论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】It is proved that teachers’ politeness behavior can highly motivate students’ learning impulse and improve teaching process. Politeness phenomenon in classroom has been broadly discussed and studied； however， there are still no systematic politeness principles that can be reasonably applied into the teaching process. On the basis of the politeness theories and a case study， this paper tries to seek a more reasonable and more efficient politeness principle in EFL classroom.
【Key words】politeness principles； teacher politeness studies； a case study
As we all known， politeness plays a big role in human interaction， which helps to keep the public order and promote the interpersonal relationship. Therefore， politeness phenomenon in different contexts has been broadly discussed and studied. For the past decades， a great number of studies on teachers’ politeness have been carried out， which have proved that teachers’ politeness behavior can highly motivate students’ learning impulse and improve teaching process. Many scholars have certainly made great efforts on seeking the appropriate politeness strategies for English teachers， but there are still many inadequacies and limitations. On the basis of the related previous studies and an analysis of a demonstration English class， this paper tries to explore more reasonable and efficient politeness principles in EFL classroom under the framework of Leech’s and Gu Yueguo’s politeness principles and Brown and Levinson’s politeness theories.
1. Brief Introduction of Politeness Theories
1.1 Leech’s Politeness Principles and Gu Yueguo’s Chinese Politeness Principles
Based on the cases that people occasionally do not observe the Grice’s Cooperative Principle（CP）， Leech puts forward the Politeness Principle （PP） as made up of six maxims as follows： l） Tact Maxim， 2） Generosity Maxim， 3） Approbation Maxim， 4） Modesty Maxim， 5） Agreement Maxim， and 6） Sympathy Maxim[1]. He distinguishes “self” and “other” in his politeness principles， and claims that their relationship is the concern of politeness. “Self” refers to the speaker， and “other”， the hearer. He suggests that the politeness is always a matter of degree and sets up three pragmatic scales： 1） the cost and benefit scale， 2） the optionality scale， 3） the indirectness scale； and two dimensional scales， termed as the power and solidarity scale， or the social-distance scale.
Inspired by Leech’ s politeness principles，Gu formulates his own principles， which is believed to be more adequate and suitable to account for Chinese culture. He concludes that there are basically four essential notions underlying the traditional Chinese conception of Limao： respectfulness， modesty， attitudinal warmth and refinement， which are considered to manifest in many Chinese speech events[2]. Gu further revises his politeness principle and put forwards five politeness maxims： l） The self-denigration and other elevation maxim： denigrate self and elevate others， 2） The address term maxim： address your interlocutor with an appropriate address term， 3） The refinement maxim： self’s behavior to other should meet certain standards， 4） The agreement maxim： efforts made by both participants to maximize agreement and harmony and minimize disagreement， 5） The virtues-words-deeds maxim： minimize cost and maximize benefit to other at the motivational level， and maximize benefit received and minimize cost to self at the conversational level[3]. The two politeness principles share many similarities， but there are also many differences between them. Professor Gu’s politeness theory shows remarkable Chinese characteristics， for he has integrated universal features of politeness and Chinese speech feature together， like the address term maxim. Chinese people pay great attention on using vocatives in communicating， which is regarded as one of the most important way to show our politeness； however， in western countries， using vocatives seems little importance， for they usually address each other with their first name regardless of age， gender or classes etc.
1.2 Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theories
Brown and Levinson’s framework rests upon three basic notions： face， face threatening acts （FTAs） and politeness strategies. They define “face” as “the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself”， and the wants related to politeness are the wants of face[4]. Besides， They argue that face is composed of two basic and paradoxical desires： negative face and positive face. The negative face is the want to be independent， to have freedom of action， and to be unimpeded by others， while positive face is the want to be appreciated and approved of by at least some others[4]. Both the positive and negative face wants should be accounted for in order to be polite in communication.
