한국 사회문화 기반의 공손성 이론 제안

이혜용 한국어의미학회 2022 한국어 의미학 Vol.78 No.-

This study raises questions about whether Brown and Levinson's politeness theory is universal, and whether their theory can explain the politeness phenomenon in Korean language. This paper proposed a politeness theory suitable to explain the politeness phenomenon in Korean. To this end, based on actual language data, the concept of face, which is the core of politeness theory, was set as ‘family-centeredism’. In addition, according to the hierarchical status of the relationship, the types of politeness in the Korean language are divided into two categories: 'conventional politeness' and 'strategic politeness'. This study is significant in that it is an attempt to review Brown and Levinson's theory from a critical point of view, and to propose a theoretical framework that can adequately explain the phenomenon of Korean politeness.

영어와 한국어의 정중성 활용 방안

양용준 한국중앙영어영문학회 2014 영어영문학연구 Vol.56 No.2

The aim of this paper is to search and suggest the practical usage device on politeness of English and Korean. Politeness is a kind of activity for good manners and it makes our society friendly and live. If someone talks with each other through politeness, their speakings are friendly and good communication activities. When they communicate with each other through politeness, a kind of good manners, they can understand each other well and easily. We have a concept of politeness although it is conscious or unconscious thought. English and Korean have some practical usage devices about politeness. First, it is a cultural difference between Korea and America. America is a linear social structure and Korea is a hierarchical social structure. Second, we can say it at the speaker’s and hearer’s consciousness structure. So, we have to use language with a conscious or nonconscious politeness. Third, we are able to find it at the difference of educational levels. People of higher educational levels use good manners through politeness when they talk, however, people of lower educational levels talk with slangs and use bad manners through non-politeness when they talk. Fourth, we can say it at our living habits. In general, people using politeness are diligent, kind, kindhearted and friendly. But people not using politeness are lazy, non-conceptual, wasteful, unkind. Fifth, we can find and say it at the difference from family members. Large family members are kind, kindhearted and talk with good manners but, generally, nuclear family members are less kind, kindhearted, friendly, diligent than large family members. In conclusion, when we talk about the difference of politeness and practical usage device on politeness of English and Korean, Korean is more polite language than English language. Politeness is very important manner, so we have to keep on using politeness through good ways when we talk to each other.

언어 표현의 조합을 통한 공손성 조절 교육

조미현 ( Cho Mi Hyun ) 서울대학교 국어교육과 2023 先淸語文 Vol.52 No.-

Politeness is based on a culture of language etiquette, so far, it has been dealt with in educational studies for foreign Korean learners. Native language learners know how to use polite expressions as a way to care for listeners, and have the potential ability to use them as an expression method that reveals various degrees of politeness. Therefore, this paper intends to propose a politeness control education that shows that various language expressions that realize politeness can be used together, resulting in a variety of levels of politeness. This paper is focusing on the polite expression especially in the request speech that requires more politeness. Politeness is the subject of expression control education in that it is judged by relative standards, not a fixed entity. The types and semantic functions of major polite expressions were summarized as linguistic resources for use in expression control education. Based on this, the reality of education related to polite expression was investigated and the reason why politeness control education was necessary was examined. As an example of visually representing the regulation of politeness, the politeness scale was presented, and the range of politeness was established by complexly considering various context factors on the scale. This paper introduces various combinations of language expressions, and provides a platform for finding and applying appropriate expressions in various contexts of language life.

정중성의 의미와 쓰임에 관한 연구

양용준 ( Yang Yong-joon ) 대한영어영문학회 2009 영어영문학연구 Vol.35 No.3

This paper is to survey and analyze the meaning and usage of politeness. For that, I studied and analyzed the meaning and usage of politeness in Korean, English and Jeju Dialect. Generally speaking, many people know the meaning of politeness in Korean and English. Specially Korean people acted with politeness but didn’t know the meaning and usage of politeness. Politeness is an important rule to guide the whole communication, not just local and unessential parts in every life. There are two meanings of politeness: the conceptual meaning and the mental(psychological) meaning. The conceptual meaning of politeness is general meaning and the mental(psychological) meaning is the internal and mental meaning of a person. These two meanings are very important in interpersonal communication. Like this, politeness is a very important factor. However, middle and high school students in Jeju don’t know the meaning of politeness correctly, but university students know the meaning of politeness well. Many Middle and High school students don’t know and act with politeness but University students know and act with politeness. So, in this paper I analyzed the meaning & usage of politeness in their communication. In conclusion, they didn’t know the meaning of politeness and didn’t use the politeness correctly. (Jeju National University)

