Примењена лингвистика у част Ранку Бугарском - Језик у

JEZIK U UPOTREBI / LANGUAGE IN USE
Botched apologies are often tied to politicians’ faux pas.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown apologised ‘profusely’ after being caught
on a live microphone pinned to his shirt calling a woman who spoke to him on the
campaign trail ‘bigoted’, according to the Guardian.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/04/28/a_botched_apology.html
They are often encountered in the Montenegrin cultural script as midway between
a face-saving strategy and being courteous. Such an apology was a case
study where the exact wording of the elaborate IFID was: “You want an apology?
Here it is and dress your harm with it” (Perović 2006). As a post-event in a personal
exchange it can be taken as botched. In the fuzzy or scalar understanding of
apologies this category is lower in force than common ritualistic apologies. But
we hold Table 6 to be true with regard to botched apologies:
Table 6. Botched apologies
1. IFID Kompenzatorna fraza +
2. FTA –
3. IF pro forma
4. Dispreferred first +
5. Mortification +
6. In one’s own name +/–
7. Negative politeness +
8. Felicity condition +
They are botched or ritualistic but they should be substantive. There is mortification,
it addresses somebody’s negative face, and there are definitely felicity conditions
for it. Yet, being botched, these apologies are extended pro forma.
6. PUBLIC APOLOGIES. Some instances of botched apologies are at the
same time a kind of public apology. Public apologies are a special kind of speech
act and deserve to be analyzed as a special category. We included them with
the ritualistic type of apology because most of them lack a high degree of FTA
despite their being closely related to power, distance and imposition. Presidents,
prime ministers and high church officials make these statements, but not in their
own name. That diminishes the personal dimension of power, relativises distance
as a category of (interpersonal) hierarchy, and lessens imposition on the side of
191