However， in real communication， there are some acts that speaker must do， yet， by their very nature， to threaten another individual’s wants. Brown& Levinson maintain that many of the acts which people want to perform are intrinsically face-threatening， so called as face-threatening acts （FTAs） [4]. In the process of communication， any rational person will try to avoid those face-threatening acts （FTAs） or will at least minimize the threat through employing face-saving strategies， namely politeness strategies. According to the model suggested by Brown &Levinson，there are five strategies that can be chosen from to deal with a face-threatening-act： 1） “Bald on record”， the most direct approach， which usually happen with people who are very familiar with each other and are very comfortable in their environment， for instance close friends or family members. “Redressive action” is necessary in most cases to reduce the potential face damage of the FTA， including two types： 2） positive politeness strategy and 3） negative politeness strategy. The former is oriented toward the hearer’s positive face wants， while the latter is oriented toward the hearer’s negative face， namely his basic want to claim for his territory and self-determination. 4） “Off-record” is considered as the more polite strategy. The speaker usually hints his needs or expresses his needs equivocally and generally instead of asking for something directly. As the most polite strategy among those five，5） “don’t do the FTA” is to avoid all the possible threat to hearer’ s face. It is a rational choice when the potential FTA is extremely serious， that is， the social distance between participants is too great or the rank of imposition on the recipient is too great [4]. 2. The Significance of Teachers’ Politeness in EFL Classroom
Classroom is a very special setting of politeness context where all activities serve for knowledge transformation. As teachers are generally regarded as controlling most of the structure and content of classroom interaction， their verbal and non-verbal behaviors can have a great influence on the learning taking place in EFL classroom. Many researches on teacher politeness， at home and abroad， show that the application of teachers’ politeness principles directly affects students’ effective learning and can improve teaching quality simultaneously. K. Poraska-Pomasta and H. Pain suggest that cognitive and affective support， which closely related to interpersonal behaviors of the teacher， plays a significant role in students’ successful learning [5]. With the analysis of data collected from some teacher participants， they demonstrate how face could be related to students’ cognitive and affective outcomes in EFL classroom context. Li Chunjing suggests that teachers should take politeness strategies into consideration in order to establish and remain good interpersonal relationship with students and create a favorable classroom atmosphere based on a case study[6]. Fan Chaoqiu and Zhang Xuan examine the effectiveness of the pragmatic application of politeness principles to English language teaching and point out that teacher’s application of politeness strategies could motivate and facilitate the teaching process[7].
Based on the previous studies we can easily get the conclusion that the observation of politeness strategies could stimulate learners’ motivation and create an enjoyable and harmonious atmosphere in class， and hence achieve more effective teaching. Most teachers in the new century have already realized the importance of teachers’ politeness in EFL classroom， as Zhao Wanli’s study proved [8]. She investigates the application of politeness theory to verify the findings about teachers’ feedback in college classroom teaching， which chooses both teachers and students as her subjects and finally concludes that the majority of the teachers （close to87.8%） have certain politeness awareness in their feedback. Consequently， the study about politeness strategies in EFL classroom is very necessary for teachers to understand the significance of their politeness behaviors， which can help us select more reasonable and efficient communicative strategies accurately.
3. On Politeness Principles with a Case Study Followed by Leech’s politeness principles， there are a few scholars who have analyzed some politeness strategies in Chinese college EFL classroom based on their teaching experience. Xiang Yangbo and Li Guifang summarize four politeness principles， that is， to avoid disagreement， to praise adequately and to refine teaching language， etc. [9] Wu Hongling and Liu Hongyu put up four politeness principles applied to feedback phase and the classroom teaching management phase： the maxim of tact， the maxim of approbation， the maxim of agreement and the maxim of sympathy[10]. Their research results are of great significance to the further study， while there are still certain limits to some extent. Therefore， this paper tries to search for more detailed and effective politeness principles with a case study of a college demonstration English class in Lishui University. Politeness principles which can be precisely applied into teaching process would be discussed and explored in five different phases of English classroom teaching.
3.1 Greeting
As the saying goes， “Well begun is half done，” almost every English teacher knows that a good beginning of a class counts a lot to the whole teaching process. If students’ interests can be aroused at the very beginning， it would be much easier to achieve an effective teaching result. In EFL classroom， “good morning/ afternoon everyone”， or “hello everyone” are most frequently used， for most teachers treats greeting as just a cliché. The lecturer here begins his class with “everybody， how are you？” and gets the positive feedback from students instantly. From my point of view， a good greeting can easily shorten the distance between teachers and students and at the same time set up a closer relationship. As we all know， EFL classroom highly requires students’ participation rather than just listening to teachers’ speech； therefore， how to make students relax and be willingly to take part in the discussion seems much more important to improve students’ effective learning. Besides the formal ways of greeting， I think English teachers can choose more casual ones， such as “what’s up！”“what’s going on？”“how are you doing？” or “how are you？” etc. On the one hand， informal greeting can form a friendly atmosphere， which help students feel free to begin with the class； on the other hand， different kinds of greeting can also be regarded as a part of teaching. It becomes easier for students to keep in mind of various ways of starting a conversation with different people. In addition， I think that teachers can do some small talk with students in order to help them get ready for discussion in English， for instance， we can say， “how’s your weekends？” to share some interesting things together； after a holiday， we may say， “ long time on see！ How have you been？”， to exchange different experiences. We can talk about recent news， exercises， TV programs， favorite things and so on. Several minutes of free talk can definitely become an important and efficient aspect of warm up tasks. In a word， I think teachers should set up a harmonious and close relationship with students at the beginning of the class， which can help us to control the flow of the lessons fluently. At this aspect， we can employ the agreement maxim， trying our best to maximize agreement between teachers and students.
