商务英语信函中的语用礼貌失误.doc

Abstract

In cross-cultural communication, under the influence of the mother tongue and the lack of relevant pragmatic knowledge, second language used in communication may cause misunderstanding or even a breakdown of the communication which is called Communicative Pragmatic Failure. British linguists Jenny Thomas (1983), who first terms Pragmatic Failure, defines it as “the inability to understand what is meant by what is said”. In intercultural communication, few former studies are concentrated on the study of pragmatic failure of politeness language in business English Correspondence. As an important means of communication, English business correspondence plays a significant role in the success of commercial activity. Pragmatic failure of politeness language in business English correspondence which can be caused by the breach of politeness principle is the last thing we should neglect. If we could apply correctly the politeness principle of English business correspondence, the writing of English business correspondence will lay a foundation for the success of the conduct of business activities.
Different from the form studies of pragmatic failure and politeness, this paper collects some English business correspondence samples from Chinese college students during their course of internship. The paper intends to study the pragmatic failure in the writing of English business correspondence from the perspective of pragmatics applying politeness principle under Thomas’s framework, and analyzes pragmatic failure resulting from the breach of politeness principle. The main place of innovation of this paper is to study the pragmatic failure in the writing of English business correspondence from the perspective of pragmatics. In the last part of this paper, some strategies of pragmatic politeness would be put forward.

Key Words：English business correspondence; pragmatic failure; politeness principle

中文摘要

在跨文化交际中，人们在使用第二语言进行会话时或多或少会受到其母语的影响，缺乏相关的语用知识因而引起交流不畅甚至失败。这种情况就是跨文化交际中的语用失误。英国语言学家Thomas(1983)将语用失误定义为“(听话人)不能从(说话人的)话中理解其真正用意”。在研究跨文化交际中的语用失误研究方面，以前的研究很少把重点放在商务信函这类特殊用途的专业书面语的语用礼貌失误上。作为商务经营活动的重要传递，交流信息方式之一的商务英语信函，对商务活动的成功与否有着举足轻重的作用。因此，由于违反语用礼貌原则等因素引起的语用礼貌失误现象不容我们忽视。如果能正确运用一些商务信函中的礼貌原则和策略，将会为商务英语信函撰写的成功奠定基础，从而促进商务活动的顺利展开。
不同于以往的关于语用失误和礼貌的研究，本文收集了中国大学生在实习期间的商务英语信函习作的例子，在Thomas提出的框架结构下，从语用学的角度，运用礼貌原则对商务英语信函中的语用礼貌失误进行了探讨，分析了导致语用礼貌失误的原因。本文的创新点在于从语用学角度，运用礼貌原则研究商务信函中的语用礼貌失误。在本文的最后部分，提出了如何在商务英语信函中运用语用礼貌的策略。

关键词：商务信函；语用失误；礼貌原则

Chapter One Introduction
1.1 Background
Pragmatics was formed in 1970s; it mainly researches on how to understand language and to use it properly and graciously in the certain conversation within the certain context. Along with the development and maturity of theories on pragmatics, there has been an increasing interest in pragmatic failures. The concept of Pragmatic Failure was introduced by British linguist Jenny Thomas (1983) published in the paper Cross－cultural Pragmatic Failure. Until now, there have been many linguists and scholars both at home and abroad who have studied the cross-cultural pragmatic failure (Jenny Thomas, 1983; He Ziran, 2001; Ran Yongping, 2001; etc). Pragmatic failure exists not only in the verbal communication but also unavoidably in the writing. Thus the analysis of pragmatic failure will be helpful and practical in understanding and using language, especially in the writing of English business correspondence, an increasingly important means of communication in commerce activity.

1.2 Aim and Objectives
There are seven basic principles in the writing of English business correspondence, among which politeness is the last thing we should neglect. Any violation of politeness principle is one of the most important causes for pragmatic failure in the English business correspondence.
The present study attempts to present a genre analysis of pragmatic failure appeared in the writing of English business correspondence from the perspective of pragmatics by applying politeness principle under Thomas’s framework.
The dissertation is primarily concerned with the following three research questions:
(1) What is the definition and classification of pragmatic failure?
(2) What is the politeness principle in English business correspondence?
(3) What strategies to avoid pragmatic failure in the writing of English business correspondence?
It is hoped that this study will benefit English writers. A good knowledge of pragmatic failure and politeness principle will provide insights for the writing of English business correspondence.

