英漢商務信函中禮貌策略的對比分析

ContentsTOC\o"1-3"\h\uChineseAbstract 2EnglishAbstract 31.Introduction 41.1AGeneralDescriptionoftheStudy 41.2AimoftheStudy 41.3SignificanceoftheStudy 41.4OutlineoftheStudy 52.ASurveyofRelevantLiterature 52.1PreviousStudies 52.2TheoreticalFoundation 73.AComparativeStudyofPolitenessStrategiesinEBCandCBC 103.1TheApplicationofPolitenessStrategiesinEBC 103.2TheApplicationofPolitenessStrategiesinCBC 133.3SimilaritiesofPolitenessStrategiesBetweenEBCandCBC 153.4DifferencesofPolitenessStrategiesBetweenEBCandCBC 164.Conclusion 18References 19英漢商務信函中禮貌策略的對比分析摘要在國際商務溝通中，信函是使用最頻繁的主要工具之一。國內(nèi)外對商務信函的研究大部分是從文體學角度或者從單一信函類別角度，對英漢商務信函中的禮貌策略對比分析還比較少。Brown和Levinson的面子威脅理論提出了四類禮貌策略：積極禮貌策略、消極禮貌策略、直接性禮貌策略及間接性禮貌策略。本文將重點利用Brown和Leech的積極策略和消極策略模型來對英漢商務信函應用情況進行分析并探究中國與西方英語國家在禮貌策略運用是否存在差異，以及產(chǎn)生異同的原因。從對比分析中發(fā)現(xiàn)，差異的原因來源于中西方對人際關系的理解不同和中西方價值觀各有特點。中國崇尚長幼尊卑，西方則倡導人人平等。中國以和諧為主流文化價值觀而西方則追求自我滿足的精神。中西方文化的巨大差異導致了其禮貌策略使用的差異,并且只有充分了解這些差異,人們才能有效地進行國際商務溝通,達到預期的目的。關鍵詞：禮貌策略；英漢商務信函；對比分析A

Contrastive

Analysis

of

PolitenessStrategies

in

English

and

ChineseBusiness

Correspondence

AbstractCorrespondenceisoneofthemostfrequentlyusedmajortoolsininternationalbusinesscommunication.Themajorityofthedomesticandforeignresearchonbusinesscorrespondencearemainlyfromtheperspectiveofstylisticsorfromtheperspectiveofasinglecorrespondencecategory.ComparativeanalysisofpolitenessstrategiesinEnglishandChinesebusinesscorrespondenceisrelativelyfewer.AccordingtoBrownandLeech’sfacethreattheory,fourtypesofpolitenessstrategiesareproposed:positivepolitenessstrategy,negativepolitenessstrategy,directpolitenessstrategy,andindirectpolitenessstrategy.ThispaperwillfocusontheanalysisofthepolitenessstrategiesusedinEnglishandChinesebusinesscorrespondencebasedonBrownandLevinson’spositiveandnegativestrategymodels.ItwillalsoexplorewhethertherearedifferencesintheuseofpolitenessstrategiesbetweenChinaandWesternEnglish-speakingcountriesandthereasonsforthedifferences.Bycomparisonandcontrast,itisfoundthatthereasonsofthedifferenceslieinthedifferentunderstandingofinterpersonalrelationshipbetweenChinaandtheWestandthedifferentcharacteristicsofChineseandWesternvalues.ChinaupholdsseniorityruleswhiletheWestadvocatesequalityforall.ChinatakesharmonyasthemainstreamculturalvalueswhiletheWestpursuesthespiritofself-satisfaction.ThetremendousdifferencesbetweenChineseandWesterncultureshaveledtodifferencesintheuseofpolitestrategiesandonlybyfullyunderstandingthesedifferencescanpeopleeffectivelyconductinternationalbusinesscommunicationandachievetheintendedpurpose.Keywords:politenessstrategies;English

