36.2187, Reviews: Chinese Politeness: Rong Chen (2023)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-36-2187. Wed Jul 16 2025. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 36.2187, Reviews: Chinese Politeness: Rong Chen (2023)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Valeriia Vyshnevetska
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Mara Baccaro, Daniel Swanson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Helen Aristar-Dry <hdry at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 16-Jul-2025
From: Xuan Li [jxaa069851 at hotmail.com]
Subject: Sociolinguistics: Rong Chen (2023)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/35-583

Title: Chinese Politeness
Subtitle: Diachrony, Variation, and Universals in Politeness Theory
Publication Year: 2023

Publisher: Cambridge University Press
           http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics
Book URL: https://cambridge.org/9781009281188

Author(s): Rong Chen

Reviewer: Xuan Li

SUMMARY
Chen’s (2003) Chinese Politeness is insightful to the field as it
introduces an extended model of politeness based on Brown and
Levinson’s (1987) theory, called B&L-E. The book offers a rich and
comprehensive exploration of politeness from multiple perspectives
including synchronic and diachronic analysis and cross-cultural
comparisons among different countries (e.g., America, Singapore,
China, Japan, Korea and Vietnam). It offers valuable resources for
scholars and students interested in politeness studies, particularly
within the context of Chinese culture. The book contains nine
chapters, addressing a wide range of topics, such as the significant
role of politeness in pragmatics, the influence of Confucianism on
Chinese politeness, the dual faces in the concept of Chinese face, and
the evolution and applicability of the B&L-E model.
EVALUATION
Chapter 1 highlights the significant role of politeness within the
field of pragmatics, as well as the contributions of Chinese
politeness to this research domain. Specifically, it exemplifies the
centrality of politeness as a mitigator of face-threatening acts
(FTAs) in speech acts, as well as its role as a universal social
motive in various discourse studies, conversation analysis, and
language use on the internet. Additionally, the author emphasizes how
Chinese politeness, with its unique linguistic and cultural
characteristics, such as the concept of Chinese face, offers insights
that challenge and refine Brown and Levinson’s (1987) theory of
politeness and contemporary research. Therefore, this chapter clearly
and effectively presents the context of existing politeness research
and positions its discussion within the broader domain of pragmatics.
In Chapter 2, the author effectively explains how the hierarchical
social structure (e.g., government, family and society interaction)
and the societal value of harmony within Chinese culture influence the
formation of Chinese faces and politeness by laying emphasis from the
perspective of Confucianism.The author illustrates the influence of
harmony in social structure (e.g., the relationships between father
and son, and monarch and subject, as well as the virtues traditionally
expected of women) through several important Chinese concepts, such as
the notion of ren 仁, xiao 孝, zhong 忠, xin Trust and jing 敬. These
notions in Chinese culture are based on traditional literature and
provide strong evidence supporting the relationship between the
hierarchical social structure and the societal value of harmony.
However, no further discussion ensues regarding cultural changes in
contemporary Chinese society.
Additionally, the author not only discusses evidence from mainland
China but also non-mainland areas, including Taiwan, Hong Kong, and
Singapore, to support the significance of hierarchy and harmony in
formatting Chinese faces and politeness. However, these areas have
their unique histories, influenced by factors such as ‘large-scale’
immigration and the local government policies. Therefore, whether the
formation of their social structures and cultures is entirely due to
the dominant influence of Chinese culture needs further discussion.
Additionally, the uniqueness of the concept of Chinese face in this
chapter can be further discussed. For instance, in English culture,
when people aim to maintain harmony in relationships and avoid the
offense of direct refusal, it is common to use a conventionalized
expression pattern, starting with a positive statement and then
introducing a contrast or shift in meaning with words like ‘but.’ This
can be seen as a strategy to avoid confrontation and allow the
interactors to save face.
Through various instances of lexemes in Chinese related to face and
politeness, Chapter 3 argues that the concept of Chinese face consists
of two parts: Face 1 (lian) and Face 2 (mian or mianzi). Specifically,
Face 1 refers to aspects of the individual's personal identity such as
morality, and accomplishments. Face 2 means the outward persona or
image perceived by others. The author effectively illustrates how Face
1 and Face 2 interact with each other, influencing social interactions
and others’ perception within the community. Furthermore, within the
Chinese culture, the author uses multiple instances to demonstrates
how Renqing (人情) or qingmian (情面) under hierarchy and harmony
influence the possession, loss, and acquisition of Face 2. The
evidence cited in the chapter primarily comes from works in
