Routine politeness in American and British English requests: use and non­use of please

Article (Accepted Version)

http://sro.sussex.ac.uk

Murphy, M Lynne and De Felice, Rachele (2018) Routine politeness in American and British English requests: use and non-use of please. Journal of Politeness Research, 15 (1). pp. 1-24. ISSN 1612-5681

This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/66601/

This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version.

Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.

Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.

Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way.

RoutinepolitenessinAmericanandBritishEnglishrequests:useandnon-useofpleaseM.LynneMurphy&RacheleDeFelicetobepublishedinJournalofPolitenessResearchFinalsubmittedversion.Pleaseaskpermissionbeforequoting.lynnem@sussex.ac.ukAbstract

Thispaperlooksattheuseandnon-useofpleaseinAmericanandBritishEnglishrequests.

Theanalysisisbasedonrequestdatafromtwocomparableworkplaceemailcorpora,which

havebeenpragmaticallyannotatedtoenableretrievalofallrequestspeechactsregardless

offormulation.675requestsareextractedfromeachofthetwocorpora;thebehaviourof

pleaseisanalysedwithregardtofactorssuchasimpositionlevel,sentencemood,and

modalverbtype.DifferencesinuseofpleasebetweenthetwovarietiesofEnglishcanbe

accountedforbyviewingthisasamarkerofconventionalpolitenessratherthanface-threat

mitigationinBritishEnglish,andofrelationshipasymmetryinAmericanEnglish.

Keywords:politenessstrategies;requests;pragmaticvariation;English;please

1. Introduction

1.1Thedualnatureofplease

Watts(2003:183)callsplease“[t]hemostobviousexampleofapolitenessmarkerin

English”,yetitisawordthatdividesspeakersofBritishandAmericanEnglishes(henceforth

BrEandAmE),occurringabouttwiceasfrequentlyinBritishEnglishasinAmerican(Biberet

al.1999:1098;BreuerandGeluykens2007).Thisdifferenceissometimesnotedin

2

interculturalcommunicationandcontributestostereotypingregardingpoliteness.Britons

oftenaccuratelyperceiveAmericansasusingpleaselessthantheywould,asin(1)and(2),

andAmericans’perceivedlackofpleaseinexpectedpositionscanbeasourceof

interculturalfriction,asin(3)and(4).

(1) IoftencomplainthatAmericansrarelysay“Please”butboydotheytake“Thank

you”seriously(BritishexpatriateintheUS;

http://pondparleys.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/americans-brits-always-offending-each.html)

(2) Americansdon’tsaypleaselikewedo[…]andyesitsoundsliketheyhaveno

manners,butit’showtheyare(Britishflightattendants;Liz&Julie2007)

(3) [We]wereintheoutdoorsectionofacafé[intheUK]once–acramped,eat-your-

lunch-and-get-outkindofplace–andasacouplewho’dbeensittingnearbywove

pastourtabletogetthemselvesout,oneofthemsaid,“Inthiscountry,wesay

pleaseandthankyou.”

Sadly,bythetimewe’dprocessedthewords,theyweretoofarawayforasnappy

comeback,but“Inourcountry,we’repolitetostrangers,”didcometomind.

(AmericantravellerinUK;http://notesfromtheuk.com/2015/01/16/manners-american-and-

british/)

(4) Oneday,afterI’dbeeneating[atabakedpotatoshopinCambridge]foraweekor

so,IorderedmyusualasIalwaysdid:“MayIhaveabakedpotatowithcheeseand

broccoli?”Theserverrespondedwith,“no,notunlessyoustartsayingplease.”(Lisa,

AmericanstudentinUK;Murphy2012)

TheAmericansinthelasttwointeractionshadnotperceivedtheirownplease-less

requestsasimpolite.Wouldtheyhaveperceivedtheirownrequestsas“morepolite”ifthey

hadsaidplease?Thereisreasontosuspectnot.SincetheseAmericansdidnotbelievethat

theydeservedscolding,theyseemtofeelthattheirplease-lessrequestswerealready

polite.Furthermore,onecanfindAmericanreflectionson“impoliteplease”,whichhas

“evolvedintoatagmeanttoconveyurgencyorannoyance”(Trawick-Smith2012).

3

Thedifferencesinfrequencyindicatedifferentnormsformakingcontext-appropriate

requests,whichmayinturnindicatedifferentprevalentfunctionsofpleaseintheUSand

UK.Thispaper,basedonworkplaceemaildata,takesthepositionthatpleasevariation

revealsdifferentaspectsofappropriateinteractioninBritishandAmericancultures,witha

greateremphasisonconventionalisedformulaeinBrEthaninAmE.TheBritishcasein

particularofferssomesupporttotheargumentthatperceptionsofwhatis“polite”can

dependonwhatisfamiliar,ratherthanacalculatedmitigationoffacethreat(Terkourafi

2015:11).TheexistenceoffewerandweakerpatternsintheAmericandatagivesthe

impressionthattheuseofpleaseinAmEislessamatterofroutine.1

Therestofthearticleisorganisedasfollows.Intheremainderofthissection,we

providesomecontextforourwork,discussingotherstudiesonAmEandBrEplease.In

Section2wedescribeourdataandmethodology,andanalyseourfindingsinSection3.

Finally,inSection4,weconsiderpossibleinterpretationsforourresults.

1.2Backgroundtothestudy

WhilethefunctionofpleasehasnotbeendirectlycomparedinBrEandAmE,differencesin

itsrelativefrequencyarenottheonlyhintwehavethatpleaseisusedfordifferent

purposesinAmEandBrE.Wherepleasehasbeenstudiedinoneofthesenationsorthe

other,theresearchershaveusedlanguageormadeconclusionsthat,whencontrastedwith

oneanother,pointtodifferences–eventhoughtheymostlymaketheirclaimsabout

“Englishplease”withoutreferencetonationalvarieties.Thisistrueregardlessofthedata

1Inconsideringthedata,weattempt,inthefirstinstance,acertaintheoreticalagnosticism.Whereweusethewordpolitewithoutreferencetoaparticulartheory,wemeantorefertofirst-orderpoliteness–thatis,speakers’culturalunderstandingofwhatqualifiesasa“polite”or“impolite”behaviour.Whenconsideringwhetherthefindingsareconsonantwiththeoreticalapproachestopoliteness,wehavenotassumedthatallmodelsareequallyexplanatoryforallcultures.

4

typeorresearchmethodologies.WorkingwithBritishdiscourse-completiontask(DCT)data,

House(1989)concludesthatpleaseoccurswhenimpositionisminimalandsocialobligation

ispresent,asinserviceencounters.Wichmann(2004),workingwithspokenrequestsinthe

ICE-GBcorpus,similarlyclaimsthatpleaseisusedonlywhereverylittleface-workis

needed.