Politeness의 다양(多樣)한 재검토(再檢討)

조영호 한국일본근대학회 2014 일본근대학연구 Vol.0 No.45

지금까지 연구되어온 다양한 politeness대한 개념을 재 고찰하고, 그 문제점을 명확히 제시한다. 먼저 Brown and Levinson(1987)의 politeness이론에 대해 소개하고, 그 개념과 politeness에 대한 이분법이 실제 담화에 적용할 때 일어날수 있는 이론적인 애매함과 문제점을 지적한다. 그리고 사회적 규범으로서의 관점에서 politeness현상을 파악하여보면 특정종류의 발화행위에 의존해 버려 언어중심주의에 빠져버릴 위험성이 있음을 지적한다. 또 politeness현상에 대한 회화의 원칙으로서의 관점은 효과적으로 담화를 성립하는 것에는 도움이 되나 담화에 있어서 회화참가자간의 face의 주고받음이 결여되어 있음으로 담화의 목표와 메시지의 전달과 같은 담화의 모습을 명확히 파악하는데 문제점이 있음을 지적한다. This research reappraises the hitherto examined diverse notions of politeness, and then suggests the problems embedded in them. First of all, it introduces the theory of politeness developed by Brown and Levinson (1987), and criticizes the theoretical ambiguity of, and ensuing problem with, the way in which their notion of politeness and its innate dichotomy are applicable to our actual (everyday) conversations. And this research also points out that the analysis of the phenomenon of politeness from the perspective of social norm might be able to fall into linguistic centrism by relying much on certain types of verbal performance. Furthermore, while the phenomenon of politeness seen from the perspective of conversational rules might be helpful in enabling our (daily) conversations more effectively, it lacks reciprocal face-to-face interactions between or among those who participate in those conversations; this perspective of seeing the phenomenon of politeness seems problematic in terms of fathoming the overall shape/appearance of a conversation, such as its main purpose and its delivery of message.

한국어 화행에서 공손성의 실현 양상

김서형(Seo Hyeong Kim) 한국어학회 2013 한국어학 Vol.61 No.-

This study suggests that politeness and honorific should deal with different linguistic category. There are another suggestions. One is that politeness is influenced expecially by intonation than any other factors. The other is that honorific expressions become to reduce but politeness expressions increase in usage. Politeness expressions can achieve recognition as the thing of language form and the thing of comprehension/interpretation from the discourse. There are many former studies about the polite expressions by language forms. However there are another polite expressions by language forms such as conjuncture, reminder markers, quotation, question, objectiveness and so on. Sometimes, direct expressions convey deeper politeness than indirect expressions. It is difficult to stabilize the politeness of utterance in the speech act. The reason is that it is to objectify the degree of politeness. Additionally, there are reliance factors of utterance situations. Politeness by sentence propositions presents more effective than the one by language forms. When intention of speakers directly show up, the politeness of it lay on the effectiveness to bring down the politeness than any other politeness devices.

