汉英礼貌用语的跨文化对比分析
浅析英汉问候语对比及跨文化交际策略探究的论文

浅析英汉问候语对比及跨文化交际策略探究的论文论文关键词:问候语礼貌原则跨文化交际论文摘要:本文探讨中英问候语中语言和文化差异,并对提高跨文化交际的能力提出相关策略。
问候语是日常会话交际中必不可少的一部分,我们问候别人时,首先考虑的就是礼貌问题。
那么具有不同文化背景的人在互相交际时所赋予这些准则的重要性是否会有差异?因为跨文化交际在很大程度上与交际者对这些准则和策略的恰当选择有关brown和levinson(19871认为,在社会交往中,人们用语言所体现出来的礼貌是有原则的,也是有差异的。
这些原则要求交谈者符合总的礼貌行为;同时,由于人们所处的文化环境不同,对礼貌的衡量和评估标准也不尽相同,而这些不同的衡量标准也会影响交际者在谈话策略上的选择。
为了解释英汉两种不同文化对于礼貌原则选择的差异,以克服跨文化交际障碍,本论文以leech(1983)的礼貌原则和顾日国(1992)的礼貌准则为基础,对英汉问候语进行调查和研究。
一、中英相同的问候语结构、通过考察我们发现,中英文化中的问候活动通常是先开始接触,然后互致某些问候客套,表示欢迎或乐意会面,再作寒暄。
因此,问候语的结构一般包括以下组成部分:招呼、问候、欢迎辞语、表示高兴、寒暄。
但是在许多情况下,随着问候情景的不同,问候活动中许多成分会随时发生变化,某些成分被省略。
一般见面时常用以下问候用语:“go0dmorning(早安)!”、“goodevening(晚安)!”、“howdoyoudo(你好)!”、“howareyou(身体好吗)?”“what’sgoingonwithyourecendy(最近如何)?”、“how’severythinggoing(一切都顺利吗)?”、“longtimenosee.howareyou(好久不见了,你好吗?)”、“iseverythingallifghtiwththechildren(孩子们都好吗)?”、“haveyoubeenonholiday(最近休假去了吗)?”二、中英问候语的礼貌原则对比结合顾日国的礼貌准则与leech关于礼貌的论述对英汉问候语语料进行比较,对问候语的研究结果证明了顾日国的观点——贬己尊人是中国特有的礼貌准则,并且是中国现代礼貌观念的核心。
中英礼貌用语的跨文化研究综述

中英礼貌用语的跨文化研究综述中英礼貌用语是两种不同文化背景下人们表达礼貌的方式。
虽然两种文化区别较大,但礼貌用语是交流的基础,因此跨文化研究中英礼貌用语非常重要。
本文将从四个方面介绍中英礼貌用语的跨文化研究——文化差异、社会等级、语境和年龄。
一、文化差异中英两国的文化差异很大,这导致了两种语言中的礼貌用语存在差异。
例如,中文中对对方年龄、职位的称呼非常重要,而英文中对个人信息的强调不如中文,更多的是通过称呼方式来表达礼貌。
与此同时,西方社会中提倡直白、开放的交流方式,人们较为直接地表达自己的观点和想法,而中国文化则更加注重面子和优雅,更倾向于使用婉转的措辞表达。
二、社会等级在中国文化中,社会等级是非常重要的因素,工作用语中使用合适的称呼也受到了极大的重视。
例如,某些职位,如老板或领导,在不同的场合下有不同的称呼,这取决于场合、人际关系和年龄等因素。
而英国文化对社会等级的关注不如中国文化那么细致入微。
在普通社交场合,英国人可能会使用比较随便的称呼,例如名字或者对方的职业,而不会像中文中一样直接使用对方的职务或称呼。
三、语境语境是指用语所处的情况或环境,它可以影响礼貌用语的具体表达。
在不同的语境中,人们可能会使用不同的礼貌用语。
比如,在欧洲英语文化中,"please"被认为是非常重要的礼貌用语,在英国人的日常交流中十分常见。
而在中国文化中,虽然"请"也是表示礼貌的重点用语之一,但它的使用情境却与英语不尽相同。
除了称呼外,还需要关注听众的年龄、社会地位、性别等细节。
因此,在不同的语境中,如何选择合适的用语来表达礼貌至关重要。
四、年龄在中文文化中,对长辈的尊重是非常重要的传统,在怎么称呼一个人和如何表达谦卑方面有很多特别的用语和习惯。
年轻一代的中国人已经开始跟进西方的潮流,开始变得更加开放和直接,但在家庭环境中,尊重长辈的惯例仍然得到遵守。
而在英文文化中,虽然老年人的地位也是非常重要的,但在称呼方式和用语表达中,没有那么强调对长辈的尊重。
论跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语的语用差异

同情准则 ( h y ptyMai : 话 者要 尽量 T eS m a x m) 说 h 减少 自己对别人 的厌 恶感 , 尽量增加 同情 感。
2 中国式 的礼 貌 准则 .