ButAmericanstudiesgiveadifferentview.Inobservationsofspontaneousspoken

AmericanEnglish,Stross(1964)foundthatAmericanwaitressesusedpleasetokitchenstaff

onlywhentheymaderequestsforactionsthatwerebeyondnormalexpectationsofthejob,

andErvin-Tripp(1976)foundthatpleasemarksdifferencesinageorrank.Thatpleaseisa

power-differentialmarkerinAmEisalsosupportedbyanecdotalobservationsthatplease

sounds“bossy”ineverydayrequests(Trawick-Smith2012)andbyLeopold’s(2015)USemail

requeststudyinwhichpleaseoccurredinallimperativerequestsforpermission,wherethe

addresseecanbeassumedtohaveauthority,unlikeinrequestsforactionwhereeither

partymightbethemorepowerful(thoughthisisjustsixrequestsinacorpusof450).Pufahl

Bax(1986),againobservingnaturallyoccurringworkplaceinteractions,foundpleaseonlyin

writtenrequests,neverinspokenones,suggestingthatAmericanpleasemarksalevelof

formality.Inexperimentalstudiescarriedoutinnaturalisticsettings,Firminetal.(2004)and

Vaughnetal.(2009),respectively,foundgreatercomplianceforalow-impositionrequest

whenitlackedpleasethanwhenithadit,andgreatercomplianceforahigh-imposition

requestwhenithadplease.Theycharacterisedpleaseasmarkinga“plea”,amarkedly

differentperceptionofpleasethangivenbyBritishcommentatorslikeLeech(2014:135),

thatpleasemarks“averagerequests”asamatterofroutine.

Linguisticgenreanddatacollectionmethodsmustbekeptinmindwhencomparing

theseandthecurrentwork.SomeofthepastworkinvolvesartificialdatafromDCTs(e.g.

5

House1989,BreuerandGeluykens2007).Agreatdealofcautionisneededinrelyingon

suchstudies,sinceFlöckandGeluykens(2015)havedemonstratedthatpleaseisusedin

verydifferentwaysinDCTsandnaturallyoccurringdata,concludingthat“pleaseprobably

servesadifferentfunctionintheDCTsthanintheauthenticdata”(2015:29).DCT

respondentsrelyonhighlysalientstrategies,andsotheymayoveruseplease.Forthe

studiesconsideringnaturallyoccurringdata,theamountsofdataareoftensmall–e.g.64

utterancesinPufahlBax(1986)and84inWichmann(2004).

Theliteraturedescribedsofarshowsthat,inavarietyofcommunicativesettings,

thereisamarkedtrendforBrEtousepleasemorefrequentlyandformoreminorrequests,

inawaythatAmEdoesnot.Inthispaper,wetakeamoresystematicandtransatlantic

approachtoplease,andcontributeanewanalysisofpleaseinnatural,computer-mediated

writtencommunicationwithattentiontothetwonationalvarieties.Usingspeech-act-

taggedcorporaofBritishandAmericanbusinessemail,weareabletoinvestigatethe

matteronalargescaleusingcomparabledata.

Ofcourse,theremaybeconsiderablesub-culturalvariationwithinthesediverse

nationalvarieties.Nevertheless,weapproachtheissueatthenationallevelfortworeasons.

First,weexpecttofinddifferencesatthenationallevelbecausethereismorehistorical

opportunityfordifferencestoariseandbemaintainedwherethereisnogeographical

continuityornationalidentityunitingthepopulations.Second,therearepracticalreasons

forinvestigating“AmericanEnglish”and“BritishEnglish”:fewpaststudiesordatasources

givesufficientinformationaboutthevarietiesusedinordertoallowforsub-national

comparison.Thisstudyaddstoagrowingbodyofstudiesonpragmaticvariationinnational

varietiesofEnglish(e.g.Flöck2011,Goddard2012,HaughandSchneider2012).

6

2.DataandMethodology

2.1Data

Tokeepextraneousvariablestoaminimum,wehavechosentwocorporarepresentinga

singlegenre:workplaceemails.TheEnronSentCorpus(Styler2011)consistsoftheoriginal,

unmodifiedmessagesextractedfromtheSentMailfoldersofEnronemployees.The

messages,whichcovertheperiod1999–2001,arewrittenmainlybynativespeakersof

AmE.TheCorpusofBusinessEnglishCorrespondence(henceforthCOBEC;Ankeetal.2013;

DeFeliceandMoreton2014)consistsofemailsfromaBritish-basedtelecommunications

company,coveringtheperiod1999–2006;themajorityofitsusersarenativespeakersof

BrE.Thecorporacontainavarietyofcommunications,bothinternalandexternaltothe

company,coveringarangeoftopics.

Cruciallyforthisresearch,thetwocorporahavebeenpragmaticallyannotated,such

thateachutteranceisassignedtoaspeech-actcategory(request,commitment,expressive,

question,statement).Thismakesitpossibletocarryoutacomprehensivestudyofspeech-

actrealisationsregardlessoftheirformulation,aswecansearchthecorpusforall

utterancestaggedasrequestsratherthanjustparticularphrases(e.g.canyouorIneedyou

to).Thismeansouranalysiscanincludebothoccurrencesandabsencesofplease,asweare

notlimitedtoalexicalsearchforthisword,butcanconsiderthefullrangeofrequests

extractedfromthecorpora.

Thespeech-actannotationfortheEnrondatawascarriedoutmanuallybythree

nativeEnglishspeakers,allwithexpertiseinlinguistics.Eachutterancewasannotatedby

tworesearchers,andanydifferencesbetweenthemwerereconciled;thisprocessis

describedindetailinDeFeliceetal.(2013).FortheCOBECcorpus,ahybridapproachwas

7

undertaken.Thedatawerefirstprocessedbyanautomatedspeechacttagger(DeFelice

andMoreton2014,2015),whichachievesaccuracyofaround81%.Thetaggeddatathen

underwenthumanpost-processingtoremoveduplicatesanderroneouslytaggedutterances

andtoidentifyfurtherinstancesofrequestsnotrecognisedbythetagger.

Forbothcorpora,wecanonlyanalysetheavailablelinguisticinformation,as

informationabouttheinterpersonalrelationshipsandrolesofthecorrespondentsislimited.

2.2Extractingandannotatingtherequests

Weextracted675requestsfromeachofthetwocorpora.Thesespanabroadrangeof

directness,frombluntimperativestoindirectrequestsformulatedasquestionsorfirst-

personstatements,astheexamplesbelowdemonstrate:

(5) Copyfromthis.[AmE]

(6) Pleaselet<N1>knowyouarecoming.[BrE]

(7) Canyoupleasechase<N2>?[BrE]

(8) Couldyouresendit?[AmE]

(9) IwouldappreciaterepresentativesfromyourareatocoverEstatesBidandOrder

Processes.[BrE]

(10) ThankyouforyourreminderbutIhavenorecordofaresponsefromyoutomy

notewhichIhaveagainattached.[BrE]

Wethenmanuallyannotatedthedatasetwithrespecttoanumberoffeatures,listedin

Table1withexamples.Bothauthorsindependentlycodedalloftherequests,anddiscussed

andreconciledanydisagreements.2Wetookallrequestsatfacevalue;thatis,wedidnot

2. WedecidedagainstusingtheCCSARPclassificatoryscheme(Blum-Kulkaetal.1989)becauseits

focusonbroaderpragmaticstrategiesdoesnotmatchourneedforfine-grainedgrammatical

8

considerthepossibilitytheymightbeutteredinjestorsarcastically,asthiscannotbe

judgedwithoutdetailedknowledgeofthecontext,However,weassumethatinsincere

utterancesareunlikelyinworkplaceemail,wherecommunicationisorientedtothe

completionofsharedtasksandsarcasmisopentomisinterpretation.

informationabouteachutterance;forexample,itcategorisesallmodalinterrogativestogetheras

query-preparatorystatements.

