Authors:
Fengguang Liu Dalian University of Foreign Languages

Search for other papers by Fengguang Liu in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Wenrui Shi Dalian University of Foreign Languages

Search for other papers by Wenrui Shi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

The practice of ‘political advice’ covers events such as media appearances, in the course of which the representatives of a country deliver symbolic ‘advice’ to another country through a monologous announcement. As such, political ‘advice’ is a ritual practice (Kádár 2017): on the surface level it represents communication with another country and its style is formed according to this symbolic surface function; however, its implicit function is to form alignment between the political authorities who deliver the advice and the citizens of their country. Studying political advice provides a twofold contribution to politeness theory. First, on the empirical level, this discursive ritual practice has not received sufficient academic attention, and so modelling it through the lens of interactional ritual theory fills an empirical knowledge gap in the field of pragmatics and broader sense language and society. Second, by modelling the complex relationship between politeness and political advice, the paper delivers a contribution to the theory of language use, since it demonstrates that in certain ritual practices such as political advice, and arguably a variety of similar ritual practices in the political arena. It is challenging to capture ‘politeness’ in the conventional sense as an other-oriented (and interpersonal) form of pragmatic behaviour, in spite of the fact that on the surface level such forms of communication are veiled as abundantly polite and as other-oriented. We argue that one needs to deploy interactional ritual theory to model the pragmatic operation of this phenomenon. The data studied is drawn from the website of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

  • Bax, Marcel . 1999. Ritual levelling: The balance between the eristic and contractual motive in hostile verbal encounters in Medieval romance and early modern drama. In A. Jucker, G. Fritz and F. Lebsanft (eds.) Historical dialogue analysis. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 3580.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bom, Isabelle van der and Sara Mills. 2015. A discursive approach to the analysis of politeness data. Journal of Politeness Research 11. 179206.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brown, Penelope and Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Chen Guo-Ming and William Starosta. 1997. Chinese conflict management and resolution: Overview and implications. Intercultural Communication Studies 7. 116.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chen, Xinren, Dániel Z. Kádár and Veschueren, Jef. 2016. Editorial. East Asian Pragmatics 1. 14.

  • Cherry, Roger . 1988. Politeness in written persuasion. Journal of Pragmatics 12. 6381.

  • Du Bois, John . 2009. Interior dialogues: The co-voicing of ritual in solitude. In: G. Senft and E. Basso (eds.) Ritual communication. London: Bloomsbury, 317339.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Eelen, Gino . 2001. A critique of politeness theories. Manchester: St. Jerome.

  • Fairclough, Norman . 1993. Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society 4. 133168.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Feng, Bo and Eran Magen. 2015. Relationship closeness predicts unsolicited advice giving in supportive interactions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 33. 751766.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Feng, Hairong . 2013. Understanding of cultural variations in giving advice among Americans and Chinese. Communication Research 42. 11431167.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goffman, Erving . 1981. Form of talk. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press.

  • Gruber, Helmut . 1993. Political language and textual vagueness. Pragmatics 3. 128.

  • Gunther, Albert and Esther Thorson. 1992. Perceived persuasive effects of product commercials and public service announcements. Communication Research 19. 574596.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Harris, Linda, Kenneth Gergen and John Lannamann. 2009. Aggression rituals. Communication Monographs. 53. 252265.

  • He, Ziran and Ren Wei. 2016. Current address behaviours in China. East Asian Pragmatics 1. 163180.

  • Hinkel, Eli . 1997. Appropriateness of advice: DCT and multiple choice data. Applied Linguistics 18. 126.

  • Hutchby, Ian . 1997. Building alignmnets in the public debate: A case study from British TV. Text 17. 161179.

  • Kádár, Dániel Z . 2012. Historical Chinese politeness and rhetoric: A case study of epistolary refusals. Journal of Politeness Research 8. 93110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kádár, Dániel Z . 2017. Politeness, impoliteness and ritual: Maintaining the moral order in interpersonal interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kádár, Dániel Z . 2019. Introduction: Advancing linguistic politeness theory by using Chinese data. Acta Linguistica Academica 66. 149164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kádár, Dániel Z. and Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kádár, Dániel Z. and Rosina Marquez Reiter. 2015. (Im)politeness and (im)morality: Insights from intervention. Journal of Politeness Research 11. 239260.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kádár, Dániel Z. and Sen Zhang. 2019. (Im)politeness and alignment: A case study of public monologues. Acta Linguistica Academica 66. 229250.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Locher, Miriam . 2006. Polite behavior within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multingua 25. 249267.

