Instructions for ispacs 2003 Camera-Ready Manuscript

Journal of Research and Innovation in Language
 
Available online at: 
 
http://ojs.journal.unilak.ac.id/index.php/reila
Vol. 1, No. 3, December 2019, pp. 111-117
114 
himself, and maintain "self-esteem" in public or 
personal situations. In this case, the speaker is usually 
trying to avoid other people being embarrassed or 
making him feel uncomfortable.
Politeness can be done distance or closeness 
socially. In formal conditions, the speaker must speak 
more politely to show respect to listeners. Being 
polite depends on how the speaker uses words or 
clauses to convey ideas to the listener when someone 
interacts with other people its divided being 2 part. Its 
verbal and non-verbal communication. 
In verbal communication If the language 
procedures someone does not comply with social and 
cultural norms, he will get value negative, for 
example, said people who are not polite, arrogant, 
arrogant, selfish, no civilized, even uncultured 
(Muslich, 2006: 2). Verbal behaviour is a crucial 
function, for example, is seen in how speakers express 
a command, must, or prohibition to do something to 
the speech partner, while nonverbal behaviour appears 
from physical gestures accompanying it. The 
successful use of politeness strategies in language 
creates communication effectively. 
For example, the politeness strategy analyzed 
focuses on the speaker in interactional opportunities 
that become available through dialogue. This focus 
choice increases the likelihood of analysis becoming 
more at the participant level, that is, it shows the 
speaker and listener anticipate the interpretation 
combined with the status received from the speaker 
(Markus. M., 2011). Another exciting area of research 
that can be explored will involve the comparison of 
online seminars with those that take place face to face, 
to see if and in what ways politeness strategies differ. 
The result is evidence of the politeness strategies used 
by participants in online interactions that are expected 
to be found in face-to-face conversations. The use of 
politeness strategies by teachers can be intentional 
because teachers, in this position of authority, may be 
aware of the impact of selected/structured features / 
structured linguistic speech on students and meaning 
in conversation. Usually, a student may not pay 
attention to the use of hedges, formula expressions, 
special speech acts and teacher allowances for the 
turn-taking process to occur, but this is perhaps the 
most essential premise where linguistic expressions 
are classified as politeness strategies and used in 
interactions, breaks (Markus. M., 2011). 
Nevertheless, Myers, in his study “
Politeness in 
the scientific text
" (1989) was linked to what Brown 
and Levinson proposed in their book "
Politeness: 
Some universals in language usage
” (1978). Myers 
(1989) pioneers the implementation of the politeness 
methods of Brown and Levinson (1987) in written 
papers and explores the presence of politeness in 
scientific articles. While one of the best-known books 
on persuasion techniques used by Mullholland (1994) 
to reinforce insight beyond the tactics employed in the 
economic text by journalists. She was the first 
person to start compiling effective persuasion 
strategies in communication. In her book, Mulholland 
(1994) provides a list of the collection of the 300 most 
powerful persuasive techniques used in speech or 
communication writing. 
Additionally, she was focused on studying the 
tactics and their strong values beyond the tactics used 
in daily lives (Hamuddin, 2012). Politeness theory has 
various shortcomings and problems that reduce their 
efficiency in success interactive communication 
analysis. Universalism, for example, is not well 
defined by Brown and Levinson's' theories. Also, the 
model is not transparent, whether to include certain 
cultures as well as aspects of cross-cultural 
communication. Besides, facial theory generally 
implies the problem of how to correct defining ideas 
about faces and is a matter of how to limit the threat 
effects of some speech actions and functions. This 
theory has the same shortcomings as those found in 
the 'Cooperative Principles' communication approach.
Brown and Levinson (1978:68) explained that 
actions could damage or threaten people's faces, and 
they are known as face-threatening (FTA) actions. 
FTA can affect the positive or negative face of the 
listener or even the positive or negative face of the 
speaker. The speaker should pursue other techniques 
to reduce the likelihood of harm to the audience or the 
speaker's face. Such tactics are known as "strategies 
of politeness" The idea of politeness technique has 
been created to avoid embarrassing others or making 
it awkward to save the audiences’ "names" in both 
verbal and non-verbal communication. 
Eventually, intending to counteract the unwanted 
effects of FTAs, people have developed a politeness 
strategy which is an easy way to remedy or mitigate 
the risk of hearing. With evidence from three different 
languages, namely English, Tzeltal, and Tamil, 
Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness (1978) 
support their findings on politeness and, most 
importantly, on the universality of face concepts. The 
following sub-sections deal, on the one hand, with the 
concept of politeness and universalism and, on the 
other hand, various critiques or modifications of one 
of the model elements; primarily the concepts of face, 
face-threatening act and the factors which affect the 
production and interpretation of politeness. Brown 
and Levinson said that in social interaction, they 
originated the notion of the Goffman (1963) image.
"Our notion of 'face' is derived from that of 
Goffman and from the English folk term, which ties 
up face notions of being embarrassed or humiliated, 
or 'losing face'. Thus, face is something that is 
emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained 
or enhanced, and must be continuously attended to in 
interaction.

---