Politeness Theory and Relational Work

By Miriam A. Locher, R. Watts. 2005

1,085 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ec0a8b0e3659a82e51241b169d950e5670e4dcae

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

1. Michael Haugh
2. Gina Masullo Chen
3. Shuning Lu
4. Timothy B. Jay
5. Kristin Janschewitz

In Language and Linguistics

1. Michael Haugh
2. Gina Masullo Chen
3. Shuning Lu
4. Timothy B. Jay
5. Kristin Janschewitz

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Michael Haugh

Citations in the corpus

• The pragmatics of swearing (2008, background): “One’s relationship with the speaker can have a significant impact on what is considered impolite or rude (Locher and Watts 2005).”
• The discursive challenge to politeness research: An interactional alternative (2007, background): “The postmodern agenda in politeness research is perhaps most comprehensively represented to date in the discursive approach to politeness (Locher 2004, 2006; Locher and Watts 2005; Watts 2003, 2005).”
• Online Political Discourse: Exploring Differences in Effects of Civil and Uncivil Disagreement in News Website Comments (2017, background): “These concerns are rooted in the fact that incivility may ignite negative emotions, aggression, or retaliation (Brett et al., 2007; Locher & Watts, 2005) and damage impressions of online discussants (Ng & Detenber, 2005).”