Примењена лингвистика у част Ранку Бугарском - Језик у

JEZIK U UPOTREBI / LANGUAGE IN USE
In this example person B does not accept any responsibility for somebody’s absence
to offer I am sorry as a compensatory phrase of apology. Here there is no
reason to apologise and person B does not take any blame for any misbehaviour
done. There is no harm, in fact. Tannen (1994) identified this kind of ritualistic
apology as especially frequent in women.
Similar, yet very different is the following example:
(18) I am sorry! But you don’t know what you are talking about!
This but-preface can be seen as preparation for something that can be construed
as offence (cf. Lakoff 2003).
(19) I am sorry, but you are not quite yourself today.
(20) I am sorry, but I must tell you that you are crazy.
The question is what could be the felicity conditions for the above examples to
constitute apologies. Obviously, they are nonexistent.
This can be gender-dependent (Baker 1975), or else a more general signal
that an apology is to follow.
Table 8. Apologies that are not
1. IFID +
2. FTA –
3. IF no acknowledgement of misbehaviour
4. Preferred first +
5. Mortification –
6. In one’s name/someone else’s +/–
7. Negative politeness +/–
8. Felicity condition –
Concluding remarks
The general formula of apology turned out to be sensitive enough for ritualistic
apologies. Its eight parameters encompassed most of the pragmatic and discursive
categories relevant for such analysis. The analysis demonstrated that our
initial division into substantial and ritualistic apologies on the basis of the low
level of FTA proved correct. Several conclusions emerged. First, Montenegro
cherishes ritualistic politeness in its many modes and forms, and we would dare
say that it is more prevalent in conversation than substantive apologies. Second,
195