3.2 Making orders
As Brown and Levinson’s “face” theory claims， “making order” is one kind of acts threatening to the hearer’s negative face， and all the participants have to maintain other’s face so as to keep a smooth communication. But in EFL classroom， “making order” is an essential part of teaching process， which especially needs teachers to pay attention to the expressive skills. In this demonstration class， the lecturer uses several ways to make requests， such as “let’s have a short interview”， “I’d like you to discuss with your groups”， “would you please turn to the first part？” etc. Obviously， he chooses indirect ways to express his opinion so that the students are much more willingly to accept the order without feeling uncomfortable. During teaching process， teachers need to avoid making orders directly， instead， we can choose suggestive words or some modal verbs to ease the mood， like “would you like to read the first paragraph？”， “if you finish it， why don’t you move on to next part？” etc. Furthermore， teachers can also use “we” and “us” instead of “you” to improve the equal relationship with students. Just like the lecturer in this lesson， “let’s….” is frequently used to show his agreement with students. Under such situations， students are impressed upon that teacher is one part of them in learning activities rather than an authoritative image. Therefore， they can carry out teachers’ orders on a basis of voluntary， which certainly help keep the classroom teaching smoothly.
At this phase， teachers are encouraged to use the refinement maxim， as Gu summarized in his Chinese politeness principle， which here means that using indirect ways to make orders so that can save students’ negative face at the same time
3.3 Asking questions
Asking questions is one of the most efficient ways to check teaching results in every teaching period， which helps teachers to make sure whether students get the main idea of the class and understand the teaching material appropriately. But as students， if teacher ask them questions， they would easily feel nervous and even can not find suitable words to express themselves， especially for some students who is not so confident with their spoken English. Thus， how to ask questions with politeness is really a big issue for English teachers. The lecturer here uses modal expressions to raise his questions， for instance， “would you please explain this for us？”“which pair would like to report your interview？”“could you possibly translate this into English？” and so on. The teacher acts very polite which made students feel that they have the power to make decisions instead of accept these questions passively. Under such circumstances， students who have already got the answers would stand up voluntarily to present their opinions. But sometimes， teachers have to name a particular student to answer this question. Generally speaking， most teachers would call the student his/ her full name， but as English teachers， I think， we can call them their first name to show intimacy as western people usually do. In addition， to show our respect and encouragement， those expressions can be applied， for example， “Let me ask a gentlemen/ lady here. XX， what’s your opinion？”， or “I’d like the handsome boy in the back to tell us something.” We can realize our goal and at the same time protect students’ positive faces. The refinement maxim can also be applied into the aspect of asking questions， which means to raise questions indirectly； furthermore， according to the special characteristics of EFL classroom， teachers can employ the address term maxim combining the Chinese and western features of using vocatives together.
3.4 Making evaluations
Evaluation constitutes one of the essential aspects of teaching process， which can be divided into two different kinds： positive evaluation and negative evaluation. As Leech’s politeness principles concentrate， the speaker needs to maximize praise of other and minimize dispraise of other. Gu also believes that we need to elevate others， just like he notes in his self-denigration and other elevation maxim. As a result， in classroom setting， positive evaluation should be extensively applied. It is not only an approval for students， but also a big encouragement that make them feel confident and thus promote their learning enthusiasm. The lecturer， in this case， frequently praise his students after they present their own opinions， like “Right！”， “Good！”， “Good job！”， “Well done！”， “Excellent！” etc. Students would feel great satisfied after offering answers， which would encourage them to take part in the interaction actively. Besides， some non-verbal behaviors can also be used to show appreciation， like nodding， smiling， thumbing up and so on. However， as English teachers， we cannot always prevent making negative evaluation. Zhao Duanyang carries out her study on the current situation of politeness strategies’ application in EFL classrooms [11]. She does questionnaire surveys and interviews among 240 students in 6 different majors， and finds that more than 60% students agree that if teachers criticize them， their faces are threatened， and the majority of the them （close to 90%） expect that teachers would apply some politeness strategies when making negative evaluation. In order to protect students’ faces and avoid conflicts， teachers need to be much more cautions with the using of negative words. We’d better not use such expressions like “no”， “it’s wrong”， “that’s bad” and so on. Instead， we can appreciate their ideas and then point out its inadequacy. For instance， if the students cannot offer the right answers， teachers can say， “it sounds reasonable， but if you are more careful， you can find something else”， or “I appreciate your answer， but it can be more perfect if you add more details”. Students would be much easier to accept those kinds of evaluation and at the same time， they would feel respected and trusted， and thus stimulate their learning impulse. To sum up， when doing positive evaluation， teachers should employ the approbation maxim to maximize praise of students that help them set up self-confidence with this subject. While making negative evaluation， teachers need to employ the sympathy maxim to show certain acceptance of students’ opinion first and then put forward his/ her inadequacies in order to avoid frustrating students’ learning interests.