顾 日国提 出 了汉语 文 化 的 四个 礼 貌特 征 :尊 重 、
谦 逊 、态 度 热 情 、 雅 。 文
1 西 方 的 礼 貌 准 则 . 英 国著 名 的 语 言 学 家 利 奇 ( .L eh 在 仔 细 研 究 G ec )
顾 日国在吸收和借鉴 了利奇 ( .L eh 的六条 礼 G ec )
貌准则 , 比分析 了英语礼 貌现象 , 追溯 了现代 礼 对 并 貌概念 的 历 史 渊 源之 后 ,根 据 礼 与 礼 貌 的联 系 ,于
J u a fL o a gNoma iest o r lo u yn r lUnv ri n y
Au ., 0 g 2 09 Vo . 8 No. 12 4
第2 8卷 第 4期
论跨文化 交际 中英汉礼貌 用语的语用差异
张 海 琳
( 河南科技大学 外 国语学 院,河南 洛阳 4 10 7 0 3)
摘
要 : 跨文化交际 中,来 自不 同文化背景 ,操不 同语 言的人 们常常会遇到 文化 差异 问题 ,英 汉礼貌 在
用语在英汉两种语言 的应用 中就存 在有很大 的差异 。其差异性 主要表现在 : 谈语 题 目、称呼方式和对赞美感
谢 的 回答 四个 方 面 。
关键词 :英汉语言 ;礼貌用语 ;礼貌准则 ;语用差异
翻译。
一
、
引 言
他人受惠最大 。
慷 慨准则 ( h e eoi ai : 话者 要尽量 T eG nrsyM x t m) 说
中文系专业毕业论文 跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语差异对比研究

中文系专业毕业论文跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语差异对比研究跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语差异对比研究摘要:随着全球化的发展,跨文化交际变得越来越重要。
在这个过程中,语言是沟通的桥梁,而礼貌用语则是语言中不可忽视的一部分。
本研究旨在对比中英汉两种语言中的礼貌用语差异,以探讨不同文化背景下的交际行为。
通过对比分析中英汉礼貌用语的结构、用法和含义,研究发现跨文化交际中存在着显著差异,这对于提高跨文化交际的有效性和成功性具有深远的意义。
1. 引言跨文化交际是指在不同文化间进行的交流和互动。
随着经济全球化和文化交流的加强,跨文化交际的重要性日益凸显。
语言是跨文化交际的核心工具,而在语言中,礼貌用语是一种重要的表达方式。
中英汉是世界上两个重要的语言,其礼貌用语在文化背景和语言结构上存在差异。
因此,深入研究中英汉礼貌用语的差异,对于提高跨文化交际的效果和准确理解他人意图具有重要意义。
2. 礼貌用语的概念和功能2.1 礼貌用语的概念礼貌用语是指为了维护社交关系和减少冲突而使用的语言表达方式。
它可以通过表达善意、尊重和友好来增加对方的好感,并促进良好的人际关系。
2.2 礼貌用语的功能礼貌用语在跨文化交际中具有以下几个功能:2.2.1 建立友好关系礼貌用语能够减少交际冲突,为交际双方创造和谐友好的氛围。
2.2.2 表达尊重和关心通过礼貌用语,我们能够向对方表达尊重和关心,增强彼此之间的亲近感。
2.2.3 传递意图和情感礼貌用语能够准确传递自己的意图和情感,帮助他人准确理解自己的意图,从而避免误解和冲突。
3. 中英汉礼貌用语差异对比分析3.1 礼貌用语的表达方式中英汉在礼貌用语的表达方式上存在较大差异。
在中文中,使用高度尊敬和客套的措辞是表示礼貌的常见方式。
而在英语中,礼貌用语通常通过使用比较委婉和客气的措辞来表达。
3.2 礼貌用语的用法中英汉在礼貌用语的用法上也存在一定差异。
例如,在对待年长者时,中文中常使用尊敬的称谓,如“先生”、“女士”等,而英语中则更倾向于直接称呼名字或使用“Mr.”、“Mrs.”等较为正式的称谓。
跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语差异对比研究

跨文化交际中英汉礼貌用语差异对比研究摘要跨文化交际中的礼貌用语是一个非常重要的话题,其涉及到不同语言文化之间的差异。
英汉两种语言文化在礼貌用语方面存在许多差异,例如在称呼方式、道歉方式以及感谢方式等方面。
本文首先探讨了英汉两种语言文化的礼貌用语的概念以及意义,然后分别从称呼方式、道歉方式、感谢方式、客套话等几个方面对英汉两种语言文化的礼貌用语差异进行详细比较,并分析了其背后的文化背景。
最后,提出在跨文化交际中如何避免礼貌用语的误用。
关键词:跨文化交际;礼貌用语;英汉文化差异;称呼方式;道歉方式;感谢方式;客套话AbstractPoliteness language in cross-cultural communication is a very important topic, which involves the differences between different language cultures. There are many differences in politeness language between English and Chinese cultures,such as the way of addressing, apologizing and expressing gratitude. This paper first explores the concept and significance of politeness language in English and Chinese cultures, and then compares the differences in politeness language between English and Chinese cultures in terms ofways of addressing, apologizing, expressing gratitude, and polite language. analyzes the cultural background behind it. Finally, how to avoid the misuse of politeness language in cross-cultural communication is proposed.Keywords: cross-cultural communication; politeness language; English and Chinese cultural differences; ways of addressing; ways of apologizing; ways of expressing gratitude;polite language一、引言随着经济全球化和文化多元化的发展,跨文化交际已成为一种常见的交际方式。
汉英礼貌用语对比与分析

汉英礼貌用语对比与分析06秋专升本学员张先存学号z06205604001礼貌作为一种社会现象,普遍存在于各国语言中,但由于语用文化价值差异和语用习惯特点的不同,人们对礼貌的理解、处理和运用方式则各不相同.中西方由于受到不同文化、民族心理和价值观的影响,会用不同的方式来表达自己的礼貌言行.而这种差异往往会影响我们进行有效的跨文化交际,因此在英语学习中我们有必要了解汉英礼貌语用方面的差异.一。
汉英礼貌用语的对比:例1:问候语以什么样的方式与别人见面打招呼,分手告别,也因东西方文化传统和风俗习惯的不同而不同。
西方人则注重逻辑,他们讲究科学,追求准确、系统的分析和实证,西方形式逻辑中有三大定律,即同一律、矛盾律、排中律;在演绎推理中有三段论,即大前提、小前提和结论。
在语言上表现为重视语言的形式,人称要一致、单复数有讲究、时态有要求,主语和谓语要配合,介词讲究搭配等等,每个细节都不能马虎。
例如:中文说“你吃了吗?”可以表示字面意义,也可以表示问候,这里的“吃”字后面的“饭”可以省略,不论早饭、中饭、晚饭都可以这样说,也不管什么时候吃的。
而英语中可能要说三句不同的话“Have you had your lunch/super/dinner?” 而且他们并不能用来表示问候,除了字面意义,这三句话可能用来暗示一种邀请,但说话人至少要考虑到两个问题:吃的是哪一餐饭,用什么时态,这些问题不清楚,这句话就没法说。
