Abstract
Kádár and Mills’s Politeness in East Asia is a compilation of selected postmodern works on linguistic politeness and impoliteness, featuring China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Vietnam. Although China and Japan’s ideologies related to politeness and impoliteness have been examined, the three other countries were included as they had not been represented previously in the linguistic politeness research. The underlying theme of the book can be summarized as follows: (a) the embedded Chinese philosophical values in East Asian ideologies on politeness and impoliteness, (b) a paradigm shift from the objective to subjective examination of the linguistic phenomena, and (c) adopting a critical approach to examine and understand the complexity of politeness and impoliteness.
East Asia, particularly China, has become a part of any critical political, international, and academic conversation as citizens and researchers alike aim to assess the changing world and the current status of the global economy. Among a multitude of today’s reports on China and East Asia, the Global Trends 2030 report strengthens an already established global reality of the increasingly significant roles that China and other emerging Asian countries will have by the year 2030 (U.S. National Intelligence Council, 2012). At a minimum, Kádár and Mills’s book should be of great interest to those who study cross-cultural and intercultural topics in general. For cross-cultural and intercultural researchers and linguists studying politeness in East Asia, Kádár and Mills’s book provides one-of-a-kind in-depth discussion on the critical turning points of politeness research. Both the theoretical and methodological juxtaposing arguments and implications related to politeness and impoliteness research are thoroughly discussed and new directions offered. Throughout the book, readers are introduced to both culture-general and culture-specific notions related to East Asian politeness and impoliteness phenomena. Kádár and Mills and the contributing authors argue persuasively for a postmodern discursive approach when examining today’s linguistic politeness and impoliteness phenomena. The authors challenge readers to go beyond the status quo when discussing politeness and impoliteness in general and linguistic politeness and impoliteness in particular. Although the authors include a discussion on the important linguistic politeness and impoliteness concepts (e.g., face, negative face, and positive face), the purpose of the book is to highlight the “postmodern” theoretical constructs and methodology. Specifically, concepts discussed in the book include the distinction between culture and ideologies, the interdependence between culture and language, the role of dominating ideologies (e.g., Confucianism and neo-Confucianism) in co-construction of reality on politeness and impoliteness, politeness as social capital, emic and etic ideologies, dominant groups and co-cultural groups, Anglo-Saxon social realities and East Asian social realities, individualism and collectivism, stereotypes, conventionalization, universal laws/rationality versus culture-specific rules/rationality, ethnocentrism and ethnorelativism, first-order and second-order politeness, and postmodern/discursive approaches.
Along with the discussion on a set of traditional politeness and impoliteness variables (e.g., positive and negative politeness and conservatism), readers are asked to consider a critical stance when examining postmodern politeness and impoliteness. The authors’ persuasive argument proposes a need to move away from the culture-general and universal model notion of politeness and impoliteness to the postmodern thinking that tends to be culture-specific when interpreting and understanding politeness and impoliteness (e.g., politeness negotiation and grammar of politeness).
Kádár and Mills’s book is organized into two main parts: Part 1 on theory and methodology and Part 2 on politeness practices in East Asia and Haugh’s Epilogue. The first part provides an exhaustive literature review of the linguistic politeness and impoliteness research dating back to Lakoff (1973) and Brown and Levinson (1987). It also addresses the current “postmodern” discursive approach when studying politeness and impoliteness from a non-Eurocentric perspective.
In chapter 1, Mills and Kádár provide readers with background information on politeness and impoliteness in general (e.g., cooperative principle and model person) and East Asian politeness in particular (e.g., how East Asia was defined for the purpose of the book and the varying degrees of culture specificity of East Asia’s politeness). In chapter 2, Mills and Kádár discuss the interdependent relationship between politeness and culture. As a result, readers come to appreciate the evolution of the linguistic politeness and impoliteness phenomena from a strict law-based approach (e.g., Brown & Levinson, 1987; Grice, 1975) to the postmodern rule-based approach (e.g., Eelen, 2001; Ide, 1989). As the Chinese and Japanese’s linguistic politeness ideologies contribute much to today’s understanding about East Asian politeness, readers are treated with an in-depth chapter on how Japanese’s honorifics were examined, understood, and evolved (chapter 3). As the book aims to propose a new way (i.e., discursive approach as opposed to researchers’ self-constructed examples), chapter 4 discusses the postmodern methodological issues in linguistic politeness and East Asian politeness research. Part 1 closes with chapter 5 on politeness and impoliteness from an intercultural communication perspective (deviating from an existing research trend that aims to examine cross-cultural politeness practices). In this chapter, Stadler’s argument convinces readers that politeness and impoliteness phenomena are far from being simple and one must acknowledge a possibility of multiple interpretations that can be based on a several contextual variables (e.g., the relationship between closeness and directness, Westernization, and Guanxi). Throughout the book, readers will come to recognize how East Asians continue to regard Confucianism as a form of social order that guides polite and impolite behaviors, particularly the use of honorific in any hierarchical social relationships. One could argue that an overseas Chinese is also likely to practice politeness that is rooted in Confucianism and neo-Confucianism.
