Investigation #7 Analyzing politeness

Here is a conversation of my two workmates- a senior lecturer (Miss K) and a part-time tutor (Nicola):

1 Miss K: Hey Nicola, I just checked the marked paper,
2 there seems to be some miscalculation for Jeremy and Jasmine's
3 papers.

4 Nicola: Oh really? I'm sorry for that.
5 Should I double-check the paper all over again?

6 Miss K: Nah.. it's alright. I've made correction for both of them.
7 By the way, know the calculation can be quite complicated.
8 Maybe you can pay more attention to the mark different parts
9 carry,it makes my head ache.


10 Nicola: Sure,sure! You're right.
11 I misread that all the questions of partB carries 4 marks each,
12 just like partA.
13 I should go double-check the whole pile.
14 I will be more careful.
15 Thanks for your reminder.

16 Miss K: Haha, work hard together!
17 All teachers here are bombarred by numbers instead of
18 alphabets...

As shown in the above conversation, the central message that Miss K tried to convey is to criticize the accuracy of Nicola's marking; which is a face threatening act to Nicola. There might be a greater desire for Miss K to maintain face for both of them than to be efficient or urgent, therefore, she tried to minimize the FTA by using the following politeness strategies.

In order not to threaten the positive face of Nicola, Miss K did the criticism 'with redressive action'. First of all, she used certain negative politeness strategies. In line 2, she pointed out the mistake made by Nicola indirectly. Instead of accusing her of deducting extra mark from the students, she avoided personalized words such as 'I' or 'you' and said 'there seems to be...'

To reduce the weight of imposition of the fault to Nicola, Miss K also used a number of positive politeness strategies. As shown in line 7-9, we can see that Miss K tried to portray herself as one of the victims under the complicated marking system and then indirectly drew Nicola's attention to the point that Nicola mistook every part carries the same mark of the paper. At the end of the conversation (line 16-8), she encouraged Nicola to work hard together with all the staff and stressed that everyone was under the same harsh condition. This can help Miss K show her understanding and sympathy, as well as to create an in-group identity for Nicola.

As for Nicola, her apology (line 4) might threaten her positive face; and in her later conversation, she adopted some positive politeness strategies. She first approved what Miss K said was right (line 10) and gave reason for her mistake (line 11-2). Other than offering to do something to make up for her fault (line 13), she also promised that she would be more careful (line 14).

This is not a rare situation in my investigation site. Whenever the junior staff make a mistake, the senior will use this approach to clarify the issue. With greater power and with the existence of social distance, senior staff tend to use negative politeness strategies to respect the junior and avoid threatening their face without redress. They sometimes use positive politeness strategies to get the junior involved in the group; it might also be a way for them to prevent themselves from creating an overt power distance. As for the junior staff, they often use the positive politeness strategies to show that they have common ground with the senior- to work their best for the students.