Face

Jūratė Ruzaitė, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania
jurate.ruzaite@vdu.lt

The concept of ‘face’ was introduced by Erving Goffman and later developed by Brown and Levinson to refer to the positive public image an individual seeks to establish in a given social interaction. In linguistics, it is associated with the concepts of ‘face theory’, ‘politeness theory’, and especially with the approach of pragmatics. Face represents a person’s sense of self-esteem, dignity, and social value, which is a dynamic category. Face can be maintained, threatened, lost, or enhanced in a social interaction through different face-saving strategies. For instance, hedges, indirectness, and tag questions are used to reduce imposition and thus face-threatening behaviour. Face involves two related aspects: positive face and negative face. Positive face refers to the person’s need that their self-image is appreciated and approved of by interlocutors. Negative face refers to the person’s need not to be impeded or imposed by other interactants and the need to maintain their freedom of action.

Because maintaining face is a collaborative effort between interlocutors, this concern for mutual understanding and social harmony is also reflected in broader theories of conversation. One such framework is the Cooperative Principle, proposed by Paul Grice, which suggests that participants in a conversation need to cooperate to maintain the face of both the speaker and the hearer. However, this principle has been critiqued in later theories suggesting that cooperation is not strictly necessary. Instead, it is proposed that coordination, perceived as some rational adjustments to the interlocutors’ needs and goals, is sufficient for successful communication.

Face management strategies vary across cultures and languages, making the concept especially relevant in cross-cultural pragmatics. For example, cultures that prioritise group harmony may favor indirect speech acts and deferential language to preserve both positive and negative face. More individualistic cultures, meanwhile, might permit more direct communication.

Keywords: positive face, negative face, politeness theory

Related Entries: Face-saving Act, Face-threatening Act, Slurs

References:
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interactional ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Books.
Grice, P. (1975/1989). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax & semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). Academic Press. Reprinted in Grice 1989b: 22–40.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Blackwell.