3.5 Making corrections
It has long been a controversial issue that whether teachers should correct the students’ mistakes， and when and how should they be corrected. Krashen points out that teachers’ correction is not conducive to students’ acquisition of second language [12]， while Schmidt and Frota argue that teachers should correct students’ mistakes in time [13]. But Van Lier claims that the learners’ self- correction is more beneficial to language learning than correction by teachers[14]. I think， it’s very important for students to learn to correct themselves in English learning， and teachers should provide much more room for them instead of making correction all the time. The lecturer here always uses “and….” to remind students that there are still something else he/ she haven’t covered. Besides， when students made some mistakes， he uses “pardon？” and “again” to ask for repetition. Through these indirect ways， the teacher helps students get aware of their mistakes and inadequacies， and make corrections by themselves. These politeness behaviors are positive applications of the tact maxim， which maximize benefit to students and at the same time minimize cost to students. Furthermore， we can usually find some students are ignorant of teachers’ speeches， like talking with classmates excitedly or reading their own stuff. As teachers， we’d better not prevent their actins directly by saying， “stop discussing”， or “attention！” etc. On the contrary， some non-verbal behaviors can be used to help us keep the flow of lessons， for instance， keeping silence for several seconds and keeping eye contacts with particular students can remind them that it’s unsuitable to do such irrelevant things but need to focus on our classes. By employing the tact maxim， teachers can maintain good discipline and also protect students’ face.
All in all， in EFL classroom， there are six politeness maxims that can be employed by teachers： the agreement maxim， the refinement maxim， the address term maxim， the approbation maxim， the sympathy maxim， and the tact maxim. The appropriate application of these politeness principles can help teachers create an easier learning situation and facilitate a harmonious relationship between teachers and students and thus improve teaching quality. 4. Conclusions
It is believed that politeness theory can help teachers understand the effectiveness of communication pattern in the classroom interaction， which provides a comprehensive approach to teachers’ language use. With the framework of Leech’s and Gu Yueguo’s politeness principles and Brown and Levinson’s politeness theories， this paper tries to explore a reasonable and effective politeness principle in EFL classroom in China with the help of an analysis of a demonstration English class. However， there are still many problems and inadequacies in this paper， where many other aspects of classroom teaching are worthy of further discussing and exploring. This study is only a preliminary research on teachers’ politeness principles， and teachers are suggested to be more aware of the need to use appropriate language and are encouraged to perform suitable politeness strategies in order to fulfill their teaching aim.
References：
[1] Leech， G. N. （1983）. Principles of pragmatics [M]. London： Longmans Press.
[2] Gu Yueguo. （1990）. Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese [J]. Journal of Pragmatics，Vol.14，No.2，237-257.
[3] 顾曰国. 礼貌、语用与文化[J]. 外语教学与研究， 1992（4）： 10-17.
[4] Brown， P.，& S. Levinson. （1987）. Politeness： some universals in language usage [M]. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press.
[5] Porayska-Pomasta， K， & Pain， H. （2004）. Providing cognitive and affective scaffolding through teaching strategies： applying linguistic politeness to the educational context. Lecture Notes in Computer Science， 3220， 77-86.
[6] 李纯晶. 英语教师课堂礼貌策略实例分析[J]. 沈阳建筑工程学院学报（社会科学版）， 2004（l）： 79-80.
[7] 范朝秋， 张漩. 礼貌理论与英语教师课堂用语[J]. 安顺师范高等专科学院学报， 2005（2）： 32-35.
[8] 赵婉莉. 礼貌理论在英语课堂教师反馈语中的应用研究[D]，陕西师范大学，2007： 27-28.
[9] 向波阳，李桂芳.礼貌原则在课堂语言教学中的运用[J]. 韶关学院学报（社会科学版）， 2004（5）： 128-130.
[10] 吴宏岭， 刘宏宇. 课堂教学中教师礼貌原则运用[J]. 新疆教育学院学报， 2004（4）： 37-39.
[11] 赵端阳. 礼貌策略在大学课堂教学中运用的调查与分析---- 教师的指令性、否定评价和批评的言语行为对学生的影响[J]. 内蒙古师范大学学报（教育科学版）， 2007（7）： 104-107.
[12] Krashen S. （1982） Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning [M].Oxford： Pergamon.
[13] Schmidt， R.， Frota， N. （1986） Developing Basic Conversational Ability in a Second Language： A Case Study of an Adult Learner of Portuguese[C] //Talking to Learn： Conversation in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley， MA： Newbury house.
[14] van Lier， L. （1988） The Classroom and the Language Learner： Ethnography and Second Language Authenticity[M].New York： Longman.