공손성과 관련성 이론

정혜인(Chong, Hyein),이상철(Lee, Sangcheol) 국제언어문학회 2017 國際言語文學 Vol.- No.38

공손성은 그 사회의 공손성에 대한 기대수준에 얼마나 부합되는 발화를 하느냐로 결정된다. 관련성 이론의 입장에서 보면 상대의 발화가 자신의 공손성에 대한 기대와 다르게 이루어지면 이는 청자의 인지적 환경을 변화시켜 관련성 있는 정보가 되고 청자는 그것이 주는 부가적 의미를 추론하게 된다. 화자가 의도적으로 공손성을 전달하고자 하는 경우 공손성에 관한 정보는 언어적 형태로 전달될 수 있고 이것은 발화 자체의 의미를 해석하는 과정에 해당되므로 함축이 아닌 외축으로 분석해 볼 수 있다. 특히 공손성이 발화에 직접적으로 전달되는 경우 이를 통해 화자가 어떤 태도로 발화하고 있는 가를 추론할 수 있게 해 주므로 상위 외축 속에 반영된다고 할 수 있다. 적극적, 소극적 공손 전략을 사용한다거나 헤지 표현이나 경어법을 사용하여 상대가 가지고 있는 공손성에 대한 기대를 어긋나는 발화를 하는 경우에도 청자는 이를 통해 화자의 공손성의 정도를 관련성 있는 정보로 여기고 이를 통해 화자가 전달하려는 바를 추론하게 된다. 이처럼 공손성이 상위 외축을 통해 전달된다고 본다면 청자가 “너나 잘하세요”같이 호칭과 종결어미의 공손성의 불일치에서 오는 특별한 뉘앙스를 해석하는 과정을 보다 잘 이해할 수 있다. In a framework of RT, politeness can be accounted for as other kind of linguistic stimulus. If information about politeness contained in the utterance meets the expectation of politeness of a hearer in the situation where conversation takes place, the information does not bring any particular cognitive effects and is not considered to be relevant to the hearer. However, if politeness conveyed by the utterance does not satisfy the expectation of politeness of a hearer, it is regarded to be relevant information and the hear finds interpretation of the information. Politeness was traditionally thought to induce implicature but when politeness is conveyed on record, politeness phenomena such as positive/negative politeness strategies, phatic expressions, hedge, and ending particle explicitly show how much a speaker wants to reveal his attitude about politeness. Therefore politeness revealed in the utterance itself contributes to the higher-level explicature, which is a relevance-theoretic term containing other explicatures and expressing speech acts or propositional attitudes of speakers. In case of Korean language, there are diverse linguistic tools to express politeness, so if degree of politeness which a pronoun or a vocative shows in the utterance is different from that of ending particles, the information about politeness of the utterance gives rise to great cognitive effects to hearers and is regarded to be relevant.

Лексико-грамматические основы категории вежливостив русском и корейском языках

Khan N. Ch.(Хан Н. Ч.) 충북대학교 러시아 알타이지역 연구소 2020 러시아학 Vol.- No.21

В данной работе изучаются личные местоимения ты и Вы в аспекте выражения вежливости. Вежливость рассматривается как коммуникативная категория, имеющая в различных культурах разное содержание. Роль личных местоимений 2 лица ед.ч. в двух сопоставляемых языках различна. Так, местоимения 2 лица являются основными показателями двух форм вежливости русского языка: неформальной (на ты) и формальной (на Вы). Личные местоимения 2 лица в корейском языке не указывают на формы/степени вежливости, но являются средствами выражения вежливости. Показано, что личные местоимения 2 лица в русском языке имеют отношение к «обращению» как социально-этикетный показатель, выражающий и отношение говорящего к собеседнику (ближе-дальше) и их социальные роли (выше-ниже, старше-младше) в обществе. При этом в корейском языке формы вежливости подразделяются на официальную или неофициальную, что говорит о том, что в корейском языке вежливость носит социальный характер и зависит от ситуации общения (официальной или неофициальной). В противопоставлении с корейской вежливостью прагмалингвистическое значение русских форм вежливости имеет коннотацию близости (или фамильярности) в форме на ты и дистанцирования (или выражения уважения) в форме на Вы, в то время как корейские степени вежливости имеют основные различия в проявлении различного уровня уважения или неуважения. Сопоставительный анализ местоимений 2 лица единственного числа в двух языках показал, что личные местоимения и структурно, и функционально, и семантически имеют различия. Структурные различия заключаются в том, что местоимения в корейском языке, в отличие от местоимений русского языка, являются именами и включаются в категорию знаменательных слов. Функциональное различие состоит в том, что местоимения русского языка, показывают степень вежливости и употребляются в различных формах вежливости (на ты и на Вы). Семантико-языковой аспект категории вежливости опирается на лексико-грамматическую основу, которая в корейском языке представлена грамматической системой вежливости, а в русском языке системой личных местоимений «ты» и «Вы». This paper presents research on subject pronouns such as “Ty” (You) and “Vy” (polite form of You) from the perspective of expressing politeness. Politeness is explored as a communicative category, which has various connotations in different cultures. Second person singular subject pronouns have different roles when comparison is drawn between the two languages. For instance, second person subject pronouns are indicators of two forms of politeness in Russian such as informal and formal when addressing somebody using “Ty” and “Vy” respectively. Second person subject pronouns in the Korean language do not indicate forms or degrees of politeness, but they are the means of expressing politeness. It is presented in the paper that second person object pronouns in Russian are related to “terms of address” as an indicator of social etiquette and the attitude of a speaker towards an interlocutor (close versus distant) as well as their social roles in the society (superior vs inferior, elderly vs young). Meanwhile in the Korean language forms of politeness are divided into official and unofficial, which implies that politeness in Korean is social in nature and depends on the communicative situation (formal or informal). In contrast with Korean politeness, pragmalinguistic meaning of politeness forms in Russian have the connotation of proximity, closeness (or familiarity) and distancing (or showing respect) when the subject pronouns “Ty” and “Vy” are used respectively. Yet, Korean degrees of politeness have major differences to show various levels of respect or a lack of it. Comparative analysis of second person singular pronouns in both languages showed that subject pronouns have differences from the perspective of structure, semantics and function. As for structural differences, pronouns in Korean compared to Russian pronouns, are included into the category of content words. The functional difference is that pronouns in Russian indicate a degree of politeness and are used in different forms of politeness (“Ty” and “Vy”). Semantic and linguistic aspect of a politeness category relies on the the lexical and grammatical framework, so in Korean it is a grammatical system of politeness, whereas in Russian it is a system of subject pronouns such as “Ty” and “Vy”. Lexical and grammatical features of the two languages compared in this work show that politeness in the Russian language is interpersonal in nature, it indicates the formal and informal nature of communication, which is expressed through strategies used by communicators to become either close or distant. In the Korean language politeness is social in nature and depends on the level of formality of a particular communicative situation.

