Home I wanted to honour your journal, and you spat in my face: emotive (im)politeness and face in the English and Russian blind peer review
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

I wanted to honour your journal, and you spat in my face: emotive (im)politeness and face in the English and Russian blind peer review

  • Tatiana Larina

    Tatiana Larina is Doctor Habil., Full Professor at Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University). Her research interests embrace cultural linguistics, cross-cultural pragmatics, discourse analysis, intercultural communication, communicative ethnostyles, and (im)politeness theory with the focus on English and Russian languages. She has numerous publications in Russian and English which comprise monographs, course books, book chapters and articles in peer-reviewed journals, including International review of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Lodz Papers in Pragmatics among others. She is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the Russian Journal of Linguistics.

    and Douglas Mark Ponton

    Douglas Mark Ponton is Associate Professor of English Language and Translation at the Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Catania. His research interests include political discourse analysis, ecolinguistics, sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, pragmatics and critical discourse studies. Recent publications include For Arguments Sake: Speaker Evaluation in Modern Political Discourse and Understanding Political Persuasion: Linguistic and Rhetorical Aspects. As well as politics, his research deals with a variety of social topics including tourism, the discourse of mediation, ecology, local dialect and folk traditions, including proverbs and the Blues.

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 17, 2022

Abstract

This study explores the degree to which politeness and emotive considerations are respected across two different academic traditions and linguistic settings; in Russian and English blind peer reviews. It analyses 120 authentic reviews (70 Russian and 50 British English) with the negative verdicts: “Reject” and “To be resubmitted after substantial revisions” using a pragmatic, contextual and contrastive methodology. Drawing on (im)politeness theory, intercultural pragmatics and cultural studies, we explore the construction of alternative meanings in reviewers’ messages, and theorize that consideration for the face requirements of the reviewee may account for the lingua-cultural choices of the reviewer. We explore structural, linguistic, communicative and stylistic differences in English and Russian reviews. The results show that despite reviewers’ individual styles there are some culture-specific traits in the styles of reviews. Emotive politeness, we have suggested, appears to be (pre)determined by the sociocultural context and is more typical of English communication than Russian. We account for the differences in terms of sociocultural context, value differences and the use of different mechanisms of politeness. Our results confirm that politeness is not only social, but is also a psychological phenomenon based on empathy, whose manifestations may vary across cultures.


Corresponding author: Douglas Mark Ponton, University of Catania – Political Science, via vittorio emanuele II 49, Catania 95124, Italy, E-mail:
Some of the results of the study were presented at the SymPol12 conference, Anglia Ruskin University, 17–19 July, 2019, at International workshop “Emotionalization of public domains in cross-cultural perspective: Russia, Israel, USA”, Beersheba-Jerusalem, 28–31 May 2019, and published in Russian in Larina, T.V. 2019. Emotive ecology and emotive politeness in English and Russian blind peer-review. Journal of Psycholinguistics 1(39), 38–57.

Funding source: RUDN Strategic Academic Leadership Program

About the authors

Tatiana Larina

Tatiana Larina is Doctor Habil., Full Professor at Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University). Her research interests embrace cultural linguistics, cross-cultural pragmatics, discourse analysis, intercultural communication, communicative ethnostyles, and (im)politeness theory with the focus on English and Russian languages. She has numerous publications in Russian and English which comprise monographs, course books, book chapters and articles in peer-reviewed journals, including International review of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Lodz Papers in Pragmatics among others. She is currently the Editor-in-Chief of the Russian Journal of Linguistics.

Douglas Mark Ponton

Douglas Mark Ponton is Associate Professor of English Language and Translation at the Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Catania. His research interests include political discourse analysis, ecolinguistics, sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, pragmatics and critical discourse studies. Recent publications include For Arguments Sake: Speaker Evaluation in Modern Political Discourse and Understanding Political Persuasion: Linguistic and Rhetorical Aspects. As well as politics, his research deals with a variety of social topics including tourism, the discourse of mediation, ecology, local dialect and folk traditions, including proverbs and the Blues.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and questions, which enabled us to clarify some points. Thanks to the Russian and British reviewers who allowed their comments to be reproduced here.

