The political correctness debate is one which has been surfacing over the past few years, particularly with certain political figuring bringing this debate to the public platform. Let’s firstly define politically correct language. Political correctness is the avoidance of expressions which may offend, exclude or marginalize certain groups or individuals on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or disability.

Politically correct (PC) language is a framework used to promote and maintain social harmony. However, PC language can also be viewed to be a hindrance to expression and freedom of speech. The take an individual has on this debate is dependent on the connotations they associate with the phrase “political correctness”. Do they consider political correctness to be a social stabilizer or do they see it as language policing?

On one hand, the use of political correctness helps to confront prejudice in society and reinforce the idea of egalitarianism. This is achieved by slowly weakening the links between certain titles and the social groups they are associated with. This includes terms such as ‘black’, ‘wogs’, ‘curries’, ‘retarded’, ‘spastic’. Using PC terms such as ‘African-American’, ‘from Greek ethnicity’, ‘South-East Asian’ and ‘person with a disability’ are more respectful ways in which to address individuals without using titles which associate them with certain stereotypes or prejudiced thoughts. In particular, using ‘person with a disability’ rather than ‘disabled person’ is a way in which to dilute the link between the individual and the “disability” and to reiterate that the disability is only a single element of many which make up the individual.

While these are the currently accepted, politically correct terms, their appropriateness is likely to change with time. Originally, it was socially acceptable to use terms like ‘retard’, ‘chairman’, ‘policeman’ ‘black’, ‘man up’, ‘mother tongue’. However, with time, values change and society progresses and what is at one point considered socially acceptable becomes politically incorrect as further neutral terms are normalized. Thus, replacements such as, ‘differently abled’, ‘chairperson’, ‘police officer’, ‘African American’ and ‘native language’ are formed. As society continues to progress, these phrases will be outdated and replaced by new, more socially acceptable terms. This consistent cycle is spinning at a more rapid rate with globalization. With globalization, ideologies and values can be shared on wide platforms instantaneously. Through the sharing of ideas, new ideas and perceptions are molded and with this, the language we use to express ourselves also changes and develops.

This rapid evolution in “socially acceptable” language angers the public. Certain PC subtleties are seen by many as unnecessary. The trend towards political correctness is seen to inhibit freedom of expression, restricting individuals from speaking their mind in fear of causing offence. When there is public backlash over the lack of political correctness in a given situation, many individuals find this reaction to be highly excessive and a sign of over-sensitivity of the millennial generation. In an interview with ABC News, former solider stated that, ‘we just seem to bend over backwards for anyone that’s different. It is making Australia a lot softer, it’s making us a big more of a pushover country’.

This frustration of many is further exasperated by the rapid evolvement of normalized accepted terms in society. 

When language used in the public domain borders on politically incorrect, there is a public uproar, in particular, by the younger generation. Donald Trump is a prime example of this and as put by The Atlantic, “the press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.” Simply put, the language choices of Donald Trump are strikingly bold; they incite fear and frustration amongst the public, deepening social prejudice through the reinforcement of stereotypes.

However, Trump’s language echoes the frustration of Americans. It is void of obfuscating, complex politically correct language, giving the indication that Trump speaks his mind, hence garnering public support and above all trust. Building trust for a politician is next to impossible, however, when Trump speaks his mind, without fear of causing office to minority groups, he is indeed able to build trust, as he speaks aloud what many think but fear to vocalize.

While this may sound bizarre given the strong global hatred towards Donald Trump, the matter of the fact is that Donald Trump won a majority vote. With a strong following of supporters despite his many controversies, it is important to recognize the power of Trump’s linguistic choices.

We all remember the famous, ‘build a wall’ statement, which became a defining factor of Trump’s presidential campaign. While a highly politically incorrect agenda, which marginalized Mexican people, many people supported Trump’s endeavors. In particular, Americans who were frustrated with their employment conditions are given an excuse to place blame onto a certain group of people. Trump, an influential figures’ use of politically incorrect language to target Mexican’s effectively gave the freedom to others to speak what they had previously restricted themselves from vocalizing for fear of being politically incorrect.

