Power Relations and Politeness in Interruptions: Politeness Strategy Use in Meeting Scenarios

As global mobility has led to the use of English as a corporate language in multinational corporations, developing English meeting skills has been essential for professionals. Previous research has indicated that from non-native English speakers' point of view meeting skills have been challenging. Interruption in meetings is especially difficult for non-native speakers because power relations and face threatening acts are involved. Based on Brown and Levinson's theoretical framework, the study aims at investigating politeness strategies more frequently used by EFL learners when they perform different acts of interruption in different power relations. A total of 50 participants with English proficiency at level B2-C1 of the CEFR were recruited and asked to fill out a discourse completion test (DCT) encompassing eighteen meeting scenarios in which the participants addressed individuals in higher, equal, or lower status. A preference for negative politeness strategies were identified in both disruptive and cooperative interruptions. The results revealed that the performance in high-to-low or equal relations shared similar frequency of strategy use. Compared to the performance in the two relations, that in low-to-high relations tended to use more negative politeness strategies. Within acts of disruptive interruptions, claiming common ground, conveying cooperation, and making minimal presumption or assumption were considered the most prevalently adopted strategies. Within acts of cooperative interruptions, in addition to the above-mentioned strategies, conventional indirectness was worth noting. Results from the investigation are not entirely consistent with Brown and Levinson's claims that strategy use is based on which face is threatened and that higher-status people tend to choose more bald on strategies. Pedagogical implications were drawn based on the findings.