9

Table1:FeaturesandvaluesforannotationofrequestsFeature Values ExamplesPlease Yes

No• Pleasegetcopiestomeasap• Sittight

Positionofplease Clause-initialClause-medialClause-finalN/A

• Pleasegetcopiestomeasap• Let’spleasediscussthis• Tellmethatitdoesn’tmatter,please• Sittight

Mood ImperativeConditionalInterrogativeIndicative

• Pleasegetcopiestomeasap• Ifyoucangetthecorrectaddresses[…]• Canwediscussthispleaseassoonaspossible?• Iwouldlikeusalsotodiscussthislistofprojects

Subject 01stsingular1stplural2nd3rd

• AnyideasonhowIshouldrespond?• Imusthaveyourinputnolaterthan4pm• Let’spleasediscussthis• Pleasegetcopiestomeasap• Folksshouldfeelfreetodistribute[…]

Modifyingif-clause

YesNo

• Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasesendusanemail• Tellmethatitdoesn’tmatter,please

Modalform CanCouldMayMightMustNeedShouldWillWouldPerhapsMaybePossibleNone

• Canwediscussthispleaseassoonaspossible?• Couldyoupleasecallmetodiscusstheproject?• Youmaywanttomakesurethetextiscorrect• Youmightconsiderthatpossibility• Youmustbookaplaceifyouwishtoattend• WeneedtogetthemtoRtoday[…]• Folksshouldfeelfreetodistributewhen[…]• Iamsureyouwillwanttothankhim• Wouldyouletmeknow?• Perhapsgivehimsomeadditionalrecommendations• MaybeI’llseeyoutonight?• Isitpossibletogetsomeideaoftheamount?• Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasesendusanemail

Expressionofgratitude

YesNo

• Iwouldappreciateanyinformationyoucangiveme• Wouldyouletmeknow?

Expressionofpreference

YesNo

• Ifwecoulddothe24th,thatwouldbegreat• Perhapswecouldsetupacalltodiscussthis?

Actiontype,forexample:[seeappendixforfulllist]

ContactFind-infoHelpOfferSchedule

• PleasecontactJassoonaspossiblefortickets• Pleasecheckcarefullyyourownrequirements• Couldyoupleaseassistwiththefollowingrequest?• Ifyouneedanything,don’thesitatetocontactme• Canyoudoitpriorto1:30?

Impositionlevel 0(offer)LowMediumHighunknown

• Ifyouneedanything,don’thesitatetocontactme• Pleaseletmeknowyourpreference.• PleasedonottellPIhaveforwardedhisletter• PleaseobtainaprintoutandaskPtocompleteit• Thatpossible?

10

Asthetableshows,theanalysedfeaturesincludesyntacticandlexicalcharacteristics–

reflectingpragmalinguisticchoices–andthemoresubjectivesociopragmaticjudgementof

imposition.Thisallowsustodrawapictureofthelinguisticcontextofpleaseandestablish

howitsuseinteractswithdifferentlevelsofimposition.

3.Resultsanddiscussion

3.1Overalluseofplease

ForBrE,373ofthe675(55%)oftherequestsincludeplease,whileonly184ofthe675

(27%)AmErequestsdo.TheloweruseofpleaseinAmEisconsistentwithpreviousclaims

(Biberetal.1999,BreuerandGeluykens2007)thatthispolitenessmarkeroccursabouthalf

asofteninAmE.Italsochimeswiththeimpressionisticobservationsofnon-linguistsin(1)–

(4)above.Still,despiteLeech’s(2014:161)claimthatpleasemarksanutterance“asa

requestspokenwithacertain(oftenroutine)degreeofpoliteness”,itisabsentinalmost

halfoftheBrErequests.Itcouldbearguedthatthisfollowsfromthe“routineness”of

please.Asaconventionalmarkerofrequests,pleaseshouldoccurregularlyinconventional,

unremarkableworkplacerequests,butperhapsnotasofteninlessroutineones.Thenext

subsectionexploresthispossibility.

3.2Useofpleasebylevelofimposition

Thedifferencesinthefrequencyofpleasecouldindicatethatthetwodialectsuseitfor

differenttypesofrequests.Likepreviousstudiesonemailrequests(e.g.Biesenbach-Lucas

2006,Félix-Brasdefer2012),wehavetakenaccountofimpositionlevelsinrelationtothe

typesofrequestsformulated.Unlikeourwork,however,previousemailresearchhasmostly

concernedthehighlyspecificcontextofstudentsemailingtheirinstructors,wherethe

11

powerdifferentialisclearlydefined,andtheresearchers,beingacademicsthemselves,can

easilydeterminehowimposingaparticularactionisfortheparticipants.Becausewelack

informationabouttherolesofthewritersandaddresseesandthenatureofthework

involved,ourimpositioncodingconcentratedoninherentrankofimposition(Brownand

Levinson1987),whichwebasedupontheactionsrequested.Themainverbphrasesofthe

requestheadactsweregroupedintomacro-categoriesofactiontypes(e.g.CONTACT,MEET,

INFORM,TAKERESPONSIBILITY;seeappendix).ThesewereinturnjudgedtobeofHIGH,MEDIUM,

LOW,orNOimposition,asinTable2.

Table2:Occurrenceofpleasewithinimpositionlevels High Medium Low Offer unknownAmE 25%(45/180) 19%(17/88) 30%(110/368) 23.5%(8/34) 40%(2/5)BrE 43%(86/201) 30%(21/70) 65%(245/377) 91%(21/23) 0(0/2)

InourAmEdata,impositionlevelhaslittlebearingontheuseofplease.However,

impositionlevelappearstoplayaroleintheBrEdata,withmorefrequentuseofpleaseat

thelowerendofthescale.Thehigherfrequencyofpleaseinlow-stakesrequestsinBrE

supportstheviewthatitisprimarilypartofaconventionalrequestingroutineratherthana

mitigatorofseriousface-threat.ThisiscongruentwithHouse’s(1989)findinginDCTsand

Wichmann’sfindingthatinspokenlanguage“indirectplease-requeststendtobetowards

themoretransparentandconventionalisedendofthescale,wheretheimpositionissocially

licensed(suchasacourthearing)orwheretheimpositionislow(suchaspassingthesalt),

orwhereitisofbenefittothehearer”(2004:1532),bothusingBrEdata.

Bothcorporaincludeseveralexamplesofrequestsimposingeffortfulworkwhichare

notmitigatedbyplease,asin(11)and(12):

(11) SeeifyoucanturnthisnotefromAZintomoreunderstandableEnglish.(BrE)

12

(12) Canyoutrackdownthisbillanddetermineimpact?(AmE)

Thedifferenceinoccurrenceofpleaseinhigh-impositioncontextsisnotduetoadifference

insentencetype:inbothAmEandBrEabout76%ofthehigh-impositionrequestswere

imperativesormodalquestions,thesentencetypesthataccommodateplease.

Furtherconfirmationoftheroutinenessandlackofface-mitigationofBrEpleaseisgiven

byitsveryhighfrequencyinthesmallclassofoffers,which,unlikeotherrequestsinthe

database,donotasktheaddresseetoactforthebenefitoftherequester,asin(13)and

(14):

(13) PleaseletmeknowifIcanbeofanymorehelp.

(14) Pleaseacceptmyapologiesforclutteringyourinbox.