所以,中国人见面时常用的客套话是:“吃过饭了吗?”“你去哪儿?”而与英美人打招呼,不要说“Have you had your meal?”或者“Where are you going?”他们会以为你想邀请他一起外出用餐或你在打听他的私事呢。
而当他们正等着听你的下文时,你却谈起旁的事情。
这样往往会使对方觉得莫名其妙。
他们会想,不请我吃饭,干吗问我吃过饭没有?即使你见他正在用餐,一般也不能说“Are you having meal?”(你在吃饭?)或者“You are going to the dinning room?”(你去吃饭吗?)他们认为这简直是无用的话,明知故问,你不是看见我正在吃饭吗?又如你正巧遇见一个美国人在修理他的汽车,你走过去说声“Hello. ”或者“Hi.”就行了。
跨文化交际中的英汉礼貌语言差异【文献综述】

文献综述英语跨文化交际中的英汉礼貌语言差异一、前言部分(说明写作的目的,介绍有关概念,扼要说明有关主题争论焦点)1.写作目的:礼貌原则是人们在社会言语交际中必须遵守的原则。
然而中西方文化价值、自我观以及语言间接程度的差异导致了礼貌原则差异的存在,从而影响了跨文化交际的顺利进行。
语言与文化密切相关,语言是文化的载体,同时也是文化的重要组成部分。
人们在社会言语交际中,必须遵守一条原则——礼貌原则。
礼貌是各社会、各群体共有的普遍现象,是人们交际活动的基本准则,是维系人际和谐的工具和手段,是实现人与人之间成功交际的基本条件,是人类文明进步的重要标志。
但不同语言和文化的国度有不同的礼貌表达方式,深刻理解中西礼貌原则的差异及其渊源,有利于跨文化交际双方增进文化交流,提高跨文化交际能力,保证跨文化交际的顺利进行。
2.相关概念:早在20 世纪50 年代, 美国学者戈夫曼(ErvingGoffman) 就从戏剧的观点提出了“面子行为理论”(贾玉新,1997),建立了礼貌模式。
他认为,人们的行为分为前台行为和后台行为二种。
“脸面”是人类行为准则之一,渗透于人际行为之中。
很显然,“面子功夫”是作给其他人看的“前台”行为。
Goffman 同时指出,面子对于每个人都是神圣不可侵犯的,是人们在交际中都很关注的重要因素。
面子的需求是相互的,一个人要想自己不丢面子,最保险的办法是不去伤害他人的面子。
美国语言哲学家Grice (1975)提出:所有的谈话者都必须遵循一条原则,即“合作原则”。
它包括四个准则:( 一) 数量准则:所提供的信息量要符合谈话的要求, 不多不少。
( 二) 质量准则:所说的话要有根据, 要真实。
( 三) 相关准则:所说的话要与前面的内容相关。
( 四) 方式准则:说话要简洁、清楚、有条不紊,不含糊其词。
koff在上个世纪七十年代提出礼貌三规则:规则一:不要强加于人;适用于交际双方权势和地位不均等的场合,如学生和老师,雇主和雇员之间;规则二:给对方留有余地和空间;适用于交际双方权力地位平等;但社会关系不密切的场合,如商人与顾客;规则三:增进双方的友情;适用于好友,恋人之间。
从跨文化交际角度看英汉礼貌语的语用差异

英汉礼貌语的语用差异摘要:使用礼貌语是不同的社会群体共有的普遍现象,是人类社会文明的标志。
然而由于受不同文化的制约,英汉礼貌用语也有所不同。
本文试从英汉两种不同语言的礼貌原则入手,通过对英汉礼貌用语的语用差异进行对比,分析其产生的原因,期望减少跨文化交际过程中的误解和文化冲突,使说话者成功进行跨文化交际。
关键词:礼貌语、语用差异、跨文化交际Pragmatic Discrepancies of Politeness in Chinese and Englishfrom the Point of Cross-cultural CommunicationAbstract:The use of politeness is a common phenomenon in various societies and groups, and it is the mark of human social civilization.However, affected by different cultures, politeness has specific characteristics. Aiming at reducing misunderstanding and cultural conflict and promoting successful communication in the process of cross-cultural communication, this paper begins with the different principles of politeness, contrasts the pragmatic discrepancies of politeness and analyzes the causes for the differences in Chinese and English.Key words:politeness;pragmatic discrepancies;cross-cultural communication1、英语礼貌原则美国语言学家Grice提出了言语交际中的合作原则。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
Research Proposal班级xxxxx 学号xxxxx 姓名xxx1.Title of my thesis英文题目:A Cross-cultural Comparative Analysis of Chinese and English Politeness中文题目:汉英礼貌用语的跨文化对比分析Thesis statement:Politeness is a code of conduct with moral or ethical significance in daily life behavior, a social statute that has a restrictive effect on any member of society; likewise, language is also bound by this code.Politeness is both universal and culturally diverse, showing different characteristics in different cultures.From the perspective of cultural differences, this article outlines the principle of politeness between China and the West, and analyzes the differences and their causes through comparisons in terms of address, greeting, and thank you. It also proposes how to deal with such differences in cross-cultural communication to avoid cultural conflict..2.Purpose and Significance of studyPoliteness itself is a code of conduct with moral or ethical significance in daily life behavior, including people's efforts to maintain harmonious interpersonal relationships. It is a symbol of human civilization and an important criterion for human social activities. However, there are differences in the "politeness principles" in