作者简介：黄帆（1983-），女，浙江温州人，浙江大学英语语言文学硕士，大学英语教师，丽水学院，助教，主要研究方向为语言与文化、英语教学研究。
【Key words】politeness principles； teacher politeness studies； a case study
As we all known， politeness plays a big role in human interaction， which helps to keep the public order and promote the interpersonal relationship. Therefore， politeness phenomenon in different contexts has been broadly discussed and studied. For the past decades， a great number of studies on teachers’ politeness have been carried out， which have proved that teachers’ politeness behavior can highly motivate students’ learning impulse and improve teaching process. Many scholars have certainly made great efforts on seeking the appropriate politeness strategies for English teachers， but there are still many inadequacies and limitations. On the basis of the related previous studies and an analysis of a demonstration English class， this paper tries to explore more reasonable and efficient politeness principles in EFL classroom under the framework of Leech’s and Gu Yueguo’s politeness principles and Brown and Levinson’s politeness theories.
1. Brief Introduction of Politeness Theories
1.1 Leech’s Politeness Principles and Gu Yueguo’s Chinese Politeness Principles
Based on the cases that people occasionally do not observe the Grice’s Cooperative Principle（CP）， Leech puts forward the Politeness Principle （PP） as made up of six maxims as follows： l） Tact Maxim， 2） Generosity Maxim， 3） Approbation Maxim， 4） Modesty Maxim， 5） Agreement Maxim， and 6） Sympathy Maxim[1]. He distinguishes “self” and “other” in his politeness principles， and claims that their relationship is the concern of politeness. “Self” refers to the speaker， and “other”， the hearer. He suggests that the politeness is always a matter of degree and sets up three pragmatic scales： 1） the cost and benefit scale， 2） the optionality scale， 3） the indirectness scale； and two dimensional scales， termed as the power and solidarity scale， or the social-distance scale.
Inspired by Leech’ s politeness principles，Gu formulates his own principles， which is believed to be more adequate and suitable to account for Chinese culture. He concludes that there are basically four essential notions underlying the traditional Chinese conception of Limao： respectfulness， modesty， attitudinal warmth and refinement， which are considered to manifest in many Chinese speech events[2]. Gu further revises his politeness principle and put forwards five politeness maxims： l） The self-denigration and other elevation maxim： denigrate self and elevate others， 2） The address term maxim： address your interlocutor with an appropriate address term， 3） The refinement maxim： self’s behavior to other should meet certain standards， 4） The agreement maxim： efforts made by both participants to maximize agreement and harmony and minimize disagreement， 5） The virtues-words-deeds maxim： minimize cost and maximize benefit to other at the motivational level， and maximize benefit received and minimize cost to self at the conversational level[3]. The two politeness principles share many similarities， but there are also many differences between them. Professor Gu’s politeness theory shows remarkable Chinese characteristics， for he has integrated universal features of politeness and Chinese speech feature together， like the address term maxim. Chinese people pay great attention on using vocatives in communicating， which is regarded as one of the most important way to show our politeness； however， in western countries， using vocatives seems little importance， for they usually address each other with their first name regardless of age， gender or classes etc.
1.2 Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theories
Brown and Levinson’s framework rests upon three basic notions： face， face threatening acts （FTAs） and politeness strategies. They define “face” as “the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself”， and the wants related to politeness are the wants of face[4]. Besides， They argue that face is composed of two basic and paradoxical desires： negative face and positive face. The negative face is the want to be independent， to have freedom of action， and to be unimpeded by others， while positive face is the want to be appreciated and approved of by at least some others[4]. Both the positive and negative face wants should be accounted for in order to be polite in communication.
