The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness

Within the impoliteness literature, an important distinction has been made between genuine and mock (or non-genuine) impoliteness (Culpeper 1996, 2011; Bernal 2008, among others). Even though mock impoliteness has generally been analyzed within an impoliteness framework, recent proposals suggest tha...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: McKinnon, Sean, Prieto Vives, Pilar, 1965-
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2014
País:España
Institución:Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Repositorio:Repositorio Digital de la UPF
OAI Identifier:oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/26988
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/26988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0009
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Impoliteness
Mock impoliteness
Prosody
Gestures
Experimental pragmatics
id ES_f74623a08e323b911eafda9f88a61ba2
oai_identifier_str oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/26988
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impolitenessMcKinnon, SeanPrieto Vives, Pilar, 1965-ImpolitenessMock impolitenessProsodyGesturesExperimental pragmaticsWithin the impoliteness literature, an important distinction has been made between genuine and mock (or non-genuine) impoliteness (Culpeper 1996, 2011; Bernal 2008, among others). Even though mock impoliteness has generally been analyzed within an impoliteness framework, recent proposals suggest that it is an essentially different pragmatic phenomenon that requires a continuous conversational evaluation (Haugh and Bousfield 2012). The present study had the goal of assessing the offline evaluation process of target genuine vs. mock impoliteness utterances, specifically the role the situational/ discourse contexts, as well as prosodic and gestural patterns, play in their interpretation. A total of 97 participants were either asked to rate the degree of impoliteness of target genuine and mock impoliteness utterances in isolation (Experiment 1), or to rate the same utterances preceded with a set of matched and mismatched situational/discourse contexts which favored either a genuine or a mock impoliteness interpretation (Experiment 2). The results of the two experiments show that (a) evaluations of intended mock impoliteness utterances generate more uncertainty in listeners than intended genuine impolite utterances; and (b) mock impoliteness evaluations are characterized by a more active use of gestural cues. These results provide evidence that mock impoliteness triggers a more complex evaluation procedure of a phenomenon that lies on the boundary between polite and impolite behavior.This research has been funded by a research grant awarded by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (FFI2009–07648/FILO), and by a grant awarded by the Generalitat de Catalunya to the Grup d’Estudis de Prosòdia (BFU2012–31995).De Gruyter201620162014info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10230/26988http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0009reponame:Repositorio Digital de la UPFinstname:Universitat Pompeu FabraInglésJournal of Politeness Research. 2014 July; 10(2): 185-219info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/3PN/FFI2009–07648info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/3PN/BFU2012–31995© De Gruyter Published version available at http://www.degruyter.com/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0009info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/269882026-06-12T07:21:37Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
title The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
spellingShingle The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
McKinnon, Sean
Impoliteness
Mock impoliteness
Prosody
Gestures
Experimental pragmatics
title_short The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
title_full The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
title_fullStr The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
title_full_unstemmed The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
title_sort The role of prosody and gesture in the perception of mock impoliteness
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv McKinnon, Sean
Prieto Vives, Pilar, 1965-
author McKinnon, Sean
author_facet McKinnon, Sean
Prieto Vives, Pilar, 1965-
author_role author
author2 Prieto Vives, Pilar, 1965-
author2_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Impoliteness
Mock impoliteness
Prosody
Gestures
Experimental pragmatics
topic Impoliteness
Mock impoliteness
Prosody
Gestures
Experimental pragmatics
description Within the impoliteness literature, an important distinction has been made between genuine and mock (or non-genuine) impoliteness (Culpeper 1996, 2011; Bernal 2008, among others). Even though mock impoliteness has generally been analyzed within an impoliteness framework, recent proposals suggest that it is an essentially different pragmatic phenomenon that requires a continuous conversational evaluation (Haugh and Bousfield 2012). The present study had the goal of assessing the offline evaluation process of target genuine vs. mock impoliteness utterances, specifically the role the situational/ discourse contexts, as well as prosodic and gestural patterns, play in their interpretation. A total of 97 participants were either asked to rate the degree of impoliteness of target genuine and mock impoliteness utterances in isolation (Experiment 1), or to rate the same utterances preceded with a set of matched and mismatched situational/discourse contexts which favored either a genuine or a mock impoliteness interpretation (Experiment 2). The results of the two experiments show that (a) evaluations of intended mock impoliteness utterances generate more uncertainty in listeners than intended genuine impolite utterances; and (b) mock impoliteness evaluations are characterized by a more active use of gestural cues. These results provide evidence that mock impoliteness triggers a more complex evaluation procedure of a phenomenon that lies on the boundary between polite and impolite behavior.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014
2016
2016
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10230/26988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0009
url http://hdl.handle.net/10230/26988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/pr-2014-0009
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Politeness Research. 2014 July; 10(2): 185-219
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/3PN/FFI2009–07648
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/3PN/BFU2012–31995
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv De Gruyter
publisher.none.fl_str_mv De Gruyter
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositorio Digital de la UPF
instname:Universitat Pompeu Fabra
instname_str Universitat Pompeu Fabra
reponame_str Repositorio Digital de la UPF
collection Repositorio Digital de la UPF
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869424867460251648
score 15,81155

Similares en LA Referencia