Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

1.1 Foundational Texts
In order to gain some form of exegetic handle on the concepts of face
and facework, Tracey (1990) divides extant research into two main camps.
Socio-linguistic based 'politeness theory approaches' (stemming mainly from
Brown and Levinson [1987]), and a cluster of 'socio-psychological approaches'
(stemming largely from the work of Goffman [1967])2. Similarly, Metts (1997)
reviews face and facework under the rubrics 'Goffman's Model' and 'Politeness
Theory'. Likewise, I will employ a similar organisation here, albeit in a way
pertinent to this particular study. Before addressing these two paradigms
though, some brief mention must be made of the cultural provenance of the
concept of face, namely, early Asian writings.
Although enjoying current favour amongst discourse analysts, face is not
a 'new` concept. It can in fact be traced back as far as the early part of the last
century (e. g. Hu 1944; MacGowan 1912; Smith 1894; Yang 1945). These early
writings were primarily concerned with oriental conceptual isations of face,
particularly the Chinese notion, and are best exemplified by Hu's (1944)
systematic exposition of the concept. Hu identified two essential criteria by
which face should be considered in Chinese society: 'mien-tzu'- essentially the
success and reputation achieved through personal effort; and 'lien' - essentially
the respect for and confidence in moral integrity of all members of that
community. Both aspects informed the day-to-day conduct of individuals. Lien
was regarded as central to the individual's claims to be a decent, honest, moral
member of society. Immoral or dishonest acts, or a lack of circumspection and
considerateness extended to others could result in the disapproval,
condemnation or ridicule of the wider cultural group. Consequently, this could
lead to the individual losing lien to varying degrees and ultimately humiliation
and disgrace to the point where the individual might be unable to function as a
normal member of that society. Mien-tzu was seen to have a wider variety of
meanings, and could refer to both self-presentational aspects (the outer
appearance of a person, the self as projected in face-to-face interaction) as well
as an individual's social status. Although the consequences for one's self were
not regarded as severe as losing lien, like lien, awareness and orientation to
mien-tzu informed both the conduct of he self and the considerate shown to
15