  1. Research funding: This work was funded by the RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program.

References

Alba-Juez, Laura & Geoff Thomson. 2014. The many faces and phases of evaluation. In Thompson Geoff & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Evaluation in context, 3–23. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.242.01albSearch in Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, Laura & John Lachlan Mackenzie. 2019. Emotion processes in discourse. In John Lachlan Mackenzie & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Emotion in discourse [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 302], 3–28. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.302.01albSearch in Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, Laura & Juan-Carlos Pérez-Gonzalez. 2019. Emotion and language ‘at work‘: The relationship between trait emotional intelligence and communicative competence as manifested at the workplace. In John Lachlan Mackenzie & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Emotion in discourse [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 302], 247–278. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.302.10albSearch in Google Scholar

Alba-Juez, Laura & Tatiana Larina. 2018. Language and emotion: Discourse-pragmatic perspectives. Russian Journal of Linguistics 22(1). 9–37. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-1-9-37.Search in Google Scholar

Alger, Christianna. 2006. ‘What went well, what didn’t go so well’: Growth of reflection in pre-service teachers. Reflective Practice 7(3). 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940600837327.Search in Google Scholar

Angouri, Jo & Miriam A. Locher. 2012. Theorising disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 1549–1553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.011.Search in Google Scholar

Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca & Dániel Kádár (eds.). 2010. Politeness across cultures. Basingstoke: Palgrave.10.1057/9780230305939Search in Google Scholar

Bayraktaroğlu, Arin & Maria Sifianou (eds.). 2001. Linguistic politeness across boundaries: The case of Greek and Turkish [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 88]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.88Search in Google Scholar

Bednarek, Monika (ed.). 2008a. Evaluation in text types. Special issue of functions of language, vol. 15(1), Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/fol.15.1Search in Google Scholar

Bednarek, Monika. 2008b. Emotion talk across corpora. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230285712Search in Google Scholar

Bednarek, Monika. 2009. Dimensions of evaluation. Cognitive and linguistic perspectives. Pragmatics and Cognition 17(1). 146–175. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.1.05bed.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatia, Vijay. 2000. Applied genre analysis: A multi-perspective model. Ibérica 4. 3–19.Search in Google Scholar

Bousfield, Derek & Miriam A. Locher (eds.). 2008. Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110208344Search in Google Scholar

Boym, Svetlana. 1995. From the Russian soul to post-communist nostalgia. Representations 49. 133–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/2928753.Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085Search in Google Scholar

Brown, Penelope & Stephen Levinson. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomenon. In Esther N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness, 56–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ciliberti, Anna. 1993. The personal and the cultural in interactive styles. Journal of Pragmatics 12. 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90104-w.Search in Google Scholar

Coates, Jennifer. 1995. The expression of root and epistemic possibility in English. In Joan J. Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds.), Modality in grammar and discourse, 55–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.32.04coaSearch in Google Scholar

Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2012. On affectivity and preference in responses to rejection. Text and Talk 32(4). 453–475. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0022.Search in Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511975752Search in Google Scholar

Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2008. The emotional weight of I love you in multilinguals’ languages. Journal of Pragmatics 40(10). 1753–1780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.03.002.Search in Google Scholar

Earley, P. Christopher. 1986. Trust, perceived importance of praise and criticism, and work performance: An examination of feedback in the United States and England. Journal of Management 12(4). 457–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200402.Search in Google Scholar

Englebretson, Robert (ed.). 2007. Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Amsterdam Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.164Search in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203697078Search in Google Scholar

Foolen, Ad. 2012. The relevance of emotion for language and linguistics. In Ad Foolen, Timothy P. Racine, Ulrike M. Lüdtke & Zlatev Jordan (eds.), Moving ourselves, moving others: Motion and emotion in intersubjectivity, consciousness and language, 346–368. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/ceb.6.13fooSearch in Google Scholar