Aside from freedom of speech, the second major issue associated with political correctness is obfuscation. This form of political correctness is institutionalized and because of this here is a genuine danger that the immense emphasis on being politically correct means that often, vital information can be omitted from news scenarios because it targets or potentially targets a certain individual or minority group. As a result, information presented can be bias and incomplete. The 2013 Rotherham child sex abuse scandal in the United Kingdom is a strong example of this. An estimated 1400 children were violated sexually. However, in the media, it was intentionally omitted that the majority of perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage. Similarly, in fear of provoking racial attacks against migrants during refugee resettlement, the German media made an effort to hide that the multiple sexual assaults during the 2016 New Year celebrations were conducted by men of North African or Middle Eastern ethnicity. The omission of such details does avoid marginalizing ethnic groups, but at the cost of significant and rightful information for the public. This tradeoff is one which is still being explored in society as the wave of political correctness is still quite new.

This debate is one which is still raw in society; it is yet to progress and as the world develops, the role PC language plays in our society will become clearer. Will PC language become more prevalent as society focuses more on social inclusion? Or, will the movement towards PC language be restricted due to the black-lash it faces for the shortcomings of this framework of communication?

Examples of Political Correctness:

2017 Australia Day Lamb Ad by Meat and Livestock Co: This company releases an Australia Day lamb ad every year which aims to show a progressive and egalitarian Australian society, celebrating the idea of a politically correct society.

Facebook video by The Line promoting gender equality and challenging the expectations of men and women:

A focal point of the English Language Study Design, specifically Unit 4 Area of Study 1, is the construction of the Australian identity through language. In order to understand how language is used to reflect the Australian identity, it is important to first understand what values or standards of behaviour an Australian identity is comprised of.

When it comes to constructing essays, it is important to find contemporary examples from Australian media and link them to Australian cultural values. These examples must be explained using subsystems to display their linguistic relevance.

Australian cultural values are influenced by Australia’s history. Convict settlement, the influence of the British monarchy, an influx of new migrants and globalization of language have all influenced the cultural values Australian’s hold today. These events in history have enabled Australians to develop values by which they hold themselves, including egalitarianism, mateship, antiauthoritarianism and larrikinism.

The most significant value is that of egalitarianism. This is the doctrine that all people are equal and deserving of equal rights and opportunities. Class distinctions are far less significant in Australian society compared to the United Kingdom where social circles have been constructed around rigid hierarchies. In contrast, Australians of lower socio-economic standing typically do not see themselves as being less equal than privileged Australians.

This notion is reflected in the language used in Australian society. Addressing individuals as ‘mate’ and using colloquialisms such as ‘pollies’ to refer to politicians demonstrates that Australians value one another on an equal ground, irrespective of socio-economics or class.

This value extends into Australia’s sense of multiculturalism. Australia houses citizens with diverse ethnic backgrounds and prides itself on this cultural diversity. Many ethnolects have established themselves within Australian culture overtime and spread across society. These ethnolects are also finding their way onto platforms such as television to reflect present Australian society. Comedians such as Nazeem Hussain or the Channel Nine show, ‘Here come the Habibs’ use phonological, lexical, syntactical and semantic features of their respective ethnolects in a comedic manner to portray cultural diversity in a public space and celebrate the Australian value of multiculturalism.

Ethnolect speakers express their multicultural identity by molding Australian English along with their ethnic language to create their unique ethnolect. This is particularly evident with Greek and Lebanon English speakers who adopt Australian colloquialisms but retain their ethnic accent. They also often insert an interjectory such as ‘reh’ into everyday discourse as a way of promoting solidarity with others within the ethnic society.

The Australian value of anti-authoritarianism is largely reflected through the lexical choices of individuals. This value is derived from the Australian notion of egalitarianism. Australians have a far greater tendency to use expletives than those from other English speaking countries. The relaxed manner in which the Australian society perceives language use is indicative of their disregard for social hierarchies and authority figures.