Wetakethisasfurtherevidenceoftheroutinenessofpleaseuseinlow-stakesBrE

directives,sinceheretheutterancesrequestnonecessaryactionfromtheaddressee.That

theyonlyhavethesurfaceformofadirectiveisindicatedbyhoweasyitistoparaphrase

themwithoutarequestform:(13)Iamavailabletohelpyouor(14)I’msorry.

3.3Useofpleaseanddirectness:sentencetypeandmodalverbs

Requestscanalsovaryalongthedimensionofdirectness,asexpressedbysyntacticmood

andsubjecttype.Inourdata,imperativesandquestionsfaroutnumberindicativesand

conditionalsinbothvarieties,asshowninTable3.3

3. Thefiguresrelatingtoindicativemoodneedtobetakenwithsomecaution:itispossiblethat

thereareveryindirectrequests,phrasedasdeclarativesentences,whichhavenotbeen

recognisedassuchbyeitherautomatedorhumanannotators,butwhichwouldberecognisedas

requestivehintsbytheintendedrecipient.

13

Table3:Requestsbymoodtype Imp Int Cond IndicAmE* 43%

(289)46%(328)

<1%(5)

8%(52)

BrE 38%(258)

46%(309)

3%(21)

13%(87)

*AmEaddsupto<100%becauseoneexamplewasasentencefragment.Pleaseisneverusedinconditionalsorindicativesineitherdataset.Thisistobe

expected,sincethesemoodsrepresentlessexplicitwaysofformulatingarequest.Their

syntacticformmitigatesthedirectnessoftherequest,andaddingpleasewouldonlymake

themovertlydirective(Blum-Kulka1987).Theseindirectformulationsareoftenusedfor

higherimposition,non-routinerequests.Forexample,57%ofBrEconditionals,39%ofBrE

indicatives,and40%ofAmEindicativeswerecategorisedashigh-impositionrequests(based

ontheirverb/actionclassifications).Table4showstherateofpleaseuseinimperativesand

interrogatives.

Table4:Useofpleasebymoodtype Imp Int

AmE 43%(124/289)

18%(59/328)

BrE 86%(221/258)

49%(152/309)

Inbothvarieties,pleaseisusedmuchmoreinimperativesthanininterrogatives,whichisin

linewiththeassumptionthattheinterrogativeisusedformitigation,andthusneedsplease

lessthanthemoredirectimperative.However,pleaseisusedmuchmorebyspeakersof

BrE,wherethevastmajorityofimperativesfeatureplease,thanbyspeakersofAmE,where

14

fewerthanhalfdo.4Thereissimilarlylargedisparityintheuseofpleaseininterrogatives.

Thisdifferencerelatestoimpositionlevel:imperativesandinterrogativesaremostoften

usedtoexpresslow-impositionrequests(halfofinterrogativesinbothvarieties,59%of

imperativesinAmE,67%ofimperativesinBrE),and,asdiscussedinSection3.2,BrEismore

likelytousepleaseinthesecontexts.Thesefiguresindicatethatusingpleasewith

imperativesisunmarkedandpreferredinourBrEdata,whereasitcannotbesaidtobe

unmarkedintheAmEdata.

Forinterrogatives,97%ofBrEand80%ofAmErequestsfeaturemodalverbs.5

Amongthese,onlycan,could,andwouldareregularlyused;allothermodals(may,might,

must,need,should,will)occur10timesorfewer,andsowedonotdiscussthemfurther.

Startingarequestwithcan,could,orwouldisafrequent,highlyroutinised

occurrence,andourdataisinlinewithWatts’claimthatcanyouandcouldyouquestions

havebecomethe“unmarkedforms[forrequesting]withinthescopeofpoliticbehaviourfor

averywiderangeofverbalinteractiontypes”(2003:193).Bothdatasetshavebothsecond-

person(henceforth2p)andnon-2psubjectsinmodalinterrogatives,with2pbeingfarmore

frequent.Closeranalysisshowedthatthesmallgroupofnon-2putterancesdifferinthetwo

varieties,withAmEmainlyusingthemasoutrightrequests(CanIhavex),andBrEmore

oftenusingfirst-personmodalinterrogativesashedgedperformatives(CanIsuggest/ask

that…).Giventhesmallsizeandheterogeneityofthefirst-personsubsetandthefactthat

theyrarelyincludeplease,theseexamplesarenotdiscussedfurtherhere.4. ThiscontrastswithLeopold(2015),inwhich67%of155Americanimperativesincludedplease.

Shedoesnotreporttherateofpleaseininterrogatives.Heremaildatadiffersfromoursinbeing

collectedfromself-selectedvolunteersfromarangeofprofessions.

5. Averysmallsetofnon-interrogativeutterancesfeaturemodalverbs.Noneofthesehaveplease,

andtheyconstitutetoosmallagroupformeaningfulanalysis.

15

Table5showsdifferentpatternsofpleaseoccurrenceinthetwovarieties,withAmE

consistentlypreferringplease-lessversionswithallthreemodals,andBrEpreferringplease-

fulversions.

Table5:Proportionofpleaseusewithcan/could/wouldyouinterrogativesmodal Canyou Couldyou WouldyouAmE 21%(18/84) 33%(32/98) 29%(5/17)BrE 55%(87/159) 60%(44/74) 65%(11/17)

OurBritishemaildataisnotablydifferentfromthatintheLondon–LundCorpusofSpoken

English,inwhichAijmer(1996)found20can+yourequestswithoutmitigationandonlyone

withplease,and25affirmativecould+yourequestswithoutmitigationand12withplease

(plusotherswithotherlexicalmitigatorsincludingkindlyandmodaladverbs).Thislower

rateofpleaseuseisnodoubtduetotherelativeinformalityofcontextsintheLondon–Lund

corpus,comparedtoourwrittenworkplacedata.Aijmernotestheexpectationthatplease

wouldbemorefrequentinbusinesscorrespondence,aswellasitsgreateruseintelephone

conversationsinthecorpus.

3.4Conventionalisationininterrogativerequests

TobetterunderstandthedegreeofconventionalisationinBrEandAmErequests,weused

AntConcsoftware(Anthony2014)toextract3-gramsand4-gramsinordertoidentify

repeatingphrases.Table6showsthosethatwereparticulartosecond-personinterrogative

requests.

16

Table6:Mostfrequent3-gramsand4-gramsin2pmodalinterrogatives AmE BrE

4-grams canyougiveme(6)couldyouletme[know](6)couldyoupleaseforward(5)

canyoupleaseconfirm(10)couldyoupleaseconfirm(8)canyoupleaseensure(7)canyouletme[know](6)canyoupleaseforward(5)canyoupleaseprovide(5)

3-grams couldyouplease(31)

canyouplease(16)canyouhelp(7)canyougive(6)couldyoulet(6)canyousend(5)couldyoucall(5)

couldyouforward(5)couldyougive(5)

couldyouresend(5)wouldyouplease(5)

canyouplease(76)couldyouplease(39)canyouhelp(13)

wouldyouplease(10)pleasecanyou[9]canyoulet(8)

canyouconfirm(5)

TheeffectisthatBrEinterrogativerequestsstartmorerepetitively,withlargernumbersof

requestsstartingwiththesamethreeorfourwords.OnequarterofBrEinterrogativesand

11%ofallrequests(regardlessofmood)startwiththesamethreewords:Canyouplease.