different cultural types, and these differences are fully reflected in polite language. At this time, understanding this difference and studying polite language can improve the ability to use polite language, promote cross-cultural communication and foreign language teaching, and also have guiding significance for our real life.3.Literature review3.1 Domestic status:Xu Shengzhang (1992) modified Leech's politeness principle in his politeness principle, replacing the words "Maximize" and "Minimize" with words such as "usually inclined", and considered the appropriateness of politeness .L. R. Mao proposed "the relative face orientation construct" after comparing the differences between Chinese and English cultures. This concept is based on the assumption that face is a public image that each member of the community intends to earn for himself, and this public image indicates a potential politeness, which is either an ideal social identity, Or point to ideal personal autonomy. This polite orientation is the unique connotation of face in a particular society.Chinese linguist Gu Yueguo (1992) proposed five rules of Chinese politeness on the basis of Leech's theoretical framework based on the politeness characteristics of Chinese language and culture: 1. the criterion of derogation and respect for others;4. Seeking common ground;5. Code of morality, words and deeds.Professor Bi Jiwan (1996) proposed three characteristics of politeness in Han culture: 1. Self-respect or respect and mutual respect; 2. Concern for each other. Friends are like relatives, and they are treated with enthusiasm and courtesy.Wang Xiao (2003) believes that in business negotiations, in order to reach an agreement in favor of both parties, civilizedlanguage, implicit euphemism, and polite manners are all necessary factors for successful negotiations. Business people must adhere to their own opinions and respect each other in foreign business negotiations, and be polite and not humble.Zhang Yuyu (2010) believes that "politeness" plays a role that cannot be ignored in daily communication. Due to the importance of "politeness", this phenomenon has also received increasing attention from pragmaticians. The most famous theories are Brown and Levinsion's "face theory" and Leech's politeness principle. Polite pragmatic research helps to improve people's communication skills, thereby creating a good communication atmosphere and creating a harmonious and harmonious environment.Pan Lanlan (2010) believes that Zou Jinhong defined "politeness" in "Ceremony" as "the idea and behavior of harmonious interpersonal relations between people, which is the embodiment of respect and friendliness of speech and manners". As a lubricant, politeness weakens contradictions and conflicts and regulates interpersonal relationships. Teachers should also follow the principle of politeness in classroom teaching. Yu language teaching organically combines to create a pleasant teaching environment to achieve the effect of promoting classroom teaching and improving teaching quality.3.2 Foreign status:In 1973, Robin Lakoff published an article entitled "The logic of politeness; or, minding your P'S and Q'S." For the first time, politeness in linguistic communication was examined from the perspective of conversational principles. Mother of Modern Politeness Theory "(Eelen, 2001: 2)In the 1960s, the American language philosopher Grice (1975) proposed the principle of conversational cooperation based on the speech acts of Austin and Seale, which