Politeness Principle in the Dialogues of Two Plays by Arthur Miller: A Pragmatic Study of Face-Saving Modes

Abstract

This study aims at analyzing the Face Saving Acts in two of Arthur Miller’s most famous plays, namely; All My Sons (1947) and The Crucible (1953). These two plays are particularly selected to prove whether Miller intentionally or unintentionally used Face Saving Acts as a main linguistic device in both of them. They are also selected because they were written by Miller in subsequent years giving them the advantage of sharing the same political and historical timelines that is defined in Chapter One. Goffman (1967) states, “to study face-saving is to study the traffic rules of social interaction; one learns about the code the person adheres to in his movement across the paths and designs of others, but not where he is going, or why he wants to get there”. He continues saying, "each person, subculture, and society seems to have its characteristic repertoire of face-saving practices". In conducting this analysis, the study uses Brown and Levinson’s (1987) Politeness Theory encompassing the interaction between playwright and reader. This Theory is used as it relies on the social situation of any given conversational encounter, which makes it significant and beneficial in this study, in particular, being suitable in analyzing the defined conversational social encounters defined in Chapter Two and Three. This study also aims at revealing how Face-Saving Acts are practiced by the characters in the two plays and how this device helps in drawing the character profiles and in the progression of the plot in each play. The concept of the Face Threatening Acts (FTAs) is used in the analysis as it refers to the threats imposed on any of the hearer’s or speaker’s Face wants, which serve as a trigger for the hearer to save his/ her face. According to Brown and Levinson (1987), Face is “the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself”. There are two types of face; positive face wants and negative face wants. Positive face is defined by Brown and Levinson as “the positive consistent self-image or ‘personality’ (crucially including the desire that this self-image be appreciated and approved of) claimed by interactants”. While negative face is defined by them as “the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction”. These acts help in the current study to reveal the underlying relationships and intentions between the protagonists in both of the selected plays. Hence, it adds further dimensions to the overall interpretation of Miller's two masterpieces; All my Sons (1947) and The Crucible (1953).