Fox, Kate. 2005. Watching the English. The hidden rules of English behaviour. London: Hodder.Search in Google Scholar

Fronhofer, Nina-Maria. 2019. My anger was justified surely? Epistemic markers across British English and German emotion events. In John Lachlan Mackenzie & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Emotion in discourse [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 302], 213–244. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.302.09froSearch in Google Scholar

Gea Valor, Maria Lluïsa. 2000. A pragmatic approach to politeness and modality in the book review articles. Valencia: Lengua Inglesa.Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interactional ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books.Search in Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goleman, Daniel. 1998. Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantom.10.1002/ltl.40619981008Search in Google Scholar

Haugh, Michael. 2018. Afterword: Theorizing (im)politeness. Journal of Politeness Research 14(1). 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2017-0058.Search in Google Scholar

Hofstede, Geert. 2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet & Maria Stubbe. 2015. Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315750231Search in Google Scholar

House, Juliane. 2006. Communicative styles in English and German. European Journal of English Studies 10(3). 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825570600967721.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 1996. Writing without conviction? Hedging in scientific research articles. Applied Linguistics 17(4). 433–454. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.4.433.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 1998. Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.54Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2004. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2009. Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2011. Disciplines and discourses: Social interactions in the construction of knowledge. In Starke-Meyerring Doreen, Paré Anthony, Natasha Artemeva, Miriam Horne & Larissa Yousoubova (eds.), Writing in knowledge societies, 193–214. West Lafayette: Parlor Press and the WAC Clearinghouse.Search in Google Scholar

Janney, Richard & Horst Arndt. 1992. Intracultural tact versus intercultural tact. In Richard Watts, Sachiko Ide & Konrad Ehlich (eds.), Politeness in language. Studies in its history, theory and practice, 21–41. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110886542-004Search in Google Scholar

Janney, Richard & Horst Arndt. 1993. Universality and relativity in cross-cultural politeness research: A historical perspective. Multilingua 12(1). 13–50. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1993.12.1.13.Search in Google Scholar

Kádár, Dániel & Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139382717Search in Google Scholar

Kádár, Dániel & Sara Mills (eds.). 2011. Politeness in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511977886Search in Google Scholar

Kasper, Gabriele. 2009. Politeness. In Sigurd D’hondt, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), The pragmatics of interaction, 157–173. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Kecskes, Istvan. 2014. Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Kobeleva, Polly & Luke Strongman. 2012. Research, teaching and learning. Pedagogy and practice in the open and distance learning paradigm. Boca Raton: Brown Walker Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langlotz, Andreas & Miriam Locher. 2012. Ways of communicating emotional stance in on-line disagreements. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 1591–1606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.04.002.Search in Google Scholar

Langlotz, Andreas & Miriam Locher. 2013. The role of emotions in relational work. Journal of Pragmatics 58. 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.05.014.Search in Google Scholar

Langlotz, Andreas & Miriam Locher. 2017. (Im)politeness and emotion. In Culpeper Jonathan, Kádár Dániel & Haugh Michael (eds.), The palgrave handbook of linguistic (im)politeness, 287–323. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_12Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana. 2009. Katergoriya vezhlivosti y stil’ kommunikaciyi: sopostavleniye angliyskih y russkih lingvokul’turnih tradiciy [Politeness and communicative styles: Comparative analysis of English and Russian language and culture traditions]. Moscow: Jazyki slavianskih kul’tur.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana. 2013. Anglichane y russkiye: Yazyk, kul’tura, kommunikaciya [The British and the Russians: Language, culture and communication]. Moscow: Jazyki slavianskih kul’tur.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana. 2015. Culture-specific communicative styles as a framework for interpreting linguistic and cultural idiosyncrasies. International Review of Pragmatics 7(2). 195–215. https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-00702003.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana V. 2019. Emotivnaya ekologichnost’ i emotivnaya vezhlivost’ v zhanre angliiskoi i russkoi anonimnoi retsenzii [Emotive ecology and emotive politeness in English and Russian blind peer-review]. Journal of Psycholinguistics 1(39). 38–57. https://doi.org/10.30982/2077-5911-2019-39-1-38-57.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana, Arto Mustajoki & Ekaterina Protassova. 2017. Dimensions of Russian culture and mind. In Lehtisaari Katja & Mustajoki Arto (eds.), Philosophical and cultural interpretations of Russian modernisation. Series: Studies in contemporary Russia, 7–19. London/New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana & Douglas M. Ponton. 2020. Tact or frankness in English and Russian blind peer reviews. Intercultural Pragmatics 17(4). 71–496. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2020-4004.Search in Google Scholar

