Abstract
Intercultural discourse (especially via a lingua franca when interlocutors have a false impression that they are speaking one and the same language) adds a new dimension – facework (the establishment of culture-sensitive politeness strategies) – to the theory and practice of argumentation from a number of perspectives: its specificity as compared to ordinary argumentational discourse, the interpretation of the concept of incommensurability, and the conduct of international negotiations. Politeness systems relevant for different cultures are not unpredictable, but represent linguistically and cognitively a highly generalised universal system which can be adopted by interlocutors and used in practical discourse. Politeness expressions are governed by linguistic components – by language forms of a certain type and by specific discourse patterns. The proper choice of language forms and discourse patterns adds a special dimension to argumentative schemata. The politeness-relevant packaging of discourse adds a zero-step to the normative stages of an argumentative discussion (establishing hierarchical relations as such), and needs permanent alignment of these relations, by using correct language forms and discourse patterns.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Ball, M. S.: 1985, Lying Down Together: Law, Metaphor, and Theology, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, USA.
Cecchetto Vittorina, and Magda Stroinska: 1996, 'Systems of Self-Reference and Address Forms in Intellectual Discourse', Language Sciences 18(3-4), 777-789.
Clyne, Michael: 1996, Intercultural Communication at Work: Cultural Values in Discourse, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gumperz, John: 1982a, Discourse Strategies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gumperz, John: 1982b, Language and Social Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Dolinina, Inga B. and Vittorina Cecchetto: (in preparation), Discourse, Respectivity, Stereotypes, Paper presented at AILA, August 1996, Helsinki.
Hart, Joy, Shirley Willihnganz and Charles Arthur Willard: 1995, 'When Argument Fails: How Organizations Deal with Incommensurabilities', in Special Fields and Cases. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation (University of Amsterdam, June 21-24, 1994), Vol IV, International Center for the Study of Argumentation, Amsterdam, pp. 565-578.
Jackson, Sally and Scott Jacobs: 1988, 'The Conversational Approach to Critical Thinking', in AILACT - ISSA Program, XVII World Congress of Philosophy, Brighton, August 21, 1988.
Lavandera, Beatriz R.: 1990, 'The Study of Language in Its Socio-Cultural Context', in Frederick J. Newmeyer (ed.) Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, IV Language: The Socio-Cultural Context,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
O'Keefe, Barbara J.: 1988, 'The Logic of Message Design: Individual Differences in Reasoning about Communication', Communication Monographs 55, 80-100.
Prideax, Gary D.: 1994, 'Two Complementary Approaches to Discourse Analysis', Linguistica Atlantica 16, 113-133.
Scollon, Ron and Suzxanne Wong Scollon: 1995, Intercultural Communication, Blackwell, Oxford.
Walker, G. B.: 1991, 'Cross-cultural Argument in International Negotiations: Values and Reasoning at the LAW OF THE Sea Conference', in Frans H. Van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation, June 19-22, 1990, University of Amsterdam.International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 734-745.
Xolodovich, A. A.: 1979, Issues of Grammatical Theory(Chapter: Category of respectivity), Nauka (in Russian), Leningrad.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dolinina, I.B., Cecchetto, V. Facework and Rhetorical Strategies in Intercultural Argumentative Discourse. Argumentation 12, 167–181 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007739713653
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007739713653