However， in real communication， there are some acts that speaker must do， yet， by their very nature， to threaten another individual’s wants. Brown& Levinson maintain that many of the acts which people want to perform are intrinsically face-threatening， so called as face-threatening acts （FTAs） [4]. In the process of communication， any rational person will try to avoid those face-threatening acts （FTAs） or will at least minimize the threat through employing face-saving strategies， namely politeness strategies. According to the model suggested by Brown &Levinson，there are five strategies that can be chosen from to deal with a face-threatening-act： 1） “Bald on record”， the most direct approach， which usually happen with people who are very familiar with each other and are very comfortable in their environment， for instance close friends or family members. “Redressive action” is necessary in most cases to reduce the potential face damage of the FTA， including two types： 2） positive politeness strategy and 3） negative politeness strategy. The former is oriented toward the hearer’s positive face wants， while the latter is oriented toward the hearer’s negative face， namely his basic want to claim for his territory and self-determination. 4） “Off-record” is considered as the more polite strategy. The speaker usually hints his needs or expresses his needs equivocally and generally instead of asking for something directly. As the most polite strategy among those five，5） “don’t do the FTA” is to avoid all the possible threat to hearer’ s face. It is a rational choice when the potential FTA is extremely serious， that is， the social distance between participants is too great or the rank of imposition on the recipient is too great [4]. 2. The Significance of Teachers’ Politeness in EFL Classroom
Classroom is a very special setting of politeness context where all activities serve for knowledge transformation. As teachers are generally regarded as controlling most of the structure and content of classroom interaction， their verbal and non-verbal behaviors can have a great influence on the learning taking place in EFL classroom. Many researches on teacher politeness， at home and abroad， show that the application of teachers’ politeness principles directly affects students’ effective learning and can improve teaching quality simultaneously. K. Poraska-Pomasta and H. Pain suggest that cognitive and affective support， which closely related to interpersonal behaviors of the teacher， plays a significant role in students’ successful learning [5]. With the analysis of data collected from some teacher participants， they demonstrate how face could be related to students’ cognitive and affective outcomes in EFL classroom context. Li Chunjing suggests that teachers should take politeness strategies into consideration in order to establish and remain good interpersonal relationship with students and create a favorable classroom atmosphere based on a case study[6]. Fan Chaoqiu and Zhang Xuan examine the effectiveness of the pragmatic application of politeness principles to English language teaching and point out that teacher’s application of politeness strategies could motivate and facilitate the teaching process[7].
Based on the previous studies we can easily get the conclusion that the observation of politeness strategies could stimulate learners’ motivation and create an enjoyable and harmonious atmosphere in class， and hence achieve more effective teaching. Most teachers in the new century have already realized the importance of teachers’ politeness in EFL classroom， as Zhao Wanli’s study proved [8]. She investigates the application of politeness theory to verify the findings about teachers’ feedback in college classroom teaching， which chooses both teachers and students as her subjects and finally concludes that the majority of the teachers （close to87.8%） have certain politeness awareness in their feedback. Consequently， the study about politeness strategies in EFL classroom is very necessary for teachers to understand the significance of their politeness behaviors， which can help us select more reasonable and efficient communicative strategies accurately.
3. On Politeness Principles with a Case Study Followed by Leech’s politeness principles， there are a few scholars who have analyzed some politeness strategies in Chinese college EFL classroom based on their teaching experience. Xiang Yangbo and Li Guifang summarize four politeness principles， that is， to avoid disagreement， to praise adequately and to refine teaching language， etc. [9] Wu Hongling and Liu Hongyu put up four politeness principles applied to feedback phase and the classroom teaching management phase： the maxim of tact， the maxim of approbation， the maxim of agreement and the maxim of sympathy[10]. Their research results are of great significance to the further study， while there are still certain limits to some extent. Therefore， this paper tries to search for more detailed and effective politeness principles with a case study of a college demonstration English class in Lishui University. Politeness principles which can be precisely applied into teaching process would be discussed and explored in five different phases of English classroom teaching.
3.1 Greeting
As the saying goes， “Well begun is half done，” almost every English teacher knows that a good beginning of a class counts a lot to the whole teaching process. If students’ interests can be aroused at the very beginning， it would be much easier to achieve an effective teaching result. In EFL classroom， “good morning/ afternoon everyone”， or “hello everyone” are most frequently used， for most teachers treats greeting as just a cliché. The lecturer here begins his class with “everybody， how are you？” and gets the positive feedback from students instantly. From my point of view， a good greeting can easily shorten the distance between teachers and students and at the same time set up a closer relationship. As we all know， EFL classroom highly requires students’ participation rather than just listening to teachers’ speech； therefore， how to make students relax and be willingly to take part in the discussion seems much more important to improve students’ effective learning. Besides the formal ways of greeting， I think English teachers can choose more casual ones， such as “what’s up！”“what’s going on？”“how are you doing？” or “how are you？” etc. On the one hand， informal greeting can form a friendly atmosphere， which help students feel free to begin with the class； on the other hand， different kinds of greeting can also be regarded as a part of teaching. It becomes easier for students to keep in mind of various ways of starting a conversation with different people. In addition， I think that teachers can do some small talk with students in order to help them get ready for discussion in English， for instance， we can say， “how’s your weekends？” to share some interesting things together； after a holiday， we may say， “ long time on see！ How have you been？”， to exchange different experiences. We can talk about recent news， exercises， TV programs， favorite things and so on. Several minutes of free talk can definitely become an important and efficient aspect of warm up tasks. In a word， I think teachers should set up a harmonious and close relationship with students at the beginning of the class， which can help us to control the flow of the lessons fluently. At this aspect， we can employ the agreement maxim， trying our best to maximize agreement between teachers and students.