Confucianism. However, it is worth noting that from circa 2070 to 221
BCE, Confucianism did not consistently hold a dominant position.
During the Spring and Autumn Period (770 BC–221 BC), multiple
philosophical schools, including Daoism and Mohism, flourished (Zhang,
2021). Therefore, when acknowledging the influence of Confucianism, it
may be worth considering whether these other philosophical schools
share common features with Confucianism that also influenced the
formation of the Chinese concept of face.
Chapter 4 primarily reviews existing models of politeness, such as
Brown and Levinson’s (1987) theory and the Model of Chinese Politeness
(MCP), for explaining Chinese politeness. While discussing their
weaknesses, such as limited applicability in various contexts beyond
‘normal’ ones, the author proposes an updated model based on Brown and
Levinson’s (1987) theory, which is referred to as B&L-E. The author
compares MCP and B&L-E, specifically on the concept of face and
politeness, noting that although these two models are similar in
content, they differ in their theoretical and linguistic explanations.
The key differences are that MCP views politeness as strategies for
maintaining harmony, while B&L-E considers it a means to mitigate face
threats in speech acts. Additionally, MCP is more general and
language-specific, whereas B&L-E focuses on broader, operational
aspects of politeness. However, some instances provided in this book
are derived from research rather than naturally occurring data. To
enhance its applicability and reliability, authentic examples from
individuals’ real-life communication could be used.
Chapters 5 and 6 explore the utility of MCP and B&L-E in explaining
both the synchronic variation and diachronic changes in politeness
behaviors within Chinese culture. Chapter 5 focuses on how these
models account for the consistency and variation in politeness,
emphasizing the crucial role of bystander interventions in conflicts,
which align politeness with moral values to restore harmony and
resolve disputes. Chapter 6 provides a diachronic analysis of changes
in Chinese politeness across three speech events including marriage
rituals, food offering, and compliment responding. It highlights that
despite these changes, they continue to support the validity of MCP
and B&L-E.
In Chapter 7 and Chapter 8, the author well examines that
applicability of MCP and B&L by comparing Chinese politeness with
other different linguacultures including English, Japanese, Korean and
Vietnamese. These testimonies confirm that while disparities exist in
these linguistic structures and cultures, they are superficial rather
than fundamental in nature. Instead, the author believes that the
underlying social values (e.g., face needs, the desire to benefit
others) driving politeness are essentially consistent within these
cultures. Through detailed comparison, these two chapters make a
compelling argument that some universality does exist in politeness
across different linguacultures.
The author in Chapter 9 firstly addresses the current criticism of
Brown and Levinson’s (1987) theory of politeness, focusing on four
main aspects: rationality, individualism, normativity, and dynamism.
Then, the author criticizes the evaluation approach to politeness,
highlighting several deficiencies, such as its limited
generalizability, and failures in fully capturing the complexity and
shifting contexts of social interactions. Instead, the author argues
that the use of the Face Threatening Act (FTA) formula in B&L-E, an
extended version of Brown and Levinson’s (1987) theory, can
effectively account for the dynamism of social interaction through
multiple factors (e.g., power, distance, ranking). Specifically, the
author uses examples of funeral rituals from Chinese and American
cultures to demonstrate that rationality in Brown and Levinson’s
(1987) theory of politeness does not negate the existence of cultural
logics. Rather, from the perspective of B&L-E, Chinese politeness is
fundamentally similar to politeness in other cultures, but with
different surface-level representations.
In all, Rong Chen’s interpretation of the current studies of
politeness is thought-provoking. The argument of the newly proposed
B&L-E is well warranted and understandable. Therefore, it is
recommended for scholars and students interested in politeness
studies. However, the book assumes a certain level of familiarity with
Chinese cultural and other east Asian cultural concepts, as some
discussions involve some culture-specific representations.
REFERENCES
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in
Language Usage. Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, S. (2021) ‘Contention of a hundred schools of thought: The
convergence of the multiple perspectives and purpose of the pre-qin
philosophers’, The Logical Deduction of Chinese Traditional Political
Philosophy, pp. 127–182. doi:10.1007/978-981-16-4376-7_3.
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Xuan Li holds a PhD in Linguistics and has a background in English
teaching at multiple educational institutions. His research interests
include pragmatics and second language acquisition, with a particular
focus on humor, irony, and sarcasm.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List, a U.S. 501(c)(3) not for profit organization:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-36-2187
----------------------------------------------------------