Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi

This paper investigates the negative and positive politeness strategies used in the syntactic structures and hedging devices in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi. Studies on politeness in different cultures have received the attention of anthropologists and linguists. This research was based on Brown a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Romina Singh, Kenel Keneshwar Singh, Sakul Kundra
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2024-12-01
Series:Cogent Arts & Humanities
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2024.2424605
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846123093123137536
author Romina Singh
Kenel Keneshwar Singh
Sakul Kundra
author_facet Romina Singh
Kenel Keneshwar Singh
Sakul Kundra
author_sort Romina Singh
collection DOAJ
description This paper investigates the negative and positive politeness strategies used in the syntactic structures and hedging devices in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi. Studies on politeness in different cultures have received the attention of anthropologists and linguists. This research was based on Brown and Levinson’s, Grice’s and Lakoff’s models of politeness strategies. This work is innovative since politeness has not been studied in Fiji Hindi, and is based on recorded natural discourse. Thirty discussions were recorded and translated. The information was coded into several sentence-level classes and, after that examined. In this paper, analysis of six types of hedging devices in the conversation will be presented – subjectivity markers, performative hedges, clausal mitigators, downgraders, proverbs and politeness maxims. Together with this, syntactic strategies such as honorificity in pronominal use, plurality in verbs, use of particles, and syntactic structures in requests will also be presented. The most significant difference found in the analyses is that females tend to use subjectivity markers predominantly. The research however, did not reveal any gender differences in using syntactic strategies. This research may inspire some new ideas concerning politeness strategies across different cultures in order to understand how cultural differences play a role in people’s politeness behaviour in conversations.
format Article
id doaj-art-05f686e6ae0b4893b074a22e6a68dca1
institution Kabale University
issn 2331-1983
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Taylor & Francis Group
record_format Article
series Cogent Arts & Humanities
spelling doaj-art-05f686e6ae0b4893b074a22e6a68dca12024-12-14T07:43:09ZengTaylor & Francis GroupCogent Arts & Humanities2331-19832024-12-0111110.1080/23311983.2024.2424605Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji HindiRomina Singh0Kenel Keneshwar Singh1Sakul Kundra2Department of Language and Literature, Fiji National University, Suva, FijiSchool of Communication, Language and Literature, Fiji National University, Suva, FijiCollege of Humanities and Education, Fiji National University, Suva, FijiThis paper investigates the negative and positive politeness strategies used in the syntactic structures and hedging devices in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi. Studies on politeness in different cultures have received the attention of anthropologists and linguists. This research was based on Brown and Levinson’s, Grice’s and Lakoff’s models of politeness strategies. This work is innovative since politeness has not been studied in Fiji Hindi, and is based on recorded natural discourse. Thirty discussions were recorded and translated. The information was coded into several sentence-level classes and, after that examined. In this paper, analysis of six types of hedging devices in the conversation will be presented – subjectivity markers, performative hedges, clausal mitigators, downgraders, proverbs and politeness maxims. Together with this, syntactic strategies such as honorificity in pronominal use, plurality in verbs, use of particles, and syntactic structures in requests will also be presented. The most significant difference found in the analyses is that females tend to use subjectivity markers predominantly. The research however, did not reveal any gender differences in using syntactic strategies. This research may inspire some new ideas concerning politeness strategies across different cultures in order to understand how cultural differences play a role in people’s politeness behaviour in conversations.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2024.2424605Politenesssyntactic structuressubjectivity markersperformative hedgesclausal mitigatorsdowngraders
spellingShingle Romina Singh
Kenel Keneshwar Singh
Sakul Kundra
Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
Cogent Arts & Humanities
Politeness
syntactic structures
subjectivity markers
performative hedges
clausal mitigators
downgraders
title Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
title_full Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
title_fullStr Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
title_full_unstemmed Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
title_short Negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in Bua Fiji Hindi
title_sort negative and positive politeness strategies in the syntactic structures and hedging devices used in conversation in bua fiji hindi
topic Politeness
syntactic structures
subjectivity markers
performative hedges
clausal mitigators
downgraders
url https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2024.2424605
work_keys_str_mv AT rominasingh negativeandpositivepolitenessstrategiesinthesyntacticstructuresandhedgingdevicesusedinconversationinbuafijihindi
AT kenelkeneshwarsingh negativeandpositivepolitenessstrategiesinthesyntacticstructuresandhedgingdevicesusedinconversationinbuafijihindi
AT sakulkundra negativeandpositivepolitenessstrategiesinthesyntacticstructuresandhedgingdevicesusedinconversationinbuafijihindi