emergence of Grammatical Categories.” In Traugott and Heine, eds.: 159-184.
MORAVCSIK, E. A. and J. R. WIRTH eds. 1980. Syntax and Semantics 13: Current Approaches to Syntax. New York: Academic Press.
MORENO CABRERA, J. C. 1991. Curso universitario de lingüística general I: Teoría de la gramática y sintaxis general. Madrid: Síntesis.
NUYTS, J., A. M. BOLKESTEIN and C. VET eds. 1990. Layers and Levels of Representation in Language Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
PALMER, F. 1994. Grammatical Roles and Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
PERLMUTTER, D. 1980. “Relational Grammar.” In Moravesik and Wirth, eds.: 195- 229.
--. 1983. Studies in Relational Grammar I. Chicago: U of Chicago P.
PERLMUTTER, D. and P. M. POSTAL. 1974. Linguistic Institute Lectures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
--. 1983. “Some Proposed Laws of Basic Clause Structure.” In Perlmutter, ed.: 81-128.
QUIRK, R. et al. 1991. A Grammar of Contemporary English. 1972. London: Longman.
QUIRK, R., et al. 1994. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. 1985. London: Longman.
RADFORD, A. 1988. Transformational Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
--. 1997. Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
SAPIR, E. 1921. Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
SCHACHTER, P. 1976. “The Subject in Philippine Languages.” In Li, ed.: 491-518.
SCHLESINGER, I. 1995. Cognitive Spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
SHIBATANI, M. 1991. “Grammaticization of Topic into Subject.” In Traugott and Heine, eds.: 93-133.
SHOPEN, T., ed. 1985. Language Typology and Syntactic Description. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
SIEWIERSKA, A. 1991. Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.
TAYLOR, J. 1989. Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
TRAUGOTT, E. C., and B. HEINE, eds. 1991. Approaches to Grammaticalization. 2 vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
VALIN, R. van 1990. “Layered Syntax in Role and Reference Grammar.” In Nuyts, Bolkestein and Vet, eds.: 193-231.
WIERZBICKA, A. 1988. The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 1998 Rosa Lorés Sanz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