and

Chinesebusinesscorrespondence;contrastiveanalysisIntroduction1.1AGeneralDescriptionoftheStudyPolitenessisanessentialpartofpeople’sdailylifeandisavitalfactorinhumancommunication.Manyexpertsareinterestedinit.Theyhaveexaminedpolitenessstrategiesindifferentperspectives.Appropriatepolitenessstrategiescanbehelpfulfortheeffectiveexchangeofinformationandthetriumphantestablishmentormaintenanceofsocialrelations.Politenessresearchisoneofthemostimportantresearchfieldsinrecentdecades,whichhascapturedpeople’sattention.Politenesstheoryisnotonlywidelyusedinpeople’sdailyconversationandcommunication,butalsocanprovidegreathelpinawiderangeofbusinesswrittendiscoursefields.Theproblemofhowtousedifferentpolitenessstrategiesintarget-orientedbusinesscorrespondencehasarisen.BasedonLeech’spolitenessprinciple,Brown’sfaceviewandLakoff’spolitenessview,thispaperanalyzesthecharacteristicsofpolitenessstrategiesinEnglishbusinesscorrespondenceandChinesebusinesscorrespondence.ThepresuppositionresearchcanprovidesomeguidingprinciplesfortheEBCandCBCwritersfromtheculturalperspectivesoastohelpthemmakepoliteapplicationandimprovetheirlanguageandcommunicationability.1.2AimoftheStudyThepurposeofthestudyistocomparetheuseofpolitenessstrategiesinEBCandCBC.ItexploresthedifferencesbetweentheapplicationofpolitenessstrategiesinEBCandCBC.TheexpectedresultistohelpChineseEnglishbusinessmentoimprovetheirpolitenessstrategiccompetenceinordertoovercometheobstaclesinbusinesscommunication,whichcouldfacilitateeffectivecross-culturalcommunication.Thestudywillanswerthefollowingquestions:Whatarethepolitenessstrategiesinbusinesscorrespondence?WhatarethepolitenessstrategiesgenerallyusedbyCBCandEBCinbusinesscommunication?WhatarethedifferencesintheuseofpolitenessstrategiesinEBCandCBC?ArethereanydifferencesintheuseofpositiveandnegativestrategiesinEBCandCBC?Ifso,whatisit?WhatreasonscanbeputforwardaccordingtotheuseofpolitenessstrategiesinEBCandCBCfromtheperspectiveofcross-culturalcommunication？1.3SignificanceoftheStudyInthewakeofvigorousdevelopmentofeconomyinthe21stcentury,theinternationalanddomestictradeexchangesareincreasinglyfrequent.TheeconomicexchangesbetweenChinaandtheWestarebecomingmoreintense.Businesscorrespondenceisanessentiallinkintradeactivitiesinbusinesscommunication.Businesscorrespondenceismainlyusedforexternalcontactbetweenorganizationsengagedinbusinessorbetweenbusinessorganizationsandcustomerstheyserve.Itisamoreformalwrittenstylewhichismostlyusedtocontactthebusiness,conductbusinessnegotiations,communicatebusinessmatters,etc.Businesscorrespondenceiswidelyusedasacommunicationbridgebetweenbuyersandsellersinsocialbusinessactivities.Communicationstartsfromcorrespondenceandendsatcorrespondence.Therefore,thebusinesscorrespondencewithaccuratelanguageexpression,standardformatandreasonablelayoutoftenplaysadecisiveroleintradepracticeespeciallyinthefinaldecisionofthetransaction.Apolitebusinesscorrespondencecanestablishanexcellentcorporateimageandcreateaharmoniousbusinessinterpersonalrelationship,inwhichthepolitenessstrategyplaysanimportantrole.Astheinternationallanguageintheworld,EnglishisoftenusedininternationaltradeactivitiesthroughEBC.ThroughthecomparativeanalysisofpolitenessstrategiesinEBCandCBC,peoplecanbetterunderstandtheculturalconnotationdifferencesbetweenEnglishandChinese,thesimilaritiesanddifferencesintheuseofpolitenessstrategiesandpourattentionintothedifferencesofpolitenessstrategiesinbusinesscorrespondencesothatpeoplecan“knowyourselfandyourpartner,andneveroffend”incross-culturalbusinesscommunication.Cross-culturalbusinesscommunicationcanachievesubstantivesuccessbyavoidingculturalconflictsintoday’sglobaltradedevelopment.1.4OutlineoftheStudyThisthesisiscomposedoffourparts.Chapterone,Introduction,introducesageneraldescriptionofthestudy,aimofthestudy,needforthestudyandoutlineofthestudy.Chaptertwo,ASurveyofRelevantLiterature,reviewsthestudiesonpolitenessandprovidesdifferentdefinitionsofpolitenessinChineseandEnglishandbusinesscommunication,thenprovidesthetheoriesofpolitenessbetweenChinaandtheWest．Chapterthree,AComparativeStudyofPolitenessStrategiesinEBCandCBC,attemptstoexaminetheuseofpolitenessstrategiesinbothEBCandCBCespeciallypositivestrategyandnegativestrategyandanalyzesthedifferencebetweenEnglishandChinesebusinesscorrespondencefromtheacross-culturalperspective.Chapterfour,Conclusion,presentsthefindingsanddiscussestheimplications．ASurveyofRelevantLiteraturePreviousStudiesPolitenessisacommonphenomenonandithasinfluenceonpeople’sdailylife.Astheworldenteredanewera,thedemandforinternationalcommunicationandcooperationsharplyincreased.Howtobepoliteincommunicationsespeciallyinbusinesscommunicationhasarousedwidespreadattentionandinterestofquiteafewresearchers.HeZhaoxiong(1999)pointsoutthatpolitenesscanbetakenasasocialphenomenon,ameanstoachievegoodinterpersonalrelationship.ChenLintang(1992)saidpolitenessisoneoftheweaponsinthemall.Writingacorrespondencewithoutpayingattentiontopolitenessislikenobulletwhenfighting.Politenessisoneofthemainsocialconstraintsininterpersonalcommunicationanditregulatestheircommunicativebehaviorbyceaselesslyremindingparticipantstoconsiderbothparties’feelingsinthatitisnecessarytoconsiderthefeelingsofeachotherinordertoestablishmutualcomfortandpublicrelations,whichinturnacceleratesandpromoteshumanexchange.Politenessisauniversalactinlanguage.AccordingtotheoriginandflowofpolitenessrelatedtoChineselanguageandculture,GuYueguo(1990),aChinesescholar,putforwardfourpolitenessfeatures:respect,modesty,attitudinalwarmthandrefinement.Therearesimilaritiesanddifferencesintheinterpretationofpolitenessstrategiesindifferentlanguageenvironmentsandculturalbackgrounds.Manydomesticscholarscontinuetostudydeeplyonthetheoreticalbasisofforeignscholars.DaiBinghui(2010)studiestheapplicationofcooperativeprincipleandpolitenessprincipleinEnglishcomplaintlettersundertheguidanceofcooperativeprincipleandpolitenessprincipletheory.XiaChunju(2009)analyzestheformationofrefusalstrategiesandtheinfluenceofcooperativeprincipleandpolitenesstheoryonfiverefusalstrategieswithalargenumberofselectedtexts.XuDongmei(2008)alsostudiestherejectionstrategiesinconflictletters.Yeung(1997)discussesthepolitenessrequirementsinCBCandEBCinHongKong.CaiXian’e’sPolitenessstrategiesinChineseandEnglishBusinessLetters(2003)studiestheapplicationofpolitenessstrategiesinbusinesslettersfromacross-culturalperspective.Westernresearchonpolitenessstrategyoriginatedinthe1960s.Moreandmorescholarshavestudiedfromtheperspectiveofpragmaticsandputforwardmany“politeness”theories,whichlaidthetheoreticalfoundationforpolitenessstrategies.ThefamousBritishscholarLeech(1983)firstproposedthe“PolitenessPrinciple”,whichexplainedtheimportantroleofpolitenessinlanguagecommunication.Theimplementationofthepolitenessprinciplemustfollowsixprinciples:(1)TactMaxim,(2)GenerosityMaxim,(3)ApprobationMaxim,(4)ModestyMaxim,(5)AgreementMaxim,(6)SympathyMaxim.Sincethen,AmericansociallinguistRobinLakoff(1989)hasalsoproposedthreeprinciplesofpoliteness:(1)Don’timpose,(2)providechoices,(3)friendlytreateachother.Accordingtothecorrespondinglanguageandculturalbackground,thetwoscholarsinterprettheprincipleof“politeness”differently,whichshowsthatpolitenessdependsonthedevelopmentoflanguageandculture.In1987,BrownandLevinsonproposedthe“Face-SavingTheory”basedontheconceptof“face”ofGoffman(1959).TheprincipleofpolitenessinLeechissupplementedandimproved.Theybelievedthattheconceptofpolitenessisstrategic.Emphasizingonpolitenessistotrytomaintainthefaceofbothpartiesincommunicationandminimizethethreattothefaceofbothpartiesfromcertaincommunicationbehavior.Yule(1996)used“borrowingpen”asanexampletoelaboratethesefivepolitestrategies.Thespeakeristhesenderandthereceiveristherecipientinbusinesscommunications.Politenessprinciplesandpolitenessstrategiesaretheprimaryconditionsforcommunication，whicharewidelyreflectedinbusinesscorrespondence.EBCandCBCusedifferentpolitenessstrategiesundertheinfluenceofdifferentlanguagesandculturalbackgrounds.SomescholarshavestudiedtheapplicationofpolitenessstrategiesinCBCandEBC.Otherscholars(Chiappini&Harris,1996)havetriedtostudythedifferencesinrequeststrategiesbetweennativespeakersandsecondlanguagelearners,andtoexplorethefactorsthatinfluencethechoiceofstrategies.Forexample,Maier(1992)exploresthepolitenessstrategiesofEnglish-speakingandnon-English-speakingpeopleinbusinesscorrespondence.Pilegaard(1997)explorespolitenessandpolitenessstrategiesinwrittenbusinessdiscoursefromtheperspectiveofwrittendiscourse.Tosumup,greatprogresshasbeenachievedinthecharacteristics,writingandtranslationofbusinesscorrespondencebymanyexpertsandscholarsathomeandabroadundertheguidanceofpolitenessprinciplesandstrategies.ThestudyofpolitenessstrategiesisanewtrendinthestudyofbusinesscorrespondenceinEnglishandChinese.2.2TheoreticalFoundation2.2.1Leech’sPolitenessPrinciple“Politenessisamatterofdegree.Differentkindsanddegreesofpolitenessarecalledforindifferentsituations”(Leech,1983:104).Mostofwhatwesayandanarmyofthecommunicationwehavedependonoursocialrelationships.Variousstrategiesareneededinordertoachieveproperpolitenessinagivensituation.Leech’spolitenessprincipleisanotherinfluentialpolitenesstheory.Leechestablishedhimselfasanotherimportantcontributorofpolitenessresearch.LeechagreedwithGrice’scooperationprincipleframeworkinprinciplebuthesuggestedthatitshouldbepromoted.Grice’s“cooperativeprinciple”and“conversationalimplicature”(Grice,1975:41-58)failstofullyexplainwhypeopledeliberatelyviolatetherulesofdialoguebecausetheyshouldobservethemandwhytheychoosetoexpressthemselvesinaroundaboutwayratherthandirectly.Leechbelievesthatthisisoutofconcernforpolitenessinmostcases.Inhisopinion,politenesshasnothingtodowith“pragmaticprogress”but“achievingsocialgoals”(Watts,1992:7).Forexample,itistheultimategoalofpolitenesstobringthegreatestbenefittothespeakerandthelisteneratthelowestcost.LeechformulatedhisownpolitenessprincipleandmaximsonthebasisofGrice’scooperativeprinciple.HeformedaninfluentialtheoryonpolitenessastheadaptationandexpansionofGrice’sCooperativePrinciplein1983.Leechbelievesthattheprincipleofcooperationisnottheonlyonethatguidesandconstrainshumaninteraction.Theprincipleofcooperationitselfcannotexplaintherelationshipbetweenreasonandpower.Theprincipleofcooperationregulateswhatwesay,whichhelpstoachievesomeassumedspeechgoals.Whiletheprincipleofpolitenesshelpstomaintainthefriendlyrelationshipbetweentheinterlocutors,whichenablesustoassumethattheinterlocutorsarethecooperatorsfirst.Thepolitenessprinciple“rescue”cooperationprinciplehelpstoexplainwhypeopledeliberatelyviolatedialoguemaximsandchoosetoexpresstheminaroundaboutway.ModelinghimselfaccordingtoGrice’scooperationprinciple,Leech(1983)alsoadoptedtheGrice’sframeworkandformulatedaseriesofmaximumandminorvalue.Leachsummarizedthesixprinciplesofpolitenessasfollows:(1)TactMaximMinimizebenefittoselfMaximizebenefittoother(2)GenerosityMaximMinimizecosttootherMaximizecosttoself(3)ApprobationMaximMinimizedispraiseofotherMaximizepraiseofother(4)ModestyMaximMinimizepraiseofselfMaximizedispraiseofself(5)AgreementMaximMinimizedisagreementbetweenselfandotherMaximizeagreementbetweenselfandother(6)SympathyMaximMinimizeantipathybetweenselfandotherMaximizesympathybetweenselfandother(Leech,1983:132)2.2.2BrownandLevinson’sFaceTheoryB&LfollowsGrice’stheoryofcooperationprinciplesandadvocatesthatverbalpolitenessisasupplementtotheprinciplesofcooperation.Theybelievethatverbalcommunicationisessentiallyrationalandclear.Inviewofthis,B&LtriestousetheirtheorytodeviatefromtheprincipleofcooperationSpeechactsprovideaprincipledexplanation(principledreasons).Theypointoutthatanidealmodelperson(ModelPerson)hastwocharacteristics—rationalityandface(BrownandLevinson,1987:58).Identifyandusethemeansthathelptoachievethegoal.Obviously,thetheoryofrationalityadherestothetheoreticalspiritofGrice’scooperativeprinciple.Facereferstothepersonalandsocialneedsofthespeaker.Bothneedsshouldbetakenintoaccountinthecommunicationprocess,whichisembodiedinnegativefaceandpositiveface.AccordingtothedefinitionofB&L,negativefacereferstothebasicrequirementsfortheterritory,thescopeofpersonalactivitiesandtherightnottobeintruded.Positivefacereferstotherequirementthatthecommunicatorwantsagoodandconsistentpersonalimageorpersonality,andisrecognizedandappreciated(BrownandLevinson,1987:61).Inshort,thenegativefaceexpressesthepersonalneedsofautonomyandthepositivefaceexpressesthesocialneedsofapproval.Asthefaceproblemisaprocessforyoutocomeandgo,anyrationaltalkerwilltrytoavoidthebehaviorthatdamagesface,oradoptsomestrategiestominimizethedamage.B&Lbelievesthat(BrownandLevinson,1987:68-70)thespeakerwillchoosethefollowingfivestrategiesaccordingtothedamagecausedbyFTAs(FaceThreateningActs)tothefaceoftheaddressee:BaldonrecordPositivepolitenessNegativepolitenessOff-recordNon-performanceB&Lassertsthatpolitenessinspeechisnotadichotomywithorwithoutdichotomybutacontinuum.Fromstrategy(1)tostrategy(5),theabilitytoregulatetheharmfulnessofspeechactsgraduallyincreasesandthedegreeofpolitenesscontinuestoincrease.Speakersaremoreinclinedtoadoptthelatterstrategieswhentheyareexpectedtobemoreharmful.2.2.3Lakoff’sViewofPolitenessLakoffisthefirstscholarwhousesGrice’sconversationalprincipletoexplainpolitenessandstudiespolitenessfromtheperspectiveofdialoguemaximization.Generallyspeaking,Lakoffregardspolitenessasavoidingoffence.Whenreferringtotheconflictbetweenclarityandpoliteness,shestated:Politenessisusuallyconsideredmoreimportantinaconversationtoavoidoffencethantoachieveclarity.Thismakessense,sinceactualcommunicationofimportantideasissecondarytomerelyreaffirmingandstrengtheningrelationsinmostinformalconversations.