Different politeness strategies in requests affected by experience of studying abroad

원경미 한국영어교과교육학회 2012 영어교과교육 Vol.11 No.1

This study investigated the differences between English learners who have been lived in English-speaking country for over a year and English learners who have studied only in Korea in their awareness and production of politeness strategies under diverse situations and influenced by social and psychological variables. Thirty 6th grade elementary students were asked to respond to twelve situations in which they would like to carry out requests in polite ways, “Politeness Awareness” questionnaire. And they also participated to provide politeness production through Discourse Completion Test,“Politeness Production” test. The findings of the "Politeness Awareness"suggest that students of both groups selected more polite strategies in distant situations and less polite ones in close situations. However, the results of the “Politeness Production” reveal that two groups differ from each other in producing polite request strategies. It can be predicted that one of two groups does not know enough to use politeness strategies in diverse situations even though one has a general sense of the use of politeness. Nevertheless,students of both groups used the “Can you...?” strategy as the most polite one for the various requestees in most situations. Accordingly, the study concludes that learners of English need explicit instruction in politeness as well as in activities that involve raising pragmatic awareness.

한국어 공손 화용교육의 학습 단계별 학습 내용과 교육 방안

문금현 한국어의미학회 2018 한국어 의미학 Vol.61 No.-

Taking notice of politeness, which is central to Korean pragmatic education, this paper suggested the educational contents of politeness pragmatic expressions according to learning levels, and discussed about specific learning methods. This was based on findings from the analysis Korean textbooks, a questionnaire survey of teachers and learners, and the analysis of the learners’ errors. First, at the beginning level, pragmatic education about basic request and refusal expressions and education about hedges as well as education about grammatical honorifics should be conducted. At the intermediate level, pragmatic education about general address terms derived from titles of authority and kinship terminologies, the politeness of suggestive form ‘-haeyo’ style as well as the aspects of politeness displayed at non-pragmatic levels and the definite perception on the concept of politeness should be conducted. In the learning, it is required to compare differences between a case where a request or a refusal expression is made directly and a case where a request or a refusal expression is made indirectly and politely, and to compare step-wise differences of request and refusal expressions that exist according to the degrees of politeness. At the advanced level, education about a high level of honorific vocabulary or pragmatically polite extraordinary expressions should be carried out. As for methods for politeness pragmatic education, it can be suggested that the pragmatic generative mechanisms of polite expressions(differences between honor and politeness, between absolute politeness and relative politeness, between formal politeness and informal politeness, the important role of hedges) should be recognized, and that education about linkages between non-pragmatic levels(grammar, vocabulary) and the pragmatic level, and the linkage between pragmatic education and politeness pragmatic education should be conducted.