Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T06:13:11.386Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Apologies in New Zealand English1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Janet Holmes
Janet Holmes
Affiliation:
Department of LinguisticsVictoria University of Wellington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The function of apologies is discussed within the context of a model of interaction with two intersecting dimensions – affective and referential meaning. Apologies are defined as primarily social acts conveying affective meaning. The syntactic, semantic, and sociolinguistic features of apologies are described, based on a corpus of 183 apologies. While apology exchanges divided equally between those which used a combination of strategies and those where a single strategy sufficed, almost all apology exchanges involved an explicit apology. An account is provided of the kinds of social relationships and the range of offenses which elicited apologies in this New Zealand corpus.

Apologies are politeness strategies, and an attempt is made to relate the relative “weightiness” of the offense (assessed using the factors identified as significant in Brown and Levinson's model of politeness) to features of the apology strategies used to remedy it. Though some support is provided for Brown and Levinson's model, it is suggested that Wolf-son's “bulge” theory more adequately accounts for a number of patterns in the data. In particular, the functions of apologies between friends may be more complex than a simple linear model suggests. (Apologies, politeness, speech functions, New Zealand English, sociolinguistics, pragmatics)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 1990 , pp. 155 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. (1979). A plea for excuses. In Urmson, J. O. & Warnock, G. J. (eds.), Philosophical papers, 3rd ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press. 175–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, P. J. M. (1988). The dark side of politeness: A pragmatic analysis of noncooperative communication. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Canterbury, Christchurch.Google Scholar
Baxter, L. A. (1984). An investigation of compliance-gaining as politeness. Human Communication Research 10(3):427–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society 13(2): 145–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics 5(3): 196–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonikowska, M. P. (1985). Opting out: The pragmatics of what is left unsaid. Lancaster Papers in Linguistics. No. 32. Lancaster: University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
Borkin, N., & Reinhart, S. M. (1978). “Excuse me” and “I'm sorry.” TESOL Quarterly 12(1):57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Goody, E. N. (ed.), Questions and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 56–289.Google Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R., & Gilman, A. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Sebeok, T. A. (ed.), Style in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 253–76.Google Scholar
Cohen, A., & Olshtain, E. (1981). Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning 31(1): 113–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, F. (1981). Poison to your soul. Thanks and apologies contrastively viewed. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), Conversational routine. The Hague: Mouton. 69–91.Google Scholar
Edmondson, W. J. (1981). On saying you're sorry. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), Conversational routine. The Hague: Mouton. 273–88.Google Scholar
Fraser, B. (1981) On apologising. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), Conversational routine. The Hague: Mouton. 259–71.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in public. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. L. (eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic. 41–58.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, A. D. (1980). Selections and labelling of INSTRUMENTALITIES of verbal manipulation. Discourse Processes 3:203–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. (1984a). Hedging your bets and sitting on the fence: Some evidence for hedges as support structures. Te Reo 27:47–62.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. (1984b). Modifying illocutionary force. Journal of Pragmatics 8:345–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J. (1986a). Functions of you know in women's and men's speech. Language in Society 15(1):1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J. (1986b). Compliments and compliment responses in New Zealand English. Anthropological Linguistics 28(4):485–508.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. (1988). Paying compliments: A sex-preferential positive politeness strategy. Journal of Pragmatics 12(3):445–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J. (forthcoming). Politeness strategies in New Zealand women's speech. In Bell, A. & Holmes, J. (eds.), New Zealand ways of speaking English. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, T. M. (1984). The role of direct and indirect speech acts in social interaction. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Nevada, Reno.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In Gladwin, T. & Sturtevant, W. (eds.), Anthropology and human behaviour. Washington, DC: Anthropological Society of Washington. 15–53.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1964). Introduction: Towards ethnographies of communication. American Anthropologist 66/6, Pt 2:1–34.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (1972). An editorial introduction to Language in Society. Language in Society 1(1):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, D. (1979). Sapir, competence, voices. In Fillmore, C. J., Kempler, D., & Wang, W. S. Y. (eds.), Individual differences in language ability and language behaviour. New York: Academic. 33–45.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. (1974). Norm-makers, norm-breakers: Uses of speech by men and women in a Malagasy community. In Bauman, R. & Sherzer, J. (eds.), Explorations in the enthnography of sneaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 125–43.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. O. (1976). The universality of conversational implicature. Language in Society 5:67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuiper, K., & Haggo, D. C. (1984). Livestock auctions, oral poetry, and ordinary language. Language in Society 13:205–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. T. (1979). Stylistic strategies within a grammar of style. In J. O. Orasanu, M. Slater, & L. A. Adler (eds.), Language, sex, and gender. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 327:53–78.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. (1980). Language and tact. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manes, J., & Wolfson, N. (1981). The compliment formula. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), Conversational routine. The Hague: Mouton. 115–32.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. R. (1978). Expressive illocutionary acts. Journal of Pragmatics. 2:277–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olshtain, E. (1983). Sociocultural competence and language transfer: The case of apology. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury. 232–49.Google Scholar
Olshtain, E., & Cohen, A. D. (1983). Apology: A speech act set. In Wolfson, N. & Judd, E. (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury. 18–35.Google Scholar
Owen, M. (1983). Apologies and remedial interchanges: A study of language use in social interaction. Berlin: Mouton, Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawley, A. (1985). On speech formulas and linguistic competence. Lenguas Modernas 12:84–104.Google Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. W. (eds.), Language and communication. London: Longman. 191–226.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. (1985). Complex illocutionary acts and the analysis of discourse. Lancaster Papers in Linguistics 11. Lancaster: University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
Trosberg, A. (1987). Apology strategies in natives/non-natives. Journal of Pragmatics 11:147–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1983). Rules of speaking. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. W. (eds.), Language and communication. London: Longman. 61–87.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1986). Research methodology and the question of validity. TESOL Quarterly 20(4):689–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1988). The bulge: A theory of speech behaviour and social distance. In Fine, J. (ed.), Second language discourse: A textbook of current research. Norwood, NJ.: Ablex. 21–38.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N., & Manes, J. (1980). The compliment as a social strategy. Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Human Communication 13(3):391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, N., Marmor, T., & Jones, S. (1989). Problems in the comparison of speech acts across cultures. In Blum-Kulka, S., House-Edmondson, J., & Kasper, G. (eds.), Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 174–96.Google Scholar