The ease with which comedic remarks can be made about influential figures and politicians in the Australian media, indicates this very idea. The SBS series, The Feed recently released a facebook video “How Politicians Speak” mocking politicians by imitating political language in everyday conversations, using excessive hedging and obfuscation and a highly formal register. This Facebook video can be further explained using the subsystem of semantics. The meaning of the video is greater than the literal words being spoken by the actors. There is cultural context required to understand the humorous intent of the video. Through this cultural context, the video is able to reach out to its audience and express this anti- authoritarian way of thinking.

The tendency to ridicule politicians and authoritative figures can be explained by a phenomenon known as ‘tall-poppy syndrome’ which describes the tendency to degrade, attack or cut down individuals because they have risen in the social hierarchy. As a country which deeply values humility and embodies the ‘battler’ persona, Australians automatically become critical when those around them climb the social ladder. Snide comments and banter are tools used to remind those rising through the ranks that they are not better than anyone else. Furthermore, the tall-poppy syndrome is an explanation for why Australians consistently ridicule and mock their politicians. Comedian, Tim Minchin recently gave a speech to a graduating class at the University of Western Australia. In this speech, he used crude language and blunt remarks to give advice to the students while simultaneously deflating their sense of self with phrases such as, ‘opinions are like assholes, in that everyone has one’. Embossed within this simile is the concept of humility and egalitarianism that depict the tall-poppy syndrome.

Most examples of Australian language will ultimately tie back to these values. This includes the general Australian accent, Australian colloquialisms, phonological features of Australian English such as assimilation and the use of high rising terminal. The features of this language are linked to the values this language is used to express.

This link is particularly evident in political speeches, debates and comedic material. In relation to essay writing, there are a few steps to be conscious of when showing these links. Try to understand your examples using subsystems and which subsystems are relevant for the given example. Is the language-use significant on a phonological level, morphological level, lexical level, syntactic level or semantic level?

Throughout the year, you will be required to research and collect such contemporary examples which reflect Australian values. In your essay, you are required to demonstrate the significance of your example, use metalanguage to explain the example and then link this example to the values it reflects in Australian society and finally explain what this means for the essay prompt. Following this sequence of steps will ensure that you are able to discuss Australian Identity and Language in a holistic manner.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

Link to “How Politicians Speak” Facebook video:

Link To clippings of Nazeem Hussain’s SBS show “Legally Brown” which turns Political Incorrectness on its head:

Link to Kate Burridge interview on Studio 10 explaining the trend towards the General Australian Accent:

From year 7-10 the traditional essays we have written have had an introduction, three body paragraphs and a conclusion. In these essays we write about characters, plot points and themes. Hence, it is understandable that upon entering English Language in year 11 or 12, it can be difficult to grasp a hold on how to write an essay without characters, plots or themes. To be precise, the requirement in an English Language essay is to ‘use key linguistic concepts and metalanguage appropriately to discuss/analyse/investigate…in an objective and systematic way” (English Language Study Design).

‍

What does this mean?

Essentially, in section C of the exam, you are required to present a discussion of a given idea. The word ‘discussion’ is defined as ‘a conversation or debate about a specific topic.’ In this sense, your essay is effectively a written conversation which needs to display an understanding of both sides of the topic.

In saying that, it is still important to form a contention, such as ‘indeed non-standard varieties are more acceptable in speaking than in writing in the Australian context’ however in arguing this contention, you must to explore both sides to show the examiner your understanding of language in Australian society.

The overarching idea of the essay is presented to you in the form of a prompt. For example, in the 2016 VCAA exam, a possible essay prompt given was: “In Australia today, variations from the standard tends to be more acceptable in speaking than in writing.”

In this prompt, the idea to be discussed is standard vs. non-standard Australian English. The main idea or topic forms an umbrella under which the essay is formed. This is the foundation of your essay. Each main argument will relate to this topic. In this example, standard vs non-standard Australian English is a topic from which an array of sub-topics can be extracted, the choice of which is to your discretion.

