Abstract and Key Words

Abstract: This paper investigates the differences between Chinese and English polite language from six aspects: addressing terms, greetings, partings, compliments, apologies and gratitude, which give rise to Chinese learners’ pragmatic failures in using English. The paper attempts to probe into the causes of pragmatic failures from the different language contexts and cultural contexts and based on that three suggestions are put forward for Chinese learners of English to avoid pragmatic failures in using English polite language, that is, avoiding negative stereotypes, increasing cultural awareness and strengthening the quality of foreign language teaching. The paper asserts that Chinese learners should attach much importance to the cultivation of the pragmatic competence.

Key words: polite language; pragmatic failure; pragmatic competence
   
摘要：本文从称呼语，问候语，道别语，赞美语，道歉语，致谢语等六个方面对中英语的礼貌语的使用不同进行了研究，并从中英不同的语言背景和文化背景两方面来阐释了造成中国英语学习者在使用英语礼貌语时造成的语用失误的原因，并在此基础上提出了三条切实可行的建议，即避免老套的英语礼貌语使用习惯，提高目的语国家的文化意识和外语教学质量。本文认为中国英语学习者应更加注重对语用能力的培养。

关键词：礼貌语; 语用失误;语用能力

1. Introduction
Politeness, as a symbol of human civilization, is a social-cultural as well as linguistic phenomenon that can be found in all societies all over the world. It has drawn much attention from linguists, psychologists, anthropologists, sociologists since 1960s. As people from different cultures may have different views on what politeness is and how to be polite in cross-cultural interactions, misunderstandings and pragmatic failures may occur if the cultural differences of politeness are neglected in cross-cultural communication. Therefore, it is necessary and of great significance for the Chinese learners of English to have a good knowledge of English polite language.
The term pragmatic failure was first employed in 1980s by Jenny Thomas, an English linguist. He defined it as the inability to understand what is meant by what is said. Stated differently, it means that the speaker’s utterance is interpreted by a hearer differently from what the speaker’s intention. According to Thomas, there are two types of pragmatic failures: pragmalinguistic failure and sociopragmatic failure.