believed that people should follow the four principles of quality, method and related in all conversations. After the principle of cooperation was proposed, Grice added a conversational meaning to supplement the situation that people often deliberately violated a certain criterion in conversations. However, Grice's principles of conversational cohesion and conversational implication still cannot fully explain the meaning of language and its illocutionary power.Brown and Levinson (1978) believe that face has two aspects: positive face and negative face. There are many potential threatening behaviors in communication activities. This requires the speaker to use positive politeness strategies to maintain the positive face of the callee or use negative politeness strategies to maintain the negative face of the callee. Their view of politeness is undoubtedly the most influential to date, and their groundbreaking research has greatly promoted the development of politeness research. Today, Brown & Levinson is almost synonymous with "politeness", and their theoretical views have become a strong meme.British linguist Leach (1983) proposed the well-known principle of politeness, which is an important principle in pragmatics. The principle includes six principles: 1. the rule of grace; 2. the principle of generosity; 3. the principle of praise; 4. The principle of modesty; 5. The principle of agreement; 6. The principle of compassion. Leech's politeness principle has two major contributions: one is to clearly indicate the criteria for distinguishing between politeness and impolite behavior; the other is to point out that politeness is both an asymmetric behavior and a symmetrical behavior. Leech proposed that theprinciple of politeness can be combined with Grice's principle of cooperation to explain certain communicative behaviors of people. For example, deliberately violates the quantity, quality, or related standards, turns corners, and does not express its intentions. In this regard, Grice's principle of cooperation cannot be explained, but the principle of politeness can give a complete answer, that is, people sometimes behave rudely to others in order not to hurt the face of others, and will convey their thoughts in the form of conversational meaning To each other. According to Leech, the principle of politeness not only saved the principle of cooperation, but also laid the foundation for the formation of the irony principle.The British, Iail Gregory, founded the Polite Society in 1986, and later changed its name to the Campaign for Courte on the 10th anniversary, and proposed to be the first in October every year Friday is designated as "National Courtesy Day."Watts (1992) believed that the so-called politeness means "the various manners of polite behavior that the members of the social and cultural collective recognize and talk about". At the same time, politeness is also a more technical concept, which is only valuable in the general theory of social interaction.The 6th International Pragmatics Symposium, held in Reims, a city in northeastern France from July 19th to 24th, 1998, featured a special discussion on "polite ideology". A total of 8 papers were exchanged at the meeting. Gino Eelen commented on these eight papers one by one.November 5-6, 1998 in Louvain, Belgium. 