The sub-topics you choose to delve into will depend on your preferences and strengths. You may choose to discuss online-speak, ethnolects or Australian slang in relation to non-standard English, or legal and political jargon in relation to standard English.

Regardless of the choice of sub-topic, each body paragraph must explicitly link to three things; the prompt, the topic sentence and the contention. This is the criteria for your discussion. Ensuring clear links to these three will assure the examiner that you have confidence in the material you are discussing.

Your body paragraphs should be used to show the examiner how the ideas you have chosen to talk about relate to the prompt provided. Here it is necessary to use a combination of contemporary media examples, personal examples and linguist quotes as a means to prove the link between your chosen paragraph idea, your contention and the prompt. Try to find the most relevant examples which clearly demonstrate your line of thinking to the examiner. You don’t want to give them a reason to question the arguments you choose to present.

It is also important to be wary of this so that your essay flows in an orderly, sequential manner. Each idea presented within a paragraph and across the essay itself should follow a pathway, one leading into another. Use the ending of each body paragraph to come back to your essay prompt and reiterate your contention. This ensures you stay on topic and the examiner can clearly visualize your understanding of your topic.

In the end, your job in your essay is to present a discussion of a given prompt; an understanding of both sides. Use examples and explanations to show your examiner that you comprehend how the prompt can be debated.

‍

Helpful Hints:

1. Writing the very first sentence of your essay can be difficult. Sometimes, to get yourself into the flow of writing, it can be helpful to integrate a linguistic quote into your first sentence. This also helps solidify your contention. For example:

• “One’s idiolect, particularly lexical choices and accent can be strongly indicative of their unique identity and the social groups to which they belong; it is the most natural badge of symbol of public and private identity (David Crystal)”

‍

2. Your topic sentence for each paragraph should contain a link to the essay prompt, to the topic of your paragraph and to your contention. A link to all three elements should be identifiable. Below is an example of a topic sentence for the given essay prompt. “The language we use is the best indicator of who we are, individually, socially and culturally. Discuss.”

• Ethnolects are a quintessential indicator of cultural identity as they are strongly identifiable by their unique phonological characteristics.
• This topic sentence shows a clear identification of the topic of the paragraph (ethnolects), a connection with the prompt, (cultural belonging) and a contention, (ethnolects are indeed indicative of cultural identity)

‍

3. Rather than introducing linguist quotes with expressions such as “in the words of…” or “as said by…” using linguist quotes discretely where they are integrated as part of the sentence will improve the flow of your essay. Consider this example.

• “The use of the interjectory ‘reh’ expresses the cultural identity individuals associate themselves with and is part of the language they use as ‘a means to an end of understanding who [they] are and what society is like (David Crystal).”

‍

4. Not all your contemporary essay examples need to come from news articles or social media. Students can often get caught up doing aimless research trying to find examples through research which really isn’t all that necessary. You should try to find examples of language use in every-day life. Perhaps consider other school subjects you study and the jargon you used within these subjects. You can quite easily discuss this use of language in your essays. Here is an example of a student using the metalanguage from VCE Accounting as an example for their essay.

• Jargon and taboo language are often used to express social identity as they are demonstrative of social groups one wishes to belong to. Jargon terms such as, ‘equity,’ ‘profit margin’, ‘cash flow statement,’ ‘debt ratio’ and ‘accrued’ belong to the financial and accounting semantic field. Their use suggests the individual is knowledgeable in business and finance and further suggests they are likely to be working in the business sector. The use of jargon in one’s vernacular can therefore provide hints of the individual’s social identity and is significant to their individual identity.