Themostfrequentinterrogative3-graminAmE,couldyouplease,occursinlessthan10%of

theAmEinterrogativerequestsandlessthan5%ofrequestsoverall.Theaveragerateof

occurrenceacrosstheAmEinterrogative3-gramsisjustunder9times,whiletheaveragefor

thesevenBrE3-gramsisabout23times.ThisleadstotheconclusionthattheBrErequests

aremorerepetitivebecausetheystartwithhighlyconventionalisedformulae.Thefactthat

theactionsrequestedinvolvelowimpositionontheaddresseearefurtherevidencethat

convention,ratherthancalculatedface-threateningactmitigation(asperBrownand

Levinson1987),isatplay.Theverbsthatoccurintheseinterrogativesaremuchthesame

acrossAmEandBrE:verbsofcommunication,suchascontactandcall,andtasksrelatedto

emailcommunication,suchasforwardand(re)send.

17

Furthermore,thetableshowsatendencytoplacepleaseinafixedmedialposition,

aspartofthemodalverb+you+pleasechunk.InlinewithSato(2008),ourdatahasno

instancesofinitialpleaseinAmEinterrogatives,andaverystrongpreferenceformedial

overfinalposition(only3%ofAmericaninterrogativesfeatureutterance-finalplease).BrE

canfeaturepleaseinanyposition,butalsostronglyprefersquestion-medialplease(7%are

utterance-initialand6%utterance-final,contraWichmann’s(2004)findingofnoinitial

pleaseinspokenquestions).6Thestrongtendencyformedialpleaseininterrogatives

supportsthepropositionthatpleaseoccursaspartofconventionalisedconstructions,in

thiscaseMODAL-PRONOUN-please.ThisfitsTerkourafi’snotionof“aconceptualizationof

politenessasarepertoireofexpressionsthatareretrievedasawholeincontextandto

whichspeakershaverecourseroutinelywhenbeing(orteachingothershowtobe)polite”

(Terkourafi2015:14).

3.5Otherformsofmitigation

Ininterculturalcommunication,thelowfrequencyofpleaseinAmEseemstocontributetoa

reportedBritishperceptionofAmericanspeakersas“rude”.Howeverspeakerscanuse

otherstrategiestomitigatearequesttomaintainpolitenessandavoidthreatstothe

hearer’sface(Holmes1984,Blum-Kulka1987,CurlandDrew2008).Welookedatwhether

othersentence-internalmitigatorswereusedinplaceofplease,focusingonconventionally

indirectmodalquestions,sincethesearetheformswherespeakershavethegreatest

opportunitytochooseornotchoosetouseplease.Themitigatorsweinvestigatedinclude:

6. Thenumberofutteranceswithinitialpleaseistoosmalltoderiveanymeaningful

generalisationsaboutwhattypesofcontextswouldgiverisetothisuse;theonlyfeaturethey

shareisthattheyaremostlylow-impositionrequests.

18

expressionsofgratitudeandpreference;downtonersincludingpossible,possibility,maybe,

perhaps,chance,wondering,andjust(e.g.whenyougetachance,isitpossible);andif-

clauses.However,fewwerefoundinanygreatnumberandtheirpresencedidnotseemto

dependoneithertheabsenceofpleaseorthelevelofimposition.If-clausesaresomewhat

morefrequentinplease-lessrequests,thoughmoreinBrEthanAmE,buttheseincluded

plainlymitigatingones,likeifyouwouldn’tmindoriffolksagree,andmorecontingent

types,asinIfyouhaveanyproblems,contactme.

Acomplicatingfactorinlookingatmitigators,however,isthatwe,likemanyother

researchers,haveonlyconsideredtheheadactoftherequest(astaggedinthecorpora).

BreuerandGeluykens’(2007)comparativeDCTstudyanalysedmitigationwithin(internal

to)andexternaltotheheadact.Internalmitigatorsincludeplease,non-imperativeclause

types,modals,andsoforth.Externalmitigatorscouldinvolveseparateexpressionsof

gratitude,acknowledgementoftheimposition,expressionsofindebtedness,contextforthe

request,etcetera.BreuerandGeluykenfoundthatBritishrequestersusedmoremitigation

thanAmericans,bothinternalandexternaltotheheadact.ButAmericansubjectswere

muchmorelikelytouseonlyexternalmitigationoftheirrequests.(Inthetwocontextsfor

whichtheygivefigures,external-onlymitigationwasfoundin28%and41.5%ofAmerican

requests,versus7%and22%respectivelyforBritishrequests.)IftheDCTresultsare

comparabletonaturallyoccurringrequests,thenlookingonlyatheadactsgivesalopsided

impressionofAmericanmitigation.(ButseeFlöckandGeluykens’cautionregardingDCT

resultsinSection1.)Theremaybefarmoremitigationthansentence-leveldataextraction

candetect,andsoabsenceofpleaseintheAmericandatadoesnotentailcomplete

inattentiontoconventionalpolitenessorface-work.

19

4.Discussionandconclusions

Thefirstavailablecitationofpleaseasastand-alonepragmaticmarkerisfrom1771(Oxford

EnglishDictionary),andpleaseonlybecamecommonplaceinrequestsinthe19thcentury

(Akimoto2000).Inotherwords,thefirstknownuseofpleaseasastand-alonepragmatic

markerisfrom150yearsaftertheEnglishmadetheirfirstsuccessfulsettlementintheNew

World,anditsusewasnotcommonuntilaftertheUnitedStateshaddeclared

independenceandAmericanEnglishhadbecomenotablydistinctfromBritishvarieties.7

Giventhesefacts,perhapsitismoresurprisingthatAmericanandBritishEnglishuseplease

similarlythanthattheyuseitdifferently.Still,pragmatic-markerpleasearosefroma

commonsituationinAmEandBrE:bothsharedtheolderphrasesfromwhichitispresumed

todevelop(ifyouplease;ifitpleaseyou;pleaseto[verb])andhadexperienceofasimilar

requestmarker,pray(FayaCerqueiro2013).

Investigatingpleaseinpresent-dayEnglish,wehavereportedonthepresenceand

absenceofpleasein1,350requestsinBritishandAmericancorporateemails.Likeother

studiesthathavecomparedpleaseoccurrenceinAmEandBrE(Biberetal.1999,Breuerand

Geluykens2007),wehavefoundthatpleaseisusedinBritishrequestsatmorethantwice

therateofpleaseinAmericanrequests,regardlessofrequestmoodtype.

EarliermonoculturalstudiessuggestedthatBritishpleasewouldbefoundinroutine,

low-impositionrequests,whileAmericanpleasewouldoccurinhigher-impositionrequests

(Stross1964,Vaughnetal.2009),moreformalrequests(PufahlBax1986),andinrequests

withgreaterpowerdifferentials(Ervin-Tripp1976,andpossiblyLeopold2015,although7. Fittinglyforourresearch,thefirstrecordedusageofpragmaticmarkerpleaseisinaletterfrom

VirginiatoLondon(Mason1968).Theletter-writer,PriceDavies,wasanOxford-educatedWelshclergyman,whohademigratedtoVirginiain1763(Weis1955:13).Ofcourse,pleasewasprobablyusedinspokenrequestsfarearlier,buthowfarearlierisdifficulttoknow.AnselmBayly’s1772grammar(London)givesasanexample“pleaseorpraygive”(citedinFayaCerqueiro2013:209).