(Lakoff,1973:297-298)Lakoff(1973:101-129)suggeststworulesofPragmaticCompetence:a.Beclear.b.Bepolite.Lakoff(1973)arguesthatpolitenessdevelopsinsocietyinordertoreducefrictioninpersonalinteraction.Shebelievesthatifthemessageisobvious,thespeakerwillemphasizetheclarityoftheconversations;ifnot,thespeakerwillgivemoreconsiderationtothesocialstatusofthelistenerandsomeotherfactorsinvolvedintheconversation.Mostofthetime,theclarityoftheconversationissacrificedinordertoachievepoliteness.Basedonthisview,Lakoff(1973)proposedthreeprinciplesofpolitenessfromtheperspectiveofthespeaker:a.Don’timpose.Usedwhenformal/impersonalpolitenessisrequired.b.Giveoptions.Usedwheninformalpolitenessisrequired.c.Makehearerfeelgood.Usedwhenintimatepolitenessisrequired.Shelaterreformulatestherulesofpolitenessasfollows:a.Formality:Keepaloof.b.Deference:Giveoptions.c.Camaraderie:Showsympathy.(Lakoff,1973:101-129)Inshort,Lakoffbelievesthatpolitenesscanavoidoffenceandmaintainaharmoniousrelationshipbetweenthespeakerandthelistenerthroughthelubricantincommunication.Infact,Lakoff’smaximhassomethingtodowithBrown’sandLevinson’sviewoffacialprotection.“Don’timpose”and“giveoption”canberegardedasretainingthenegativeexpressionofthelistenerandthespeaker;ontheotherhand,“makethehearerfeelgood”isrelevanttopositivepoliteness.AComparativeStudyofPolitenessStrategiesinEBCandCBC3.1TheApplicationofPolitenessStrategiesinEBC3.1.1PositiveStrategiesinEBCAsthefirstmeansofapositivestrategy,“claimcommonground”attemptstominimizethedistancebetweenthewriterandtherecipientbyemphasizingastronginterestintheneedsoftheotherparty.Thespecificstrategiesof“commonground”areasfollows:Strategy1:Notice,attendtoH(her/hisinterests,wants,needs,goods)(1)Thanksforyourunderstanding.Pleasekindlyletmeknowwhatyouthink.(2)Weappreciateyourviewsonthepossibilityoflaunchingbusinessventure.(3)Oursavingsaccountspay5%interest.(4)Youwillearn4%interestfromyoursavingsaccount.Thisstrategymeansthatthewritershouldpayattentiontoorfullyconsidertherecipient’sinterests,needsandwishesinordertomaintainagoodfriendlyrelationship.Thiskindofconsiderationfortherecipientisparticularlynecessaryinbusinesscorrespondence.BrownandLevinsonalsocitedtheexampleof“God,youcutyourhair”toshowtherecipient’sattentiontotheaudience.Thewriterusuallyexpressesappreciationandpraiseandadoptsattitudelanguagetoachievethisstrategyinbusinesscorrespondence.Asshownintheaboveexample,complimentsinEBCusuallyproducepositiveeffects,whichhelpstogainagoodimpressionandtrustfromtherecipient,forexample,itcanmaketherecipientfeelsincerebypraisinginanaturalandrationalwaywithappropriatesentencepatternssuchas:thanksfor+doing/thankyouforyourdoingandsoon.Bycomparingtheexamplesof(3)and(4),wecanfindthatthesample(4)ismorepolitethansample(3)byusingyou-languetoshowthewriter’ssincereconcernabouttherecipient’sinterests.You-languemaintainsthepositivefaceoftheotherpartyandconstructsaharmoniousrelationship.Secondly,you-langueembodiesawritingstylewhichexpressesopinionsinapositivewayandshowsanoptimisticattitudewithahappytone.Strategy2:Exaggerate(interest,approval,sympathywithreceiver)Wewouldbeextremelygratefulforanearlyreplyandcanassureyouthatitwillbetreatedinthestrictestconfidence.Iamquitewillingtohavethesurfacereplaced,butIamafraidwewillhavetochargeyouforthematerialsandworkinvolved.Intheaboveexamples,thewritersatisfiestherecipient’sfavoriteneedsandexpressestheirconcernstotherecipientbyexaggeratingtheapprovalinexample(1)andthewillingnessinexample(2)Asaresult,therecipient’spositivefaceissatisfied.Thewritershowshisinterest,approvalandempathyproperly,whichgreatlyreducesthepsychologicaldistancebetweenthewriterandtherecipient.Usingappropriateexaggeratedwordsnotonlymaintainsthepositivefaceoftherecipient,butalsoachievesthegoalofthewriter.Strategy3:Beoptimistic(1)Iamconfidentthatthiswillbeofinteresttoyou.