3.2 Making orders
As Brown and Levinson’s “face” theory claims， “making order” is one kind of acts threatening to the hearer’s negative face， and all the participants have to maintain other’s face so as to keep a smooth communication. But in EFL classroom， “making order” is an essential part of teaching process， which especially needs teachers to pay attention to the expressive skills. In this demonstration class， the lecturer uses several ways to make requests， such as “let’s have a short interview”， “I’d like you to discuss with your groups”， “would you please turn to the first part？” etc. Obviously， he chooses indirect ways to express his opinion so that the students are much more willingly to accept the order without feeling uncomfortable. During teaching process， teachers need to avoid making orders directly， instead， we can choose suggestive words or some modal verbs to ease the mood， like “would you like to read the first paragraph？”， “if you finish it， why don’t you move on to next part？” etc. Furthermore， teachers can also use “we” and “us” instead of “you” to improve the equal relationship with students. Just like the lecturer in this lesson， “let’s….” is frequently used to show his agreement with students. Under such situations， students are impressed upon that teacher is one part of them in learning activities rather than an authoritative image. Therefore， they can carry out teachers’ orders on a basis of voluntary， which certainly help keep the classroom teaching smoothly.
At this phase， teachers are encouraged to use the refinement maxim， as Gu summarized in his Chinese politeness principle， which here means that using indirect ways to make orders so that can save students’ negative face at the same time
3.3 Asking questions
Asking questions is one of the most efficient ways to check teaching results in every teaching period， which helps teachers to make sure whether students get the main idea of the class and understand the teaching material appropriately. But as students， if teacher ask them questions， they would easily feel nervous and even can not find suitable words to express themselves， especially for some students who is not so confident with their spoken English. Thus， how to ask questions with politeness is really a big issue for English teachers. The lecturer here uses modal expressions to raise his questions， for instance， “would you please explain this for us？”“which pair would like to report your interview？”“could you possibly translate this into English？” and so on. The teacher acts very polite which made students feel that they have the power to make decisions instead of accept these questions passively. Under such circumstances， students who have already got the answers would stand up voluntarily to present their opinions. But sometimes， teachers have to name a particular student to answer this question. Generally speaking， most teachers would call the student his/ her full name， but as English teachers， I think， we can call them their first name to show intimacy as western people usually do. In addition， to show our respect and encouragement， those expressions can be applied， for example， “Let me ask a gentlemen/ lady here. XX， what’s your opinion？”， or “I’d like the handsome boy in the back to tell us something.” We can realize our goal and at the same time protect students’ positive faces. The refinement maxim can also be applied into the aspect of asking questions， which means to raise questions indirectly； furthermore， according to the special characteristics of EFL classroom， teachers can employ the address term maxim combining the Chinese and western features of using vocatives together.
3.4 Making evaluations
Evaluation constitutes one of the essential aspects of teaching process， which can be divided into two different kinds： positive evaluation and negative evaluation. As Leech’s politeness principles concentrate， the speaker needs to maximize praise of other and minimize dispraise of other. Gu also believes that we need to elevate others， just like he notes in his self-denigration and other elevation maxim. As a result， in classroom setting， positive evaluation should be extensively applied. It is not only an approval for students， but also a big encouragement that make them feel confident and thus promote their learning enthusiasm. The lecturer， in this case， frequently praise his students after they present their own opinions， like “Right！”， “Good！”， “Good job！”， “Well done！”， “Excellent！” etc. Students would feel great satisfied after offering answers， which would encourage them to take part in the interaction actively. Besides， some non-verbal behaviors can also be used to show appreciation， like nodding， smiling， thumbing up and so on. However， as English teachers， we cannot always prevent making negative evaluation. Zhao Duanyang carries out her study on the current situation of politeness strategies’ application in EFL classrooms [11]. She does questionnaire surveys and interviews among 240 students in 6 different majors， and finds that more than 60% students agree that if teachers criticize them， their faces are threatened， and the majority of the them （close to 90%） expect that teachers would apply some politeness strategies when making negative evaluation. In order to protect students’ faces and avoid conflicts， teachers need to be much more cautions with the using of negative words. We’d better not use such expressions like “no”， “it’s wrong”， “that’s bad” and so on. Instead， we can appreciate their ideas and then point out its inadequacy. For instance， if the students cannot offer the right answers， teachers can say， “it sounds reasonable， but if you are more careful， you can find something else”， or “I appreciate your answer， but it can be more perfect if you add more details”. Students would be much easier to accept those kinds of evaluation and at the same time， they would feel respected and trusted， and thus stimulate their learning impulse. To sum up， when doing positive evaluation， teachers should employ the approbation maxim to maximize praise of students that help them set up self-confidence with this subject. While making negative evaluation， teachers need to employ the sympathy maxim to show certain acceptance of students’ opinion first and then put forward his/ her inadequacies in order to avoid frustrating students’ learning interests.