‍

Link to David Crystal interviews to pick out quotes and ideas for your essays:

‍

Link to Kate Burridge on TED Talk talking about Euphemisms; a good source for examples of euphemisms and how they are used in society. This can be used as foundation for a paragraph in your essays:

Let’s talk about emoji’s. There is a wide debate about whether or not these small icons we know as emoticon’s are the birth of a whole new language. What once started off as a :) at the end of an email has rapidly grown into a vast array of icons which serve multiple purposes and convey various meanings. I would not call emoji’s a new language for it lacks grammar; the very foundation which kneads a language together. Most often, emoji’s are used in conjunction with words on online platforms to enhance communication. The laughter emoji or smiling emoji is frequently used to close social distance or convey a sense of playfulness where a message may be perceived to be hostile. They can also be used to save face and reduce personal embarrassment. Frankly, emoji’s can be used to express a range of emotions and conversational tones which are difficult to achieve with words alone. In this way, they cater for the inability to use intonation and paralinguistic features such as hand gestures, facial expressions within written speech.

As emoji’s become a more prevalent part of online communication, they have begun to carry their own connotations. The eggplant and water-drop emoji’s are classic examples of this within young adolescents. However, even within smaller social groups, emoji’s can take on secondary meanings. (You probably have emoji’s within your friendship group which have connotations or act as inside jokes).

In this way, emoji’s are not replacing our language, but rather, they are an addition to comprehension of written language.

While emoji’s don’t have a complex syntactical system, they are loosely governed by grammatical rules. While this does not constitute emoji’s as a new language, one can still communicate meaning by stringing emoticons through semantic fields. Content words can be replaced with emoticons, however the relationship between emoticons must be inferred or expressed through functional words.

Hence, there can be communication difficulties when the relationship of an emoji to context is not effectively implied or explained. Julie Bishop’s use of the red faced emoji to describe Vladimir Putin on Twitter is a classic example of this notion. This emoji used on its own caused confusion as to what Julie Bishop thought of Putin, whether he was an angry man or whether she disapproved of him. Due to limited context and no words to back up Bishop’s opinion, there was controversy around her response.

Emoji’s are an addition to the written mode of language, catering for paralinguistic features which cannot be expressed through words. However, due to the lack of complex grammar binding emoji’s they cannot become a new language.

Have a read of our Ultimate Guide to English Language if you haven't already done so!

[Modified Video Transcription]

Prescriptivism Versus Descriptivism - GIF or JIF?

Ever since the inception of the format, we have been arguing with each other over whether we should say 'gif' or 'jif'. This debate has raged both online and offline, but does it really matter? On one side, supporters of 'gif' claim that because the acronym stands for Graphics Interchange Format, the G sound in 'graphics' should be maintained. Whereas the 'jif' camp argues that because the inventor of the format, Steve Wilhite, says 'jif', so should we all. However, a far more sane argument is that as long as what someone says (whether it be 'gif' or 'jif') is understood, it shouldn't matter how they say it. 

As students of English language, we should aim to primarily take this descriptive approach to studying language. We identify and describe what people are saying or writing, and the effects this has, but we don't then ascribe our own judgement. Language exists to be a vessel for our communication, and so, as long as it is transferring meaning between its users, it's serving its purpose. There is no correct way of speaking or writing because there isn't really a good way of determining what this correct way is. 

What Are Prescriptivism and Descriptivism? 

Simply put, prescriptivism is an attitude that prescribes how language should be and how you, as its speaker, must use it. A prescriptivist most often promotes Standard English or a similar variety. This is the variety of English you will find in most textbooks, government letters and notices and in your English classroom. 

Descriptivism on the other hand, is a non-judgemental approach to looking at language. As descriptivists, we place more importance on how English is actually being written and spoken rather than trying to identify a correct way. The vast majority of linguists, dictionaries and other English language authorities consider themselves to be descriptive and not prescriptive, and this is a really important distinction. 

