Linguistic Impoliteness Strategies in Thai

Main Article Content

Naphat Angkunsinthana
Pananda Lerlertyuttitham

Abstract

Linguistic impoliteness is a negative behavior to attack face and right of interlocutor. This behavior can trigger the impoliteness when the speaker intentionally attacks face and right of the hearer and the hearer perceives this behavior intentionally. Therefore the speaker has to construct the impoliteness strategies that are assured to attack face and right of the hearer and the hearer can perceive that intention. This study aim at studying the impoliteness strategies in Thai. The data was collected from 4 data sources: conversations from soap operas, daily interaction where the researcher participated or observed, conversations from YOUTUBE website and conversations from interviewing. It was found the there were 12 strategies: 1) using the interjections to express negative feeling, 2) using impolite final particle, 3) using taboo words, 4) using the words with negative meaning, 5) using negative expressions, 6) using the utterances with hearer’s mistake, 7) denying, 8) frighten, 9) using directive speech acts, 10) sarcasm, 11) defying, and 12) withhold politeness.

Article Details

How to Cite
Angkunsinthana, N., & Lerlertyuttitham, P. (2019). Linguistic Impoliteness Strategies in Thai. Parichart Journal, 32(2), 63–74. Retrieved from https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/parichartjournal/article/view/143605
Section
Research Articles
Author Biography

Naphat Angkunsinthana

สาขาวิชาภาษาไทย (ค.บ.5ปี) ตึก30 คณะครุศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏบ้านสมเด็จเจ้าพระยา

ถนนอิสรภาพ 15 แขวงหิรัญรูจี เขตธนบุรี กรุงเทพมหานคร 10600 

References

[1] Culpeper, J. (2005). Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The weakest link. Journal of Politeness Research, 1, 35- 72.

[2] Culpeper, J. (2012). Politeness and impoliteness. In Andersen, G. and Aijmer, K. Editor. Pragmatics of Society, 393- 483. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

[3] Lakoff, R. (1989). The Limits of politeness: Therapeutic and coutroom discourse. Multilingua, 8(2-3), 101- 129.

[4] Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[5] Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics. 25,
349- 367.

[6] Culpeper, J. (2015). Impoliteness strategies. In Capone, A. and Jacob, L. Editor. Interdisciplinary studies in pragmatics, culture and society, 1- 23. London: Springer.

[7] Bousfield, D. (2007). Beginnings, middles and ends: A biopsy of dynamics of impolite
ex-changes. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 2185- 2216.

[8] Argyro, K. (2010). Impoliteness strategies in house M.D. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics. 6, 305- 339.

[9] Sawanglap, J. (2013). Impoliteness strategies in Thai reality shows. M.A. Thesis in Thai Language. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.

[10] Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[11] Spencer- Oatey, Helen D. M. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Helen D. M. Spencer-Oatey Editors. Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across cultures. London and New York: Continuum.

[12] Spencer-Oatey, H., & Kádár, D. (2016). The bases of (Im) politeness evaluations: Culture, the moral order and the East- West. East Asian Pragmatics, 1(1), 73-106.

[13] Culpeper, J. (2012). (Im) politeness: Three issues. Journal of Pragmatics, 44,
1128- 1133.

[14] Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: politeness phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 403 -426.

[15] Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 237- 257.

[16] Mao, L. R. (1994). Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5), 451-486.

[17] Vatcharasuwan, P. (2004). The act of disagreeing in Thai by speakers of different social status: The case of teachers and students. M.A. Thesis in Thai Language. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.

[18] Sukwisith, W. (2004). The speech act of reprimanding in Thai. M.A. Thesis in Thai Language. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.

[19] Photiwit, S. (2004). Strategies of expressing conflict in Thai. M.A. Thesis in Linguistics. Bangkok: Thammasat University.

[20] Phengsuriya, N. (2006). The usage of stigmatized expressions in Thai. M.A. Thesis in Linguistics. Bangkok: Thammasat University.

[21] Jaisue, R. (2006). The speech act of complaining in Thai: A case study of university students. M.A. Thesis in Thai Language. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.

[22] Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[23] Ljung, M. (2011). Swearing: A cross-cultural linguistic study. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

[24] The Royal Society. (2013). Dictionary of Thai language. Bangkok: Nanmeebooks Publishing.

[25] Spencer- Oatey, Helen D. M. (2008). Culturally speaking: Managing rapport through talk across culture. London and New York: Continuum.

[26] Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.

[27] Intachakra, S. (2007). Fundamental concepts of pragmatics. Bangkok: Thammasart University Press.

[28] Kàdàr, D. Z. (2013). Relational rituals and communication: Ritual interaction in group. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

[29] Culpeper, J., Bousfield, D., & Wichmann, A. (2003). Impoliteness revised: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1545- 1579.

[30] Tumtavitikul, A., & Thitikannara, K. (2006). The intonation of Thai emotional speech. Proceedings of the 11th Australian International Conference on Speech Science & Technology, New Zealand, 6-8 December 2006. 287-291.