Epilogue 1. Introduction I write this “critical reaction to, and constructive summary of, the findings of the authors” (as the editors call it) as an outsider. I have no specialised knowledge of the linguistic and interpersonal practices of any of the times and places examined by the contributors. I am there- fore in no position to offer any sort of critique of their substantive findings. Instead, much of what follows is framed as a commentary on how the practices which they analyse differ from those with which I myself am intimately familiar. As someone who was born in the mid- dle of the 20th century in Britain and has lived all but four years of his life in various parts of Europe, I can fairly safely characterise these practices as ‘present-day western’. 1 Indeed, some of what follows could more properly be described as characterisation of present-day western practices – and thus not ‘historical’ at all. But I presume that, notwithstanding the more specific objectives outlined in the introduc- tion to this volume, that this is precisely the broad value of the histori- cal politeness enterprise – it encourages us to view our own practices in a new light. In this respect, historical politeness studies have a great deal in common with cross-cultural ones. Like the latter, they either My thanks to Dániel Z. Kádár and Jessica Malay for encouraging reactions to vague ideas of mine which they then filled out. Neither, though, is responsible for the actual filling...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.