20

pleasewasnotthemainfocusofherstudy).Thenatureofourdatameantthatwecould

onlyconsiderthenatureoftheactionrequestedwhenconsideringimpositionlevel.The

natureoftheinterpersonalrelationshipsbetweeninterlocutorscanbeexpectedtoaffect

theformalityoftheexchangeandtheextenttowhicharequestisfelttoimpose.However,

wedidnothavesufficientinformationtotakethesemattersintoaccount.Thelargeamount

ofdatawehadtoconsiderandthecomparabilityofitintermsofformalityandcontenttype

goessomewaytowardsreassuringusthattheeffectsfoundhereareamatterofpragmatic

variationbetweennationalvarieties.Thisissupportedbythefactthatourfindingsare

consonantwithearlierindicationsthatBritishpleasewouldbemorefrequentinhighly

routinised,low-impositionrequests.

Whiletheproportionofrequestswithpleaseisgreateratallimpositionlevelsinthe

Britishdata,thepatternofdistributionisnoticeablydifferentinthetwonationaldatasets.

WeindeedfoundthatBritishpleaseisstronglyassociatedwithlowerlevelsofimposition,

with65%oflow-impositionrequestshavingplease,comparedwith30%ofmedium-

impositionones.Americanpleasedidnot,contrarytoourexpectation,leantotheopposite

sideoftheimposition-levelcontinuum.Instead,Americanpleasewasfairlyevenly

distributedatthefourimpositionlevels,withnolevelhavinglessthan19%ormorethan

30%please-marking.Ourcodingforimpositionlevelswasdrivenbytheverbphraseofthe

headactoftherequest,anditwasnecessarilysubjective.Itisperhapsleasttrustworthyin

thedivisionofmedium-andhigh-impositionrequests.Mostoftherequestsinourdata

probablyrelatetoactionsthatarepartoftherecipient’sjobdescription—andtherefore

unlikelytobe“high”inimposition.Butinfavouroftheresultspresentedhere,thecoding

wascompletedindependentlybythetwoinvestigators,whowereveryconfidentinthe

lowesttwocategories:lowimpositionandnoimposition(offers).

21

TheBritishuseofpleaseisparticularlystriking(91%)intheno-impositioncategory,

consistingofperiphrastic,directive-phrasedoffersofhelp,thanks,apologiesand

congratulations(e.g.Pleaseacceptmyappreciation).Giventheformulaicnatureof

expressionslikePleaseacceptmy/our[politeact]andthe(atmost)quasi-directivenatureof

theseoffers,theuseofpleaseintheselargelyBritishcontextsappearstobeamatterof

sayingthehabitualwordsforthesituation,rathernegative-face-threatmitigationina

BrownandLevinson-typepolitenessmodel.Formulaiclanguageisalsoseeninsomeofthe

low-impositionrequests,suchaspleasefindattached[adocument],inwhichtheimperative

formisusedforaninformativeillocution:‘hereisadocumentforyou’.TheBritishdata

included20instancesofindicationofdocumentlocation,allwithplease.TheAmericandata

hadonlytwo.Garner(2002)notesthatAmericanbusiness-writingguideshave“consistently

condemned”enclosedpleasefindandpleasefindenclosed,thepaper-mailpredecessorsto

pleasefindattached.AsearlyasRichardGrantWhite’sEvery-DayEnglish(1880),pleasefind

enclosedwasdismissedwith“Amoreridiculoususeofwords,itseemstome,therecould

notbe”.By1928,Crowell'sDictionaryofEnglishGrammarsawitasa“worn-outformula”

andby1989EffectiveBusinessWritingdescribeditas“borrowedfromanearlier

generation”,withthesuggestionthatIamenclosingwouldbeagoodreplacementfor

pleasefindenclosed(allcitedinGarner2002).Wehavefoundnosuchequivalent

condemnationinBritishwritingadvice.

SinceAmericanpleaseseemslesstiedtoroutine,itsuseprobablydependsmoreon

interpersonalrelationshipfactors,includingpowerrelationsandleveloffamiliarityor

intimacy.Thesameistrueofpleaseusedinnon-routinewaysinBrE,where,asAijmer

(1996)notes,itconveysappealorpersuasion.Butif,asourdataindicate,pleaseisless

routineinlow-impositionrequestsinAmE,itmaybeamoreriskystrategytouseinAmE

22

thaninBrE,sincepleaseismoremarkedintheAmericancontext.FollowingWatts’(2003)

distinctionbetweenthepoliticandthepolite,pleaseinBrElow-impositionroutinesis

politic:itspresencedoesnotmakearequestpolite,butitsabsencemaymaketherequest

seemimpolite.InAmE,ontheotherhand,therelativeweaknessofpleaseroutinesmeans

thepresenceofpleaseinalow-impositionrequesthasmorepotentialtobeinterpretedas

politeorimpolite.

GreateruseofpleaseinBrEgivesrisetomoreandlongerpredictablestringsof

wordsstartingrequests.Repeatedexposuretosuchformulaeconventionalisesthemand

entrenchestheirstatusas“howonedoespoliterequests”foraparticulartypeofcontext(in

thiscase,businessemails).Theassociationofhighlyritualisedexpressionswithpoliteness

followsBlum-Kulka’s(1987)observationthatacrossnationalvarietiesofEnglish,

conventionalisedindirectnessisoftenperceivedasmorepolitethantheunconventionally

indirect.Thisisattributedtothelessercognitiveburdenthatconventionalisedformsplace

ontheaddressee,whocaneasilyrecognisetherequestandknowstheoptionsfor

respondingtoit.

Americanrequestsalsouseconventionaldirectandindirectrequeststructures;the

maindifferenceisthelowrateofplease.Thisisnotpartofagenerallesseruseofpoliteness

formulaeintheUS,sincethanksandthankyouarefoundmoreofteninAmericanspeech

thaninBritish(Biberetal.1999;cf.example(1)above).IfAmericanpleaseisperceivedasa

markerofpowerdifferentiation(Ervin-Tripp1976),thiswouldhelpexplainwhyitisless

consistentlyused.Americancultureenforcestheappearanceofegalitarianisminbusiness

interactions,andsomarkersofpowerdistanceareoftenunwelcome:“Interpersonal

relationsaretypicallyhorizontal,conductedbetweenpresumedequals.Whenapersonal

confrontationisrequiredbetweentwopersonsofdifferenthierarchicallevels,thereisan

23

implicittendencytoestablishanatmosphereofequality”(StewartandBennett1991:89).

Thesameistrueofrequests.8IfAmericanpleaseismoreassociatedwithrelationship

asymmetrythanBritishplease,thenthiscanhelpexplainitssteadyoccurrenceacross

impositionlevels.Pleaseinthiscaseislessamatterofroutinisedbehaviourforaparticular

typeofrequestthanamarkerofaparticulartype(ortypes)ofinterpersonalrelationship.In

thoserelationships,requestsmightbeexpressedthatinvolvevariouslevelsofimposition.

ThisisnottosaythatBritishinteractionswithpleaseareanti-egalitarian,butitisa

suppositionthatpleasesitsmorecomfortablywithinBritishsocialstructuresthanAmerican

becauseBrEspeakershavetheoptiontointerpretpleaseasamatterofroutine,while

Americansdonothavethatoptiontothesameextent.TheinterpretationofAmEuseof

pleaseaslessroutinebringstomindAlexisdeTocqueville’s(1840:506)commentsonthe

divergenceofmannersbetweentheUSandaristocraticBritain,“[American]mannersare

neithersotutorednorsouniform,buttheyarefrequentlymoresincere”.