If the way that we as English speakers use or spell a word changes, the dictionary will change too, in order to reflect this. The Macquarie Dictionary made one such change in 2012, which entered the public spotlight. The word 'misogyny' has been used for many years to mean 'an entrenched prejudice against women' and not necessarily 'a hatred of women', as it says in the dictionary. So, when Julia Gillard used the word in her speech on the topic, it seemed to conflict with what it said in the dictionary. Yet, we all knew what she meant. And so, The Macquarie Dictionary updated its entry for the word to better reflect how we actually are using it. That's all well and good in the academic world, but why is this distinction important outside of a video about language? 

Language Prejudice

Throughout history, and still to this day, prejudice exists against people who speak differently.

For example, for much of the 20th century, and to some extent still to this day, Aboriginal Englishes have been deemed substandard and inferior to varieties used by people with European heritage. This has led to demonstrable discrimination in places like courts and hospitals, but often the time and care is not taken to actually interpret what Aboriginal people mean when they speak. By seeing that prescribing how a language ‘should’ be doesn't actually do anything to improve its effect or usefulness, we can be far more accepting of the fact that language varies depending on who is speaking and that it changes with time. 

We have the option of either allowing the people to define how a language is used or allowing a linguistic academy like the Council for German Orthography in Germany, or the French Academy in France, to prescribe how we should speak.

Language Shift

So, where can we find relevant examples in today's society? We're seeing a shift to prescriptive attitudes in the realm of teen-speak and text-speak, with people like David Crystal saying that creating new words and new ways of speaking is a rite of passage for young people. In the rapidly evolving fields of technology, social media or even politics these days, we are seeing new words and phrases and even entire new ways of constructing sentences being coined every day. But, not everyone is accepting of this and plenty of people still cringe when they hear a hashtag used in regular speech. We're also experiencing a shift to the normalization of informal language, Australian slang and hypocorisms, even in social and situational contexts where traditionally we would use a more formal register. Just how many times have we heard the likes of Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull used the phrase ‘fair dinkum’?

But when does this matter in English language? We should be careful not to say that certain ways of speaking or certain varieties of language are inherently wrong and instead, describe what makes them 'non-standard uses' of language. This description is far more interesting than a subjective judgment of a particular way of using English. 

Descriptivism and Prescriptivism as Metalinguistic Tools

The terms descriptivism and prescriptivism can also be good metalinguistic tools when we are analysing opinions about language. Look out for segments on the radio, television or even the opinion columns of newspapers for discussions about varieties of English. People can identify very strongly with certain varieties of language, so a prescriptive attitude can often also indicate other beliefs. This can be important when identifying the social and cultural context of a text. We can also employ this knowledge in our own writing and speaking. Instead of trying to use correct language, we can instead focus on using appropriate language. This doesn't mean that you can start spelling words however you want, and giving your essays a generous sprinkling of commas and apostrophes where they don't belong (because these will often get in the way of you being easily and clearly understood), but the next time you're writing and you see a red line under that word that you're a hundred percent sure is correct, you can be safe in knowing that it's probably the dictionary, and not you, that needs an update.

Language has many uses which go beyond simple communication. Language can be used to entertain, to convey abstract ideas and to mold one’s perspective. A strong understanding of linguistic features, of words and their connotations can allow one to manipulate their language in order to convey certain ideas and thoughts. This brings us to the topic of face needs. One’s face need is the sense of social value that is experienced during social interactions. There are two types of face needs; positive face needs and negative face needs. Positive face refers to the need to feel accepted and liked by others while negative face describes the will to do what one wants to do with freedom and independence.

In daily conversations and in media, language is used to either appeal to face needs or to avoid meeting face needs. Basic politeness markers are frequently used to appeal to face needs, often subconsciously. Imagine a teacher asks you to pass them the pencil they just dropped. Most likely, they will ask something along the lines of, “are you able to pass me that pencil please?” The teacher’s relationship with you is that of an authoritative nature. Therefore, when asked to pick up the pen, you will almost certainly oblige unless there is a compelling reason not to. While the teacher has technically posed a request or a question, it is a in fact a command in disguise. The teacher has an expectation that you will pick up the pen, however, by framing this command as a question, it appears as though you are being given a choice. This appeals to your negative face needs as you are not being imposed upon to pick up the pen, but are given a choice should you wish to “pick it up”. In situations where interlocutors do not have a very close social distance, linguistic features such are politeness markers, rising intonation and interrogative sentences are used to appeal to negative face needs. If this same situation occurred with a friend, they might say something along the lines of ‘oi, chuck us that pen.’ This is a blatant disregard for negative face needs, but due to the close social distance between you and your close friend, appealing to negative face needs for such small things is unnecessary.