Larina, Tatiana V., Vladimir I. Ozyumenko & Dilbar G. Ishankulova. 2011. O pozitivnom myshlenii predstavitelei anglosaksonskoi kul’tury i ego otrazhenii v yazyke i kommunikatsii [Positive thinking of the people of Anglo culture and its reflection in language and communication]. Journal of Psycholinguistics 1(13). 52–63.Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2007. Politeness: Is there an East-West divide? Journal of Politeness Research 3. 167–206. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr.2007.009.Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey. 2014. The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford studies in sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey & Jan Svartvik. 2003. A communicative grammar of English, 3rd edn. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey & Tatiana Larina. 2014. Politeness: West and East. Russian Journal of Linguistics 4. 9–34.Search in Google Scholar

Lemke, Jay L. 1995. Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. London: Taylor and Francis.Search in Google Scholar

Leontovich, Olga A. 2015. Pozitivnaya kommunikatsiya: postanovka problemy [Positive communication: A theoretical perspective]. Russian Journal of Linguistics 1. 164–176.Search in Google Scholar

Locher, Miriam. 2004. Power and politeness in action; disagreement in oral communication. Berlin: Mouton and Gruyter.10.1515/9783110926552Search in Google Scholar

Locher, Miriam A. & Richard J. Watts. 2005. Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research 1. 9–33. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9.Search in Google Scholar

Locher, Miriam A. & Tatiana V. Larina. 2019. Introduction to politeness and impoliteness research in global contexts. Russian Journal of Linguistic 23(4). 873–903. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2019-23-4-873-903.Search in Google Scholar

Mackenzie, John Lachlan & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.). 2019. Emotion in discourse [Pragmatics and Beyond New Series 302]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.302Search in Google Scholar

Maíz Arévalo, Carmen. 2014. Expressing disagreement in English as a lingua franca: Whose pragmatic rules? Intercultural Pragmatics 11(2). 199–224.10.1515/ip-2014-0009Search in Google Scholar

Majid, Asifa. 2012. Current emotion research in the language sciences. Emotion Review 4(4). 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912445827.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, James R. & Peter R. R. White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, John D., David R. Caruso & Peter Salovey. 2016. The ability model of emotional intelligence: Principles and updates. Emotion Review 8(4). 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916639667.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, John D. & Peter Salovey. 1997. What is emotional intelligence? In Peter Salovey & David J. Sluyter (eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications, 3–31. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar

Meltzer, Bernard N. & Gil Richard Musolf. 2015. “Have a nice day!”: Phatic communion and everyday life. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 23. 95–111.10.1016/S0163-2396(00)80033-2Search in Google Scholar

Mikolajczak, Moïra. 2009. Going beyond the ability-trait debate: A three level model of emotional intelligence. E-Journal of Applied Psychology 5. 25–31.10.7790/ejap.v5i2.175Search in Google Scholar

Mills, Sara. 2003. Gender and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615238Search in Google Scholar

Mills, Sara. 2009. Impoliteness in a cultural context. Journal of Pragmatics 41(5). 1047–1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.014.Search in Google Scholar

Mugford, Gerrard. 2020. Mexican politeness: An empirical study on the reasons underlying/motivating practices to construct local interpersonal relationships. Russian Journal of Linguistics 24(1). 31–55. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2020-24-1-31-55.Search in Google Scholar