AmEpleaseseemstomarkbothupwardanddownwardpowerdifferentials,and

thereforeitcanmakerequestssoundlikeeitherordersorpleas.Forinstance,oneAmerican

blogcommenternoted:“Pleasewindsupfeelingimpolitewithpeoplethatyoudon'thave

therighttoorderaround,i.e.anyoneotherthanyourchildren”(WyndesinMurphy2012).

8. InastudyofspokenbusinessinteractioninaNewZealandworkplace,Vine(2004:99)explains

lackofpleasebytheroutinenessoftherequests:“Theinfrequentuseofpleaseinmydatacan

beaccountedforbytheworkplacecontextinwhichmydatawascollected.Theactions

requestedrefertotheparticipants’jobobligationsandarenotoutsidetheresponsibilitiesofthe

addressee.”ThissuggeststhattheNewZealandworkplacemighthavemoreincommonwithan

AmericanonethanaBritishone.Thisisnotsurprising,sincelikeAmericanEnglish,NewZealand

Englishhasdevelopedina“new”culturethatislikelytotendtowardsolidarity-typebehaviours

(ScollonandScollon1981).

24

Intheotherdirection,Firminetal.(2004)concludedthatlow-stakesrequestswithplease

wereunsuccessfulbecausetheysoundedinappropriatelylikepleading.

Totestthismatterfurther,datacollectionwithmoresensitivitytointerpersonal

factorsisneeded.Cross-culturalcomparisonsacrossgenrearealsoneeded.Whileemailisa

usefulsourceofrequestdata,itsitsinaplacebetweeninformalspeechandformalletter-

writing.Normsofemailstructureandtonemaydifferinthetwonationsormorespecifically

inthetwocorporatecultureswehaveexamined,thereforemoresupportisneededfrom

naturalisticspokenandfurtherwrittendata.Inaddition,studiesoftheinterpretationor

perceptionofpleaseinnaturalcontextsinthetwovarietiescouldbeinteresting.These

mustbecarefullydesignedinordertoavoidinterferencefromtheexplicitlytaughtnotion

thatpleaseisa“politeword”.

Butinitself,thiscomparativestudyisasolidstepforwardinunderstandingakey

lexico-pragmaticdifferenceinBritishandAmericanEnglish.Mostcomparativestudiesto

datehaveconcernednative-versus-learnerrequestformationanduseofplease.The

presentstudyemphasisesthat“native-speakerbehaviour”isnotonlynotuniform,itmay

observesomemajordialectalboundaries.

AcknowledgementsWearegratefultoEmmaMoretonforaccesstotheCOBECdataandtotheeditorandanonymousreviewersfortheircomments.ReferencesAijmer,Karin.1996.ConversationalroutinesinEnglish:conventionandcreativity.London:

Longman.

Akimoto,Minoji.2000.Thegrammaticalizationoftheverbpray.InOlgaFischer,Anette

Rosenbach&DieterStein(eds.),Pathwaysofchange:grammaticalizationinEnglish.

Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins,67–84.

25

Anke,LuisEspinosa,JoséCamachoCollados&EmmaMoreton.2013.Thedevelopmentof

COBEC:theCorpusofBusinessEnglishCorrespondence.PaperpresentedattheV

CongresoInternacionaldeLingüísticadeCorpus(CILC),Alicante,14–16March.

Anthony,Laurence.2014.AntConc(Version3.4.1w)[ComputerSoftware].Tokyo,Japan:

WasedaUniversity.Availablefromhttp://www.laurenceanthony.net/(accessed15May

2016)

Biber,Douglas,StigJohansson,GeoffreyLeech,SusanConrad&EdwardFinegan.1999.

LongmangrammarofspokenandwrittenEnglish.Harlow:PearsonEducation.

Biesenbach-Lucas,Sigrun.2006.Makingrequestsinemail:Docyber-consultationsentail

directness?Towardconventionsinanewmedium.InKathleenBardovi-Harlig,J.César

Félix-Brasdefer&AlwiyaS.Omar(eds.),PragmaticsandLanguageLearning,Volume11.

Honolulu:UniversityofHawai’iPress,81–107.

Blum-Kulka,Shoshana.1987.Indirectnessandpolitenessinrequests:sameordifferent?

JournalofPragmatics11.131–146.

Blum-Kulka,Shoshana,JulianeHouse&GabrieleKasper.1989.TheCCSARPcodingmanual.

InShoshanaBlum-Kulka,JulianeHouse&GabrieleKasper(eds.),Cross-cultural

pragmatics:requestsandapologies.Norwood,NJ:Ablex,273–294.

Breuer,Anja&RonaldGeluykens.2007.VariationinBritishandAmericanEnglishrequests:

acontrastiveanalysis.InBettinaKraft&RonaldGeluykens(eds.),Cross-cultural

pragmaticsandinterlanguageEnglish.Munich:Lincom.

Brown,Penelope&StephenC.Levinson.1987.Politeness:someuniversalsinlanguage

usage.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Curl,TraciS.&PaulDrew.2008.Contingencyandaction:acomparisonoftwoformsof

requesting.ResearchonLanguageandSocialInteraction41.129–153.

DeFelice,Rachele,JeanniqueDarby,AnthonyFisher&DavidPeplow.2013.Aclassification

schemeforannotatingspeechactsinabusinessemailcorpus.ICAMEJournal37.71–105.

DeFelice,Rachele&EmmaMoreton.2014.ThepragmaticsofBusinessEnglish:introducing

theCorpusofBusinessEnglishCorrespondence(COBEC).Paperpresentedatthe7th

IVACSConference,Newcastle,19–21June.

DeFelice,Rachele&EmmaMoreton.2015.IntroducingtheCorpusofBusinessEnglish

Correspondence(COBEC):aresourceforthelexiconandpragmaticsofBusinessEnglish.

Paperpresentedatthe36thICAMEConference,Trier,27–31May.

26

deTocqueville,Alexis.1840.DemocracyinAmerica,vol.2.ProjectGutenbergebookedition.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/815/815-h/815-h.htm(accessed15May2016)

Ervin-Tripp,Susan.1976.IsSybilthere?thestructureofsomeAmericanEnglishdirectives.

LanguageandSociety5.25–66.

FayaCerqueiro,Fatima.2013.Courtesymarkersinrequests:thecaseofprayandpleaseIn

LateModernEnglish.Doctoralthesis,UniversidadedeSantiagodeCompostela.

Availableat:http://hdl.handle.net/10347/9306

Félix-Brasdefer,J.César.2012.Emailrequeststofaculty.InMariaEconomidou-Kogetsidis&

HelenWoodfield(eds.),InterlanguageRequestModification.Amsterdam:John

Benjamins,87–118.

Firmin,MichaelW.,JanineM.Helmick,BrianA.Iezzi&AaronVaughn.2004.Sayplease:the

effectoftheword“please”incompliance-seekingrequests.SocialBehaviorand

Personality32.67–72.

Flöck,Ilka.2011.SuggestionsinBritishandAmericanEnglish:acorpus-linguisticstudy.

BochumerLinguistischeArbeiten3.67–81.

Flöck,Ilka&RonaldGeluykens.2015.Speechactsincorpuspragmatics:aquantitative

contrastivestudyofdirectivesinspontaneousandeliciteddiscourse.InJesúsRomero-

Trillo(ed.),YearbookofCorpusLinguisticsandPragmatics2015.Dordrecht:Springer,7–

36.

Garner,Bryan.2002.TheOxforddictionaryofAmericanusageandstyle[onlineedition].

NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.Availableat:

http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195135084.001.0001/acref-

9780195135084(accessed16June2016)

Goddard,Cliff.2012.CulturalscriptsandcommunicationstyledifferencesinthreeAnglo

Englishes.InBarbaraKyrk-Kastovsky(ed.),Interculturalmiscommunication:pastand

present.Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins,101–120.

Haugh,Michael&KlausSchneider(eds.).2012.SpecialIssue:Im/politenessacrossEnglishes.

JournalofPragmatics44(9).

Holmes,Janet.1984.Modifyingillocutionaryforce.JournalofPragmatics8.345–365.

House,Juliane.1989.PolitenessinEnglishandGerman:thefunctionsofpleaseandbitte.In

ShoshanaBlum-Kulka,JulianeHouse&GabrieleKasper(eds.),Cross-culturalpragmatics:

requestsandapologies.Norwood,NJ:Ablex,96–119.

27

Leech,Geoffrey.2014.Thepragmaticsofpoliteness.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Leopold,Lisa.2015.Requeststrategiesinprofessionale-mailcorrespondence:insightsfrom

theUnitedStatesworkplace.TESLCanadaJournal32(2).1–29.

Liz&Julie.2007.Youf’coffeesir?Kindleedition.HighPeak,Derbyshire:BingBong,Ltd.

Mason,FrancesNorton.1968.JohnNortonandSons,merchantsofLondon&Virginia.

NewtonAbbot,Devon:David&Charles.

Murphy,M.Lynne(Lynneguist).2012(18August).Sayingpleaseinrestaurants.Separated

byaCommonLanguage(blog).

http://separatedbyacommonlanguage.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/saying-please-in-

restaurants.html(accessed15May2016)

OEDOnline.2016.please,adv.andint.OxfordUniversityPress.(accessed24May2016)

PufahlBax,Ingrid.1986.Howtoassignworkinanoffice:acomparisonofspokenand

writtendirectivesinAmericanEnglish.JournalofPragmatics10.673–692.

Sato,Shie.2008.UseofpleaseinAmericanandNewZealandEnglish.JournalofPragmatics

40.1249–1278.

Schneider,KlausP.2012.AppropriatebehaviouracrossvarietiesofEnglish.Journalof

Pragmatics44.1022–1037.

Scollon,Ron&SuzanneW.Scollon.1981.Narrative,LiteracyandFaceinInter-ethnic

Communication.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.

Stewart,EdwardC.&MiltonJ.Bennett.1991.Americanculturalpatterns:across-cultural

perspective.Yarmouth,ME:InterculturalPress.

Stross,B.1964.Waiter-to-cookspeechinrestaurants.Unpublishedtermpaper.Citedin

Ervin-Tripp(1976).

Styler,Will.2011.TheEnronSentCorpus.Boulder:UniversityofColorado.

Terkourafi,Marina.2015.Conventionalization:anewagendaforpolitenessresearch.

JournalofPragmatics86.11–18.

Trawick-Smith,Ben.2012(13May).Impolite“please”.DialectBlog.

http://dialectblog.com/2012/05/13/impolite-please/(accessed15May2016)

Vaughn,AaronJ.,MichaelW.Firmin&Chi-enHwang.2009.Efficacyofrequestpresentation

oncompliance.SocialBehaviorandPersonality37(4).441–450.

Vine,Bernadette.2004.Gettingthingsdoneatwork:thediscourseofpowerinworkplace

interaction.Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins.

28

Watts,RichardJ.2003.Politeness.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Weis,FrederickLewis.1955.ThecolonialclergyofVirginia,NorthCarolina,andSouth

Carolina(2001reprint).Baltimore:Clearfield.

Wichmann,Anne.2004.Theintonationofplease-requests.JournalofPragmatics36.1521–

1549.

29

Appendix:ActiontypesforutteranceclassificationImpositionlevel

ExamplerequestsacttypeHighimposition

documentpreparation

• Pleaseamendthenewsflash• Couldyoupleasetranslatethefollowingforme.

favour • Iwouldliketoseekabitofadvice.• IwouldappreciateyourguidanceonwhomIshouldinvolve.

findinfo • CouldyoupleasechaseNasperemailbelow.• Canyoufindmebiosofthesefolks?

gosomeplace • Canyouattendanaudioconference?• Canyouleaveearlyenoughtodaytopickupasleepingbag?

influence • Canyoupersuade[NAME]topartwiththecash?• Couldyouuseyourcontactswith[COMPANY]togetonthe

phonewith[NAMES]tojumpstartthisthing?meeting • Couldwemeetonanyoftheabovedates?

• Canwevisitinadvanceofyourmeeting?read • Pleasereadthisforyourinformation.

• Takealookatthecompetitordata.secretarialtasks • Couldyouprint4copiesofthisforus

• Canyouprovideuswithadeskandphoneforthe3days?takeresponsibility • Canyoupleasearrangeforittobepaidimmediately.

• Canyoutakethison?think-work • Pleasecommenton/amendthisproposalbeforeIsendittoR.

• Canyouplanyourdetaileddiscussionswiththearchitect?Mediumimposition

collaborate • Perhapswecantalkthen?• Canwediscussthesepossibilitiesfurther?

elaborate • Canyouclarifytheirrole&durationofthearrangements.• Canyouexplainwhatistheimpactofthisnewnameonwhat

weagreed?help • Couldyoupleaseassistwiththefollowingrequest?

• Canyouhelp?interact(withthirdparty)

• PleasecanyouaskKwhatthesumrelatestoandwhoauthorisedit.

• Whenyougetachancecanyoutalktohimaboutthis.prevent • Pleasedonotdeviatefromthisstatement.

• PleasedonottellPIhaveforwardedhisletter.Lowimposition

contact • PleasecontactJassoonaspossibleifyourequiretickets.• Pleasecallforfurtherclarification.

endorse • Canyoupleaseprovidefundingauthorizationforthesetwoitemstoday?

• WouldyoupleasesignacopyofeachforC?

30

extendpoliteness • IamsureyouwillwanttothankB.• PleasejoinmeinwelcomingWto[COMPANY]

holddoc • CanyoupleasesavecopiesofyourplansasProject98file.• Writeitdownandkeepitsomewheresafe.

holdinfo • Pleasenotethat…• Keepinmindthatthesituationremainsextremelyfluid

inform • PleaseconfirmASAP• Pleaseletmeknowyourpreference.

nominate • LcanyouidentifypeoplefortheareasIlistedyouunder.• IwouldappreciateitifyouwouldnominateaRecruitment

championforeachoftheseterritories.receivedocument • Pleasefindattachedtwodocuments.schedule • CanIsuggestTuesday12at13:00whenKwillalsobein

[PLACE]?• Canwemakeitat2pm?

transmit • Wouldyoupleasecascadethisinformationwithinyourarea.• CanyoupleaseforwardthistoA.

wait • Untilwe’vehadachancetotalk,couldyouwaitbeforeforwardingmyname?

Noimposition(offer)offer • Ifyouhaveanyqueries,pleasedon'thesitatetocontactme.

• Feelfreetoquestionmyestimates.receivepoliteness • Pleaseacceptmyappreciationforsparingyourtimeand

apologiesforthefactthatwecannotconsideryoufurther.