(ZhangLanzhi,2007:32)(2)Weareconfidentthatyouwillappreciatethisinitiativedelivery.(ZhangLanzhi,2007:32)Optimismherereferstothewriter’soptimisminhiscorrespondence.Whenthewriterisoptimisticabouttherecipient’sbehavior,hewillshowhisconfidenceintherecipientandtherelationshipbetweenthem.BrownandLevinsonprovideexamplessuchas“I’msureyouwon’tmindifIborrowyourtypewriter”,“You’lllendmeyourbike,right”andsoon.3.1.2NegativeStrategiesinEBCOnthebasisofBrownandLevinson,“givefreedomofaction”,“dissociatesender/receiverfromact”and“minimizeimposition”arethreelinguisticcategoriestoachievenegativepoliteness.Strategy1:Beconventionallyindirect(1)Couldyoupleasetakemorenoteofourinstructionsinthefuture?(2)Willyoupleasesendmesomeonetopickupthewronglydeliveredgoods?(3)Couldyouchangethepackingsizeaswenoteinthisletter?Theexemplaryverb“could”inthesesentencesindicatesthatthewriteronlyquestionedwhethertherecipientiswillingtosatisfyhimselfratherthanforcingtherecipienttosatisfyhimself.Therefore,therecipientstillhasthefreedomtochoosewhethertofulfillitsoastomaintaintherecipient’snegativeface.Inadditiontotheinterrogativesentenceusedabove,conditionalsentencescanalsoachievethisgoal.Theemergenceof“if”meansthatrecipientshavetherighttomaketheirownchoices.Translatingdirectrequestintoif-clauseisalsooneofthemainwaystomaintainnegativefaceinEBC.Strategy2:MinimizetheimpositionIjustwanttoaskifyoucanextendthevalidperiodoftheLetterofCredittonextmonth.(2)I’msorrytodisturbyou,butwemuststressthatourinspectioniscarriedoutinfullaccordancewiththecontract.Inbothexamples,therecipient’snegativefaceisthreatenedbythewriter.However,theuseoftheword“just”willmoderatethetone,whichavoidsdirectlycollidingwiththerecipient.Therefore,theimposingwordscanonlypartiallyretaintherecipient’snegativeface.Onewaytopartiallysaverecipients’negativefaceistoshowthatthewriterknowstheserequirements,andtakethisintoaccountwhenimplementingfreetradeagreements.Whenusing“but”forsomemitigation,criticismmustbeimplementedintheformofanagreementorpartialagreement.Theeasingwordsbefore“but”pavedthewayfortheemergenceofnegativeinformation.Strategy3:ApologizeWeareverysorryfortheshortage.Itwasmuchourregretthatweheardthegoodsyouorderedwasdamagedatsea.Intheaboveexamples,thewriterindicatesthatheorshehasidentifiedtheinfringementandthewriterhascorrectedthematterbydirectapology.Theabilitytoapologizetoavoidconflictcanmaintaintheidealrelationshipandpromotesolidarityduringtheinteractioninthiscase.Strategy4:GentlypointoutthedebtoftheotherpartyoradmityourowndebttosatisfytheotherpartyWewouldbegratefulforyourearlydelivery.Wewillhavethepleasuretoarrangeeverythingforyou.Accordingtotheexamples,executingthisstrategyrequiresfrequentuseofexpressionssuchas“Iwillbegratefulifyou...”and“Icaneasilydoitforyou”.ThewritercaneasilyresolvetheFTAsbyassertingtotherecipienthisowndebtornotbearinganyoftherecipient’sdebt.Inexample(1),thewriterdirectlyacknowledgesthathehasassumeddebtforearlydelivery,whichisimposeddirectlyontherecipient.Forexample(2),thewritersatisfiestherecipient’srespectwhilemakingtherecipientgrateful.3.2TheApplicationofPolitenessStrategiesinCBC3.2.1PositiveStrategiesinCBCTheChinesepourmoreattentionintotheoverallharmony.Thespiritofunityandcooperationisalsoindispensable.Therefore,thecoreand