Pizziconi, Barbara. 2007. The lexical mapping of politeness in British English and Japanese. Journal of Politeness Research 3(2). 207–241. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr.2007.010.Search in Google Scholar

Rubin, Victoria L., Elizabeth D. Liddy & Noriko Kando. 2006. Certainty identification in texts: Categorization model and manual tagging results. In James G. Shanahan, Yan Qu & Janyce Wiebe (eds.), Computing attitude and affect in text: Theory and applications, 61–77. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/1-4020-4102-0_7Search in Google Scholar

Salovey, Peter & David A. Pizarro. 2003. The value of emotional intelligence. In Robert J. Sternberg, Jacques Lautrey & Todd I. Lubart (eds.), Models of intelligence: International perspectives, 263–278. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.Search in Google Scholar

Selting, Margret. 2009. Communicative style. In Sigurd D’hondt, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), The pragmatics of interaction, 21–39. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Shakhovskiy, Victor. 2016. Dissonans ekologichnosti v kommunikativnom kruge: chelovek, yazyk, emotsii [Dissonance in communicative sustainability: People, language, emotions]. Volgograd: IP Polikarpov Publ.Search in Google Scholar

Shakhovskiy, Victor. 2018. Kognitivnaya matritsa emotsional’no-kommunikativnoi lichnosti [The cognitive matrix of emotional-communicative personality]. Russian Journal of Linguistics 22(1). 54–79. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-1-54-79.Search in Google Scholar

Shakhovskiy, Victor I. 2008. Lingvisticheskaya teoriya emotsii [Linguistic theory of emotions]. Moscow: Gnozis Publ.Search in Google Scholar

Sifianou, Maria. 1999. Politeness phenomena in England and Greece: A cross cultural perspective. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Sifianou, Maria. 2012. Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics 44. 1554–1564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.009.Search in Google Scholar

Sifianou, Maria. 2019. Conflict, disagreement and (im)politeness. In Matthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries & Jim O’Driscoll (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language in conflict, 176–195. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780429058011-11Search in Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2005. (Im)politeness, face and perception of rapport: Unpacking their bases and interrelationships. Journal of Politeness Research 1(1). 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.95.Search in Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2007. Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics 39(4). 639–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.004.Search in Google Scholar

Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2011. Conceptualising ‘the relational’ in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics 43(14). 3565–3578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.08.009.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff & Laura Alba-Juez. 2014. Evaluation in context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.242Search in Google Scholar

Ting-Toomey, Stella & Atsuko Kurogi. 1998. Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 22(2). 187–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0147-1767(98)00004-2.Search in Google Scholar

Tracy, Karen & Sara J. Tracy. 1998. Rudeness at 911. Reconceptualizing face and face attack. Human Communication Research 25(2). 225–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1998.tb00444.x.Search in Google Scholar

Tzanne, Angeliki & Maria Sifianou. 2019. Understanding of impoliteness in the Greek context. Russian Journal of Linguistics 23(4). 1014–1038. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2019-23-4-1014-1038.Search in Google Scholar

Watts, Richard. 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

White, Peter R. R. 2003. Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23(2). 259–284. https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300099270.003.0011.Search in Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1999. Emotions across languages and cultures: Diversity and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511521256Search in Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2002. Russian cultural scripts: The theory of cultural scripts and its applications. Ethos 3(4). 401–432. https://doi.org/10.1525/eth.2002.30.4.401.Search in Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2003/1991. Cross-cultural pragmatics, 2nd edn. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110220964Search in Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2018. Emotions of Jesus. Russian Journal of Linguistics 22(1). 38–53. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2018-22-1-38-53.Search in Google Scholar

Wilce, James M. 2009. Language and emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Zappettini, Franco, Douglas M. Ponton & Tatiana V. Larina. 2021. Emotionalisation of contemporary media discourse: A research agenda. Russian Journal of Linguistics 25(3). 586–610. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-586-610.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-09-23
Accepted: 2020-08-04
Published Online: 2022-01-17
Published in Print: 2022-02-23

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 26.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/pr-2019-0035/html
Scroll to top button