1.3 Organization of the Dissertation
The dissertation is divided into six chapters. Chapter one is an introduction to the whole paper. It covers background, aim and objectives and the organization of the dissertation. Chapter two deals with the definition and classification of pragmatic failure. It serves as a theoretical framework for the analysis of pragmatic failure in this paper. Chapter three gives an overview of some fundamental studies of politeness principle in the writing of English business correspondence. Chapter four is the main body of the dissertation in which the model for analysis outlined in chapter two and three are applied to analyze the collected English business correspondence samples which are from Chinese college students during their course of internship and find out the reasons caused pragmatic failure in the writing of English business correspondence. Chapter five provides some strategies for the writing of English business correspondence. Chapter Six draws a conclusion, discusses limitations of the dissertation and suggests further research.

Chapter Two The Study of Pragmatic Failure
2.1 Introduction
With the accelerated globalization, the communication between countries to countries is becoming more and more important. However, in cross-cultural communication, there exists pragmatic failures. This chapter first begins with definition of concept of pragmatic failure. Then, it continues with the introduction of Jenny Thomas’ theorical framework, which includes the definition and classification of pragmatic failure.

2.2 Pragmatic Failure
The term “pragmatic failure” was first proposed by Jenny Thomas (1983) in the paper “Cross cultural Pragmatic Failure” which serves as a solid theoretical framework for the later studies by linguists at home and aboard. Thomas believes that pragmatic failure is the major reason why cross cultural communication would break down; she terms it “the inability to understand what is meant by what is said”.
He Ziran said that researchers collectively referred the mistakes that result in unsatisfactory communication in verbal communication as pragmatic failure (He Ziran, 2001). They don’t use the word “errors”, because this kind of mistakes don’t result from the syntax error, namely the words which fail to convey the meaning because of grammatical structure, but speaks in an inappropriate way and occasion, or not in conformity of expression.
Sun Ya and Dai Ling (2002) gave a more comprehensive definition of pragmatic failure: when the speaker uses the sentences with correct sign’s relationship, but to speak in an inappropriate way. Specifically, the speaker transgresses the interpersonal norm, social norm or reglects the identity of communicators, status, occasion and so on, which are against the specific language cultural values that lead to the interruption and failure of the verbal communication. In this case, the communication can not achieve the expected satisfactory result, this kind of mistake is called pragmatic failure.

2.3 Classification of Pragmatic Failure
According to Thomas(1983), pragmatics failure can be classified into two categories: Pragmatic Linguistic Failure and Social Pragmatic Failure.

2.3.1 Pragmatic Linguistic Failure
The definition of Pragmatic Linguistic Failure has two facets: one is the mistakes which are from the misuse of words by the speaker, causing the listener’s misunderstanding of the exact meaning of words within a certain context; the other is caused by the listener’s miscomprehension of the illocutionary meaning that the speaker intends to express, or by the speaker’s inaccurate expression of illocutionary meaning.
Take the usage of English as an example, the language is not accord with the idiom of English native speaker by misusing other English expression, or using the language in his native idiomatic manner by ignorance of the correct English expression.

2.3.2 Social Pragmatic Failure
Social Pragmatic Failure refers to the mistakes that result from the mischoosing the linguistic form because of ignorance of the difference between both sides’ cultural background. It’s closely related to status, register, social familiarity to the topic and so on.
For example, Chinese “谢谢” has the English equivalent word “Thank you”, but the usage of them is not completely the same. When we receive others’ praise, “thank you” is the most common words we use; but in China, people often use “过奖，过奖”, “惭愧，惭愧”and other modest words to show politeness. If we don’t use “Thank you”, but use “You flatter me” or “I feel ashamed”, that could probably raise a laugh.

2.4 Summary
This chapter has settled on the definition of pragmatic failure and classification of pragmatic failure and established the theoretical model for the current study in pragmatic failure in the writing of English business correspondence. The following chapter will deal with politeness principle in English business correspondence.