3.5 Making corrections
It has long been a controversial issue that whether teachers should correct the students’ mistakes， and when and how should they be corrected. Krashen points out that teachers’ correction is not conducive to students’ acquisition of second language [12]， while Schmidt and Frota argue that teachers should correct students’ mistakes in time [13]. But Van Lier claims that the learners’ self- correction is more beneficial to language learning than correction by teachers[14]. I think， it’s very important for students to learn to correct themselves in English learning， and teachers should provide much more room for them instead of making correction all the time. The lecturer here always uses “and….” to remind students that there are still something else he/ she haven’t covered. Besides， when students made some mistakes， he uses “pardon？” and “again” to ask for repetition. Through these indirect ways， the teacher helps students get aware of their mistakes and inadequacies， and make corrections by themselves. These politeness behaviors are positive applications of the tact maxim， which maximize benefit to students and at the same time minimize cost to students. Furthermore， we can usually find some students are ignorant of teachers’ speeches， like talking with classmates excitedly or reading their own stuff. As teachers， we’d better not prevent their actins directly by saying， “stop discussing”， or “attention！” etc. On the contrary， some non-verbal behaviors can be used to help us keep the flow of lessons， for instance， keeping silence for several seconds and keeping eye contacts with particular students can remind them that it’s unsuitable to do such irrelevant things but need to focus on our classes. By employing the tact maxim， teachers can maintain good discipline and also protect students’ face.
All in all， in EFL classroom， there are six politeness maxims that can be employed by teachers： the agreement maxim， the refinement maxim， the address term maxim， the approbation maxim， the sympathy maxim， and the tact maxim. The appropriate application of these politeness principles can help teachers create an easier learning situation and facilitate a harmonious relationship between teachers and students and thus improve teaching quality. 4. Conclusions
It is believed that politeness theory can help teachers understand the effectiveness of communication pattern in the classroom interaction， which provides a comprehensive approach to teachers’ language use. With the framework of Leech’s and Gu Yueguo’s politeness principles and Brown and Levinson’s politeness theories， this paper tries to explore a reasonable and effective politeness principle in EFL classroom in China with the help of an analysis of a demonstration English class. However， there are still many problems and inadequacies in this paper， where many other aspects of classroom teaching are worthy of further discussing and exploring. This study is only a preliminary research on teachers’ politeness principles， and teachers are suggested to be more aware of the need to use appropriate language and are encouraged to perform suitable politeness strategies in order to fulfill their teaching aim.
References：
[1] Leech， G. N. （1983）. Principles of pragmatics [M]. London： Longmans Press.
[2] Gu Yueguo. （1990）. Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese [J]. Journal of Pragmatics，Vol.14，No.2，237-257.
[3] 顾曰国. 礼貌、语用与文化[J]. 外语教学与研究， 1992（4）： 10-17.
[4] Brown， P.，& S. Levinson. （1987）. Politeness： some universals in language usage [M]. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press.
[5] Porayska-Pomasta， K， & Pain， H. （2004）. Providing cognitive and affective scaffolding through teaching strategies： applying linguistic politeness to the educational context. Lecture Notes in Computer Science， 3220， 77-86.
[6] 李纯晶. 英语教师课堂礼貌策略实例分析[J]. 沈阳建筑工程学院学报（社会科学版）， 2004（l）： 79-80.
[7] 范朝秋， 张漩. 礼貌理论与英语教师课堂用语[J]. 安顺师范高等专科学院学报， 2005（2）： 32-35.
[8] 赵婉莉. 礼貌理论在英语课堂教师反馈语中的应用研究[D]，陕西师范大学，2007： 27-28.
[9] 向波阳，李桂芳.礼貌原则在课堂语言教学中的运用[J]. 韶关学院学报（社会科学版）， 2004（5）： 128-130.
[10] 吴宏岭， 刘宏宇. 课堂教学中教师礼貌原则运用[J]. 新疆教育学院学报， 2004（4）： 37-39.
[11] 赵端阳. 礼貌策略在大学课堂教学中运用的调查与分析---- 教师的指令性、否定评价和批评的言语行为对学生的影响[J]. 内蒙古师范大学学报（教育科学版）， 2007（7）： 104-107.
[12] Krashen S. （1982） Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning [M].Oxford： Pergamon.
[13] Schmidt， R.， Frota， N. （1986） Developing Basic Conversational Ability in a Second Language： A Case Study of an Adult Learner of Portuguese[C] //Talking to Learn： Conversation in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley， MA： Newbury house.
[14] van Lier， L. （1988） The Classroom and the Language Learner： Ethnography and Second Language Authenticity[M].New York： Longman.
作者简介：黄帆（1983-），女，浙江温州人，浙江大学英语语言文学硕士，大学英语教师，丽水学院，助教，主要研究方向为语言与文化、英语教学研究。