The second part of the book is devoted to culture-specific understanding of the following countries: China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Singapore. Readers with specific interests to any one of these countries are treated with politeness resources through ample examples both in the traditional characters and Romanized systems to demonstrate degrees of linguistic complexity when one attempts to understand East Asian politeness and impoliteness. In chapter 6, Kádár and Pan discuss Chinese politeness from the Mainland China perspective. The authors’ claim that China offers the most concrete examples to demonstrate how politeness and impoliteness phenomena evolve through periods in time is quite legitimate. The authors further the discussion by offering an in-depth review of how Chinese politeness has evolved from the dynastic periods to the present. In chapter 7, Haugh and Obana offer an alternative concept of Tachiba, “the place where one stands,” as compared to the concept of Wakimae, “discernment, when examining Japanese politeness through the use of Keigo, “respect language” or honorifics. The paradigm shift from Wakimae to Tachiba has broadened both the knowledge and understanding of the Japanese politeness. In chapter 8, Kim offers an insight suggesting that Korean politeness is also situational. Many factual examples are given to those who are unfamiliar with the Korean culture. By the end of the chapter, readers will learn that Koreans use honorifics strategically, particularly when negotiating face-work. Although Korean honorifics do not always accompany all linguistic codes, Kim’s research implies that use of the Korean honorifics can be anticipated more in stranger relationships or in relationships during the initial stages than in nonstranger relationships or in relationships during the maintenance or exit stages. In chapter 9, Chew explains how politeness in Vietnam has evolved from the historical periods (feudal and pre-Communist periods when much of the influence from China formed politeness beliefs and rules) to the current period (as a result of colonialism and other foreign influences during the Vietnam War era). Chew’s research on politeness in Vietnam advances the dialogue on politeness in similar countries that are experiencing varying degrees of social change that will undoubtedly affect how politeness is construed. In chapter 10, Lee examines politeness among different groups of Singaporean Chinese in Singapore. Consistent with the contextual and rule-based theme of the book, Lee begins by informing readers of the complex history of Singapore (from having been ruled by the Japanese and the British up until 1963 and gained its independence from Malaysia in 1965). These historical turns resulted in today’s Singapore as one of the multicultural societies in East Asia. Because the majority of Singaporeans are of Chinese descent, Lee focuses mainly on the outcomes of the compulsory “mother tongue” subjects in which the Chinese learn Mandarin (whereas other Singaporean ethnic groups learn their own “mother tongue” languages). Lee examines different ethnic Chinese groups and code switching (e.g., switching from Mandarin to one of the Southern Chinese dialects such as Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese, Hakka, and Hainanese). Although Confucianism and neo-Confucianism dominate much of the politeness among the Singaporean Chinese, the Singaporean Chinese go one step further to co-construct their politeness and impoliteness systems based on their chosen linguistic code (Mandarin vs. a Southern Chinese dialect). This multilayer of culture-specific notion is also remarkable in South China, where a Chinese “local” dialect and its linguistic rules can prevail over the “main” dialect (i.e., Mandarin). Hence, both Singaporean Chinese and Chinese living in South China are likely to have specific conceptions, beliefs, and practices of politeness that are distinct from other groups within the larger community.
Finally, the Epilogue by Haugh discusses future research implications and directions. Among the most insightful directions was Haugh’s suggestion to put more emphasis on studying the relationship between East Asian politeness and impoliteness by examining other East Asian languages. Haugh points to strong research evidence and suggests that impoliteness is beyond an absence of politeness but rather distinctive norms and practices of what are considered impoliteness. By employing a critical perspective when examining linguistic politeness and impoliteness phenomena, Haugh anticipates that future research will eventually close the gap between the first-order and second-order understanding of politeness perspective, minimizing the interpretive discrepancy between the participants’ and the researchers’ own politeness perspectives.
Although neo-Confucianism is one of the major philosophical values that influences today’s East Asian politeness phenomena, this reviewer would offer a suggestion to examine the role of Taoism and Buddhism when studying East Asian politeness and impoliteness. By implementing notions of Taoism and Buddhism, other relevant variables (e.g., changes, flexibility, adaptability, observance, reactivity, interdependence, and ability to differentiate) can also be considered as additional elements to Pan’s grammar of politeness (chapter 4).
Overall, politeness and impoliteness phenomena have been studied primarily from the European perspective. This book is an excellent resource for those whose interests lie in the areas of linguistic politeness and impoliteness phenomena in general and East Asian politeness and impoliteness in particular. Readers who are less familiar with East Asian politeness research will gain a tremendous insight into how Confucianism and neo-Confucianism play crucial roles in the identity formation and communication practices (i.e., politeness) among the East Asians. Yet readers are always reminded that generalizations about politeness and impoliteness can only go so far. The majority of the contributing authors also suggest how the contextual rules rather than the universal rules should be applied when examining linguistic politeness and impoliteness phenomena. Linguistically advanced readers will be treated with rich linguistic examples in the original Chinese, Japanese, and Korean characters and Romanized systems of the featured languages (i.e., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese). This book challenges readers to go beyond the status quo (both in theory and practice) when contemplating politeness frameworks. It would not come as a surprise that future understanding of East Asian politeness and impoliteness research will derive from the research produced and discussed in this book. Globalization has required world citizens to learn intercultural communication competence skills, and so more interdisciplinary research is necessary to provide both interpretive and critical viewpoints in understanding linguistic politeness and impoliteness beyond the linguistic researchers’ community. From the global perspective, for non-Asians who are moving to Asia for business opportunities and alternative lifestyles, East Asian politeness research is crucial to their own preparation for an overseas experience beyond the entry stages of culture shock. Likewise, it is also a pivotal moment for non-Asian hosts to begin to connect with Asian immigrants and benefit from what they have to offer. This book provides rich resources in furthering one’s knowledge and understanding about politeness in East Asia.