Appealing to negative face is most commonly observed in interactions with strangers or with those who do not have a strongly established relationship. However, appeals to negative face needs can also be observed with close individuals, particularly used to further the relationship by extending its boundary. For example, when asking a big favour from a relatively new friend one will most likely use methods to appeal to negative face needs, using phrases such as, ‘do you mind if,’ ‘would it be possible if,’ ‘could I please ask you a huge favour’. Such phrases do not impose of the individual, allowing them to “choose” whether or not to oblige. Appealing to the negative face demonstrates that one recognizes the other’s freedom and wish to do as they wish. 

Appealing to positive face needs occurs through slightly different linguistic and paralinguistic techniques. Compliments, minimal response, eye contact, politeness markers and the use of interrogatives are all ways in which one can appeal to another’s positive face needs. These techniques are very often employed in radio and television interviews. It is the duty of the host to make their guest feel welcome and wanted on the show. Television hosts such as Jimmy Kimmel and Ellen often introduce their celebrity guests by mentioning their achievements, thus making them feel special. They frequently employ interrogatives to display avid interest in their guests. Furthermore, back-channeling and vocal effects such as laughter allow the guests to feel that their presence is welcome and appreciated. Think of this from the perspective host and their social purpose. They want to make their guests feel appreciated to promote their viewership and build solidarity with the guests so they may return on the show.

This is interview is an example of positive face needs where interviewer Rajeev Masand compliments Stanger Things actors Milly Bobby Brown and Noah Schnapp at the beginning of the interview for their show.

‍

Tom Holland on Ellen:

In this example both Tom Holland and Ellen meet one another’s positive face needs. Politically correct language and euphemisms are also another example of appeals to positive face needs. Calling people ‘differently abled’ is done in attempt to avoid discrimination and allow individuals of different abilities to feel equally accepted and welcome. However, this does not always come across as intended. Often politically correct labels are not embraced by the given community as they feel that such labels further alienate them from society. Politically correct labels can act as reminders to such groups that they are considered minority or, they may feel that these labels are a feeble attempt to push aside previous, conflicting history. This is important to note as it demonstrates that appealing to face needs can sometimes be a hit or miss. In everyday conversation, people use cues in attempt to understand the individual they are conversing with and hence alter their language accordingly. They will use these cues to understand how to use language to appeal to the face needs of the other individual. In a context with school friends, there is likely to be less use of politeness markers and politically correct language as the pre-established relationship means there is a mutual understanding the one does not wish to offend. In contrast, the use of language is likely to be very different in transactional conversations, interviews and conversations with an authoritative relationship.

Techniques used to appeal to face needs always come back to the social purpose of the interlocutors and the contextual factors. By understanding the link between these elements, you can form a holistic analysis of face needs. Therefore, when writing about face needs in your exam and sacs, it is vital to be considerate of the context as this impacts how face needs are approached. 

Here are some other examples of celebrity interviews where there is evidence of appeals to positive face needs. Watch them carefully and you’ll notice the specific linguistic features used in these interviews to build solidarity with the guests and create engagement with the show. The hosts compliment their guests and frequently employ minimal response to allow the conversation to progress smoothly. There are minimal overlaps as the hosts are cautious not to talk over their guests. You will notice that in certain interviews, when the host and guest are known to one another, appeals to face needs are not adhered, allowing them to strengthen their bond and further audience engagement.

Malala Yousafzai on Ellen:

‍

Eddie Redmayne interview on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert: