Impoliteness strategies reported and issued on website reviews by clients of New York and Madrid social services centres
Abstract
This paper analyses the negative reviews that some users of social services in New York and Madrid posted on Google. The aim is to relate the impoliteness strategies that the users of these centres reported to have received or that they issued themselves with the cultural values of the groups they belong to. To achieve this, twenty American and Spanish centres were analysed, obtaining more than two hundred negative comments that, qualitatively and quantitatively analysed, were related to impoliteness strategies. These impoliteness strategies were linked to the four social characteristics already presented in a previous study. Also, the chi-square formula was applied to the data. Thus, this study has shown that the use that speakers make of impoliteness strategies is related to the cultural values of the group they belong to.
Full text article
References
Bennett, J. M. (2004). Developing intercultural sensitivity: An integrative approach to global and domestic diversity. In D. Landis, J. M. Bennett & J. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 147–175). Sage.
Bhaskaran, S. & Sukumaran, N. (2007). National culture, business culture and management practices: Consequential relationship? Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 14(1), 54–76, https://doi.org/10.1108/13527600710718831
Boddy, J. & Dominelli, L. (2016). Social Media and Social Work: The Challenges of a New Ethical Space. Australian Social Work, 70(2), 172-184, https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2016.1224907
Bousfield, D. (2006). The grand debate: Where next for politeness research? Cultura, Lenguaje y Representación, 2, 9-15.
Bousfield, D. (2010). Researching impoliteness and rudeness: Issues and definitions. In M. A. Locher & S. L. Graham (Eds.), Interpersonal pragmatics (pp. 101-134). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338.1.101
Bravo, D. (1999). ¿Imagen “positiva” vs imagen “negativa”? Pragmática sociocultural y componentes de face. Oralia, 2, 155-184.
Bravo, D. (2002). Actos asertivos y cortesía: Imagen del rol en el discurso de académicos argentinos. In D. Bravo & M. E. Placencia (Eds.), Actos de habla y cortesía en español (pp. 141-174). London: LINCOM Studies in Pragmatics 5.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Caza, B. B. & Cortina. L. M. (2007). From Insult to Injury: Explaining the Impact of Incivility. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(4), 335-350, https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530701665108
Correa, F., Contreras, C., Ramírez, A. & López, E. (2002). Dimensiones del individualismo-colectivismo en México: Un estudio exploratorio. La psicología social en México, 9, 553-559.
Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatic, 25, 349-367.
Culpeper, J. (2010). Conventionalised impoliteness formulae. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3232-3245, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.007
Evers, A., Haverinen, R., Leichsenring, K. & Wistow, G. (2019). Developing Quality in Personal Social Services: Concepts, Cases and Comments. London: Routledge.
Frisby, C. M. (2017). A Content Analysis of Serena Williams and Angelique Kerber’s Racial and Sexist Microagressions. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 263-281. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2017.55019
Fuentes Rodríguez, C. (2012). Subjetividad, argumentación y (des)cortesía. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 49, 49-92, https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_CLAC.2012.v49.40615
Gokmen, Y., Baskici, C. & Ercil, Y. (2021). The impact of national culture on the increase of COVID-19: A cross-country analysis of European countries., International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 81, 1-8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.12.006
Hampden-Turner, C. & Trompenaars, F. (2000). Building Cross-Cultural Competence. Great Britain: Wiley.
Hampden-Turner, C. & Trompenaars, F. (2021). Culture, Crisis and COVID-19: The Great Reset. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (1998). Masculinity and Femininity. The Taboo Dimension of National Cultures. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J. & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill.
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2018). Renta por persona y unidad consumo por comunidades autónomas. https://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Tabla.-htm?t=9947 (accessed 15 February 2020).
INE Instituto Nacional de Estadística. (2019). España municipal 2019. https://www.ine.es/infografias/infografia_padron.pdf (accessed 15 February 2020).
Kaul de Marlangeon, S. (2017). Tipos de descortesía verbal y emociones en contextos de cultura hispanohablante. Pragmática Sociocultural, 5(1), 1-23, https://doi.org/10.1515/soprag-2017-0001
Kienpointner, M. (2008). Cortesía, emociones y argumentación. In A. Briz, A. Hidalgo, M. Albelda, J. Contreras & N. Hernández Flores (Eds.), Cortesía y conversación: de lo escrito a lo oral. III Coloquio Internacional del Programa EDICE (pp. 25-52). Valencia/Estocolmo: Universidad de Valencia-Programa EDICE.
Leaptrott, N. (1996). Rules of the Game: Global Business Protocol. Cincinnati, Ohio: Thomson Executive Press.
Locher, M. A. (2006). Polite behaviour within relational work: The discursive approach to politeness. Multilingua, 25(1), 249-267, https://doi.org/10.1515/MULTI.2006.015
Mills, S. (2003). Gender and politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mills, S. (2005). Gender and impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(2), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.2.263
Pacheco Baldó, R. M. (2019). Impoliteness strategies and social characteristics. An analysis of films in peninsular Spanish and American English speakers at work. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 48(6), 608-626, https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2019.1701065
Schiffrin, D. (1991). El análisis de la conversación. In Panorama de la Lingüística moderna de la Universidad de Cambridge. El lenguaje: Contexto sociocultural, IV, 299-323. Madrid: Visor.
Sifianou, M. & Garcés-Conejos, P. (2018). Introduction: Im/politeness and globalisation. Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 113-119, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.014
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.), Culturally Speaking. Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures (pp. 11-46). London: Continuum.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2003). Developing a framework for non-ethnocentric “politeness” research. In D. Bravo (Ed.), La perspectiva no etnocentrista de la cortesía: Identidad sociocultural de las comunidades hispanohablantes. Actas del Primer Coloquio del Programa EDICE (pp. 86-97). Stockholm: Programa EDICE.
Statista. (2018). Per capita income in the most populated U.S. cities in 2018. https://www.statista.com/statistics/205618/per-capita-income-in-the-top-20-most-populated-cities-in-the-us/ (accessed 15 February 2020).
Bureau, U, S, C. (2018). Quick facts: New York City, New York, United States.https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/newyorkcitynewyork US/PST045218 (accessed 15 February 2020).
Vélez, R., Ramos, E., Hernández, V., Carmena, E. and Navarro, J. (2004). Métodos estadísticos en ciencias sociales. Madrid: Ediciones Académicas S.A.
Wilutzky, W. (2015). Emotions as pragmatic and epistemic actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. 1593 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01593/full
Woo Jun, J. & Lee, H. (2007). Cultural differences in brand designs and tagline appeals. International Marketing Review, 24(4), 474-491, https://doi.org/10.1108/-02651330710761035
Authors
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Intercultural Communication

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright / Open Access Policy: This journal provides immediate free open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of ideas and is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). But the copyright was retained by the authors. Articles are free for personal use but are protected by copyright in the sense that they may not be used for purposes other than personal use without permission.