  • Lu, Chang . 2002. A study of Chinese and Japanese set phrases. Foreign Languages And Their Teaching 158. 1718.

  • Lu, Xing . 1999. An ideological/cultural analysis of political slogans in communist China. Discourse & Society 10. 487508.

  • Magnusson, Lynne . 1992. The rhetoric of politeness and Henry VIII. Shakespeare Quarterly 43. 391409.

  • McCourt, David M . 2014. Rethinking Britain's role in the world for a new decade: The limits of discursive therapy and the promise of field theory. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 13. 145164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Moysey, Robert . 1982. Isokrates’ “On the Peace”: Rhetorical exercise or political advice? American Journal of Ancient History 7. 118127.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Okano, Emi and Lucien Brown. 2018. Did Becky really need to apologise? Intercultural evaluations of politeness. East Asian Pragmatics 3. 151178.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pälli, Pekka, Eero Vaara and Virpi Sorsa. 2009. Strategy as text and discursive practice: A genre-based approach to strategizing in city administration. Discourse & Communication 3. 303318.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pan, Yuling . 2000. Politeness in Chinese face-to-face interaction. Stamford: Ablex.

  • Pan, Yuling and Dániel Z. Kádár 2011. Politeness in historical and contemporary Chinese. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Pinker, Steven, Martin Nowak and James Lee. 2008. The logic of indirect speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105. 833838.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pudlinski, Christopher . 2002. Accepting and rejecting advice as competent peers: Caller dilemmas on a warm line. Discourse Studies 4. 481500.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, Michelle . 2013. Affect and respectability politics. Theory & Event 17. Supplement.

  • Spencer-Oatey, Helen and Kádár, Dániel Z. 2016. The bases of (im)politeness evaluations: Culture, the moral order and the East–West debate. East Asian Pragmatics 1. 73106.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sun, Yi . 2018. The acceptability of American politeness from a native and non-native comparative perspective. East Asian Pragmatics 3. 263287.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sutton, Donald . 2007. Ritual, cultural standardization and orthopraxy in China: Reconsidering James L. Watson's ideas. Modern China 33. 321.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sverdik, Noga, Sonia Roccas and Lilach Sagiv. 2012. Morality across cultures: A value perspective. In M. Mikulincer and P. R. Shaver (eds.) The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 219235.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tabakowska, Ewa . 2002. The regime of the other: ‘us’ and ‘them’ in translation. In: A. Duszak (ed.) Us and others. Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vehviläinen, Sanna . 2001. Evalutive advice in educational counseling: The use of disagreement in the “stepwise entry” to advice. Research on Language and Social Interaction 34. 371398.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Watts, Richard . 2003. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Whutnow, Robert . 1989. Meaning and moral order: Explorations in cultural analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Wilson, Steven R., Carlos G. Aleman and Geoff B. Leatham 1998. Identity implications of influence goals: A revised analysis of face-threatening acts and application to seeking compliance with same-sex friends. Human Communication Research 25. 6496.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Yule, George . 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Zhang, Min and Doreen Wu. 2018. A cross-cultural analysis of celebrity practice in microblogging. East Asian Pragmatics 3. 179200.

  • Collapse
  • Expand

The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE

Editors

Editor-in-Chief: András Cser

Editor: György Rákosi

Review Editor: Tamás Halm

Editorial Board

  • Anne Abeillé / Université Paris Diderot
  • Željko Bošković / University of Connecticut
  • Marcel den Dikken / Eötvös Loránd University; Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Hans-Martin Gärtner / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Elly van Gelderen / Arizona State University
  • Anders Holmberg / Newcastle University
  • Katarzyna Jaszczolt / University of Cambridge
  • Dániel Z. Kádár / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • István Kenesei / University of Szeged; Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Anikó Lipták / Leiden University
  • Katalin Mády / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Gereon Müller / Leipzig University
  • Csaba Pléh / Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Central European University
  • Giampaolo Salvi / Eötvös Loránd University
  • Irina Sekerina / College of Staten Island CUNY
  • Péter Siptár / Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics, Budapest
  • Gregory Stump / University of Kentucky
  • Peter Svenonius / University of Tromsø
  • Anne Tamm / Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church
  • Akira Watanabe / University of Tokyo
  • Jeroen van de Weijer / Shenzhen University

 

Acta Linguistica Academica
Address: Benczúr u. 33. HU–1068 Budapest, Hungary
Phone: (+36 1) 351 0413; (+36 1) 321 4830 ext. 154
Fax: (36 1) 322 9297
E-mail: ala@nytud.mta.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Arts and Humanities Citation Index
  • Bibliographie Linguistique/Linguistic Bibliography
  • International Bibliographies IBZ and IBR
  • Linguistics Abstracts
  • Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts
  • MLA International Bibliography
  • SCOPUS
  • Social Science Citation Index
  • LinguisList

 

2022  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
56
Journal Impact Factor 0.5
Rank by Impact Factor

Linguistics (Q4)

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0.4
5 Year
Impact Factor
0.5
Journal Citation Indicator 0.59
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Language and Linguistics (Q2)
Linguistics (Q3)

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
13
Scimago
Journal Rank
0.592
Scimago Quartile Score

Cultural Studies (Q1)
Linguistics and Language (Q1)
Literature and Literary Theory (Q1)

Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1.4
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Literature and Literary Theory 24/982 (97th PCTL)
Cultural Studies 212/1203 (82nd PCTL)
Scopus
SNIP
1.159

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
63
Journal Impact Factor 0,690
Rank by Impact Factor

Linguistics 145/194

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,667
5 Year
Impact Factor
1,286
Journal Citation Indicator 0,67
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Language & Linguistics 141/370

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
11
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,341
Scimago Quartile Score Cultural Studies (Q1)
Linguistics and Language (Q1)
Literature and Literary Theory (Q1)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,4
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Literature and Literary Theory 22/934 (D1)
Cultural Studies 164/1127 (Q1)
Scopus
SNIP
1,070

2020

 

Total Cites

219

WoS

Journal
Impact Factor

0,523

Rank by

Linguistics 150/193 (Q4)

Impact Factor

 

Impact Factor

0,432

without

Journal Self Cites

5 Year

0,500

Impact Factor

Journal 

0,72

Citation Indicator

 

Rank by Journal 

Linguistics 144/259 (Q3)

Citation Indicator 

 

Citable

19

Items

Total

19

Articles

Total

0

Reviews

Scimago

10

H-index

Scimago

0,295

Journal Rank

Scimago

Cultural Studies Q1

Quartile Score

Language and Linguistics Q2

 

Linguistics and Language Q2

 

Literature and Literary Theory Q1

Scopus

72/87=0,8

Scite Score

Scopus

Literature and Literary Theory 42/825 (Q1)

Scite Score Rank

Cultural Studies 247/1037 (Q1)

Scopus

1,022

SNIP

Days from 

58

submission

to acceptance

Days from 

68

acceptance

to publication

Acceptance

51%

Rate

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
155
Impact Factor 0,222
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,156
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,322
Immediacy
Index
0,870
Citable
Items
23
Total
Articles
23
Total
Reviews
0
Cited
Half-Life
11,2
Citing
Half-Life
16,6
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00006
Article Influence
Score
0,056
% Articles
in
Citable Items
100,00
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,00780
Average
IF
Percentile
9,358
Scimago
H-index
9
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,281
Scopus
Scite Score
53/85=0,6
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Cultural Studies 293/1002 (Q2)
Literature and Literary Theory 60/823(Q1)
Scopus
SNIP
0,768
Acceptance
Rate
25%

 

Acta Linguistica Academica
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 900 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2023 Online subsscription: 572 EUR / 696 USD
Print + online subscription: 656 EUR / 796 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Linguistica Academica
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
2017 (1951)
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia   
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2559-8201 (Print)
ISSN 2560-1016 (Online)