Page 171 - Silence in Intercultural Communication

158 Silence in Intercultural Communication

19 successes with French and German, (0.2) and
20 then later Japane:se, was (.) precisely
21 using film. (0.5) and it’s come late to some
22 other languages = you were gonna say
23 but (.) I'm sorry,=
-> 24 Tamara: =Ahm yeah I- I understand like cause I’ve
25 been studying Greek for many many many many
26 years since (.) you know kindergarten, and
27 uni,(0.7) but- um (0.4) uh I just don’t
28 know okay we have to implement new
29 strategies in order to get (0.2) you know,
30 candidates to continue the language, ·hhh
31 but I think it’s (0.4) it- it varies from
32 >subject to subject< cause once you get to
33 >year eleven and twelve for Greek< it’s more
34 content based. ·hh I don’t know how >you
35 will be able to< introduce it.=
36 Lect: =(Right/But),
-> 37 Tamara: and I don’t know how students would
38 react. (0.4) I don’t know if it’s such a
39 difference?
In the excerpt above, it is interesting to see Tamara perform the FTA of making a
staged critical comment with redressing politeness strategies. She shows approval
by saying “yeah I- I understand” in line 24, being positively polite, and then indi-
rectly expresses her doubt by hesitantly saying “but um …I just don’t know” (lines
27 to 30, being negatively polite), before gradually getting to her disagreement
“but I think it’s…it varies from subject to subject” (lines 31–32; negatively polite);
and “I don’t know if it’s such a difference?”(lines 38 to 39; negatively polite). This
type of staged critical comment was also performed by other Australian students.
Here we can see the tension between the need to perform FTA for the practical
goal of classroom participation and a need to maintain the lecturer’s face.
In her study on politeness in Greek high school classrooms, Pavlidou (2001)
finds “minimal politeness investments” in teacher-student interaction (p. 129),
and explains that, because of the goal-orientedness of classroom activities, “certain
acts that would be very face threatening in another setting are less so in classroom
[sic]” (p. 130). In the Australian university context, criticism and disagreement,
which are highly face-threatening in other settings, are performed with staged
politeness strategies by Australian students, and lecturers are likely to perceive
such behaviour as an indicator of academic competence rather than as a threat to
the lecturer’s face.