Brown and Levinson’s (1987) typology of politeness strategies is based on the basic wants of a model person (MP). Their concepts of face and positive and negative politeness have been...Show moreBrown and Levinson’s (1987) typology of politeness strategies is based on the basic wants of a model person (MP). Their concepts of face and positive and negative politeness have been groundbreaking in the fields of pragmatics and intercultural communication. However, their claim of having developed a universal model has been refuted by many scholars (Bargiela-Chiappini 2003; Watts 2003; Hill et al. 1986; Matsumoto 1988; Nwoye 1992; Mao 1994). In this paper, I use a contrastive language guide by Baxter and Baxter (2011) to attempt to analyze [1] how their pragmalinguistic advice relates to Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness; [2] what influence the sociological variables have had on Baxter and Baxter’s choice of politeness strategies that are incorporated with face-threatening acts (FTAs); and [3] what the key underlying cultural differences are between the Dutch and the British in their choice of politeness strategies. The results of this study indicate that the pragmalinguistic advice relates to Brown and Levinson’s theory by using positive and negative politeness strategies when an FTA is incorporated into an utterance. Furthermore, sociological variables do play a significant role in the selection of politeness strategies, as they adhere to the discernment principles of their respective cultures. The key difference between the Dutch and the British is found in the sociological variable Low context communication.Show less