1a. The University of Neuve held a symposium dedicated to the interface between politeness and ideology. The first international seminar on language politeness was held at Chulalongkom University in Bangkok, Thailand, December 7-9, 1999. Bruce Fraser, Robin Lakoff, Sachiko Ide and many other well-known scholars of politeness were invited to make keynote speeches at the conference and discuss the study of politeness Method and its cross-cultural perspective. Some papers of the conference were published in 2005 by John Benjamins, a well-known Dutch publishing company. (Lakoff & Sachiko, 2005)Mdrquez Reiter (2000) adopted the "open role-playing method" for the first time to conduct a comparative study of the verbal behavior of requests and apologies in Uruguay English and British English.Eelen (2001) used meta-analysis to analyze the ontological, epistemological and methodological problems in politeness research in detail.Beeching (2002), based on the French impromptu colloquial corpus, analyzes the role of French vignettes in oral conversation to investigate the politeness of French men and women in conversation.Locher (2004) focused on the interaction of power and politeness in discourse conflicts.4.Key PointsFor today's era, cross-cultural conflict is not a new topic, but it is still an inquiring topic. Since the end of the Western Han Dynasty, Buddhist culture has entered China, but it has been resisted by Chinese Taoism and Confucianism. Conflicts between Chinese culture and foreign cultures of different models have begun to emerge. The large-scale exchanges and conflicts between Chinese and Western cultures began with the Opium War and have a history of more than 160 years. Especially after China's entry into the WTO in 2001,the conflict between Chinese and Western cultures has become increasingly apparent. As cross-cultural negotiations at various levels and types become more frequent, understanding the differences between Chinese and Western cultures will play a very important role in preventing cross-cultural communication errors, reducing misunderstandings in international exchanges, and promoting international exchanges and cooperation. Cultural conflicts are manifested in many aspects, so looking at the differences between Chinese and Western intercultural communication principles of politeness is also a breakthrough.5.Outline1. Introduction1.1 Research Background1.2 Significance of the Study2.Politeness Principle and Interculturel Communication2.1 Politeness Principle2.2 Interculturel Communication2.3 The relation between Both of Them3.Survey about the Difference3.1 Adressing3.2 Greeting3.3 Thanking3.4 Apologising4.Reason for the Difference5.ConclusionBibliographyAcknowledgements6.References[1] 毕继万.“礼貌”的文化特性研究[J]. 世界汉语教学,2006,1[2]梁金萍. 从礼貌原则的视角分析非语言交际语用失误[D]. 天津大学, 2009.[3]潘岚岚. Leech礼貌原则在英语课堂教学的运用[J].《现代企业教育》2010,16[4]王晓. 商务谈判英语中的礼貌原则[J].重庆工商大学学报(社会科学版)2003,6[5]张博. 语用即文化——语用研究的文化审视[J]. 大众文艺, 2014(13):193-194.[6] 张昱昱.礼貌的语用研究[J]. 湖南人文科技学院学报2010,5,3[7] Beeching,K.Gender,Politeness and Pragmatic Panicles in French[M].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2012.[8]Eelen,G. A, Critique of Politeness Theories[M].Manchester:St.Jerome,2011.[9]Lakoff,‘R.T.&S.Ide(eds.).Broadening 1.Ile Horizon of Linguistic Politeness[c].Amsterdam:John Benjamins,2005.[10]Locher,M.A.Power and Politeness in Action:Disagreement Oral Communication[M].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,2009.[11]Watts,R.J.Politeness[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2003.[12]Watts,R.J.,Ide,S.&Ehlieh,K..Introduction[A].InWatts,R.J.,Ide,S.Ide&Ehlich,K.(eds.).Politeness Language:Studies in Its History,Theory and Practice7.Scheduale of writing1. 2020年3月下旬确定论文题目,指导老师下达任务书。