Chapter Three Politeness Principle in English Business Correspondence
3.1 Introduction
English business correspondence is important in international trade and business communication. The correct and proper application of politeness principle in correspondence is of great significance. This chapter first introduces the seven basic principles in English business correspondence writing. Then, it continues with the introduction of two typical theories on politeness principle in English business correspondence: Brown&Levinson’s Face Theory and Leech’s Politeness Printiple.
3.2 Seven Basic Principles in English Business Correspondence Writing
English business correspondence writing is one of the practical English writing, it has special purpose and social characteristcs, and therefore it requires adherence to the 7C Principles: Correctness, Clearness, Completeness, Concreteness, Consideration, Conciseness and Courteousness(He Ziran, 2001). The details are as followings:
(1) Correctness: Assure accuracy with respects to grammar, facts and opinions;
(2) Clearness: Use the language that the reader understands, and avoid jargon and unfamiliar words and phrases;
(3) Completeness: Include all the information necessary to make the point and promote action from the reader;
(4) Concreteness: Use figures, ratios and facts whenever there are available to make the correspondence specific and definite rather than vague and abstract;
(5) Consideration: From others’ point of view, try to take others’ difficulties into account and for others sake. Being considerate will easily gain others’ goodwill so as to promote the success of the communication;
(6) Conciseness: Keep the correspondence short and to the point;
(7) Courteousness: Courteousness principle is the most effective weapon for sellers. Apply words and phrases that set a positive light possible tone or cast recipient’s actions or inactions in the most positive light possible so as to receive a favorable response, and thus more effectively accomplish the goal.
Among the seven principles in the writing of English business correspondence, courteousness principle (politeness principle) plays a very important role. The correct application of politeness principle in the writing of English business correspondence will leave a good impression to others and, therefore, to some extent, may lead to the success of business.
3.3 Leech’s Politeness Principle
In 1967, American philosopher Herbert Paul Grice(1913—1988) first proposed cooperative principle. Politeness principle appeared as a supplement for cooperative principle. Lakoff, the author of The Logic of Politeness(1973), was among the first to adopt Grice’s theory of cooperative principles in an effort to explain politeness. Like Lakoff, Leech adopts the framework initially set out by Grice: a principle that consists of a set of maxims and sub-maxims that guide and constrain the conversation of rational people.
Leech’s politeness printiple is categorized into six maxims which are as follows:
(1) Tact Maxim (found in impositives and commissives)
(a) Minimize cost to other;
(b) Maximize benefit to other;
(2) Generosity Maxim (found in impositives and commissives)
(a) Minimize benefit to self;
(b) Maximize cost to self；
(3) Approbation Maxim (found in expressives and assertives)
(a) Minimize dispraise to other;
(b) Maximize praise to other;
(4) Modesty Maxim (found in expressives and assertives)
(a) Minimize praise of self;
(b) Maximize dispraise of self;
(5) Agreement Maxim (found in assertives)
(a) Minimize disagreement between self and Other;
(b) Maximize agreement between self and other;
(6) Sympathy Maxim (found in assertives)
(a) Minimize antipathy between self and other;
(b) Maximize sympathy between self and other.
(Leech, 1983:132)
What have been mentioned above are politeness principle people should observe in daily life. However, not all the maxims are equally important. For instance,Tact Maxim influences more powerfully on conversational behavior than Generosity Maxim does. Within each maxim, sub-maxim(a) is more important than sub-maxim(b). From what has been mentioned above, we can easily find that politeness principle focus on other but self－listener and the third part. Maximize others’ benefit and maximize self cost will gain others’ respect and goodwill so as to achieve the success of the communication.
3.4 Brown&Levinson’s Face Theory
In 1978, Brown and Levinson published Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena. In 1987, it was revised and republished as Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage in which Brown and Levinson put forward their theory about politeness principle. This theory includes three basic notions: face, face threatening acts (FTA) and polite strategies.
According to Brown and Levision, “Face” means that every social member wants to earn his or her public self-image. Face is related with politeness. Face is an emotional thing, it can be received, protected, improved or lost. Protecting face aims at maintaining mutual benefits. Brown and Levision divide the “ Face” into two aspects: positive face and negative face. Positive face refers to the wish to gain others’ recoganition and approbation. Once this wish can be granted, the positive face is to be protected. Negative face means the hope to have independent freedo