ISSN 2409-7616

Антонова Т.В.


UDC 37.025.7


Antonova T.V.1 (Bryansk, Russian Federation) –

1Bryansk State University Named after Academician I. G. Petrovsky

Abstract. Despite the universal nature of the category of politeness, its implementation has national specifics, which is manifested in the peculiarities of the communicative behavior of the people who belong to a certain linguistic culture. Objectified in communication, politeness is the reflection of a mental category inherent in the communicative consciousness of the people. Communicative politeness acts as a category of communicative consciousness, prescribing certain forms of communicative behavior to the members of the society, recognized by the society at this stage of its development as polite. Researchers study not only speech formulas, their lexical and grammatical structure, semantic and pragmatic meanings, the features of functioning, but also politeness strategies, which also have national and cultural specifics. The lack of objective data on the mechanisms of the implementation of these strategies during the educational process at the university determines the relevance of the work. The purpose of the article is the theoretical development of the main directions in the development of the educational dialogue, according to the components of the category of politeness, the presentation of the results of an experimental verification which can prove the effectiveness of the applied methodology. The object of the study is the classroom work of the students in pairs. The subject of the research is a number of communicative strategies and tactics with regard to the category of politeness. The purpose and subject of the study make it possible to assume that the work at practical and seminar classes at the university will be more effective if a teacher takes into account the means of expressing the category of politeness in relation to the type of the situation, the acquaintance of the interlocutors, their characteristics, the place and time of the communication. The scientific novelty of the research lies in an integrated approach to the development of the main directions that can determine students’ speech means and the norms of etiquette for a given educational situation.

Keywords: the category of politeness, educational dialogue, pair work, communicative strategy, communicative tactics, speech exercises.


  1. Biryukova O.A., Yan H. Verbalized ideas about Russian hospitality as a representation of politeness. Vladivostok, Far Eastern Federal University Publ., 2019, pp. 190-195 (In Russian). URL:
  2. Vasil’ev D.A. Euphemization of the English language in the light of politeness and political correctness. Bulletin of Modern Research, 2018, no 10.5 (25), pp. 25-27 (In Russian). URL:
  3. Kirilina A.V. Forced tracing politeness in telephone communication between company employees and clients. Moscow, Agency for Social and Humanitarian Technologies Publ.,  2019, pp. 24-26 (In Russian). URL:
  4. Koval’ E.A. Politeness as a strategy for the formation of personality. St. Petersburg, Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen Publ.,2019, pp. 77-81 (In Russian). URL:
  5. Leont’ev V.V. The “dark side” of courtesy: a historical and pragmatic analysis of the nominations of its subjects in Russian linguistic culture. World of Linguistics and Communication, 2018, no. 54, pp. 132-162 (In Russian). URL:
  6. Malyuga E.N., Moskvicheva E.A. Hedging and politeness in business communication: a linguo-pragmatic approach. Moscow, Science Publ., 2022, pp. 164-180 (In Russian). URL:
  7. Nefedova L.A. English politeness as a phenomenon of European culture: features of the lexical representation of the concept of “politeness” in German and Russian. Moscow, Moscow State Linguistic University Publ.,2019, pp. 259-262 (In Russian). URL:
  8. Rudneva E. A. Bantering as a Politeness Strategy. Anthropological Forum, 2019, no. 41. pp. 97-120 (In Russian). URL:
  9. Chung E., Fisher L. A dialogic approach to promoting professional development: Understanding change in Hong Kong language teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding vocabulary teaching and learning. System, 2022, vol. 110. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2022.102901
  10. Cretiu A.-E. Politeness and the art criticism discourse. Klironomy Journal, no. 1(1), 2021, pp. 163-180. URL:  
  11. Gurova E. Interrogatives as a means to express politeness in the Danish language. Scandinavian Philology, 2020, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 225-245. URL:
  12. Hinojosa D.M. Practice what you teach: Onsite coaching and dialogic feedback to promote the appropriation of instructional strategies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2022, vol. 111. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103582
  13. Holloway S.M., Shijing X., Simin M. Chinese and Canadian preservice teachers in face-to-face dialogues: Situating teaching in cultural practices for West-East Reciprocal Learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2023, vol. 122. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2022.103930
  14. Huzhamurodova F.R.K. Politeness and lexical means of expressing it in English. Young scientist, 2021, no. 23 (365), pp. 349-351. URL:
  15. Lebedeva I.S., Fedorova P.K. Politeness in conflict discourse. Issues of Applied Linguistics, 2020, no. 2 (38), pp. 76-94. URL:
  16. Mambetova M.A. Expression of politeness in different cultures. Bulletin of the International University of Kyrgyzstan, 2019, no. 2 (39), pp. 99-102. URL:
  17. Neda Kameh Khosh Politeness strategies in British and Persian family discourse: forms of addressing. Philology. Theory & Practice, 2021, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 2265-2271. URL:
  18. Németh Z. The first steps towards the first-order politeness research in Udmurt. Bulletin of the Udmurt University, 2021, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 521-536. URL:
  19. Novosseltseva V.S. Kategorie der Höflichkeit und Ausdruck der Dankbarkeit in der Deutschen Sprache. The youth. Society. Modern science, technology and innovation, 2021, no. 20, pp. 170-175. (In Douche). URL:
  20. Parker Ch., Bickmore K. Classroom peace circles: Teachers’ professional learning and implementation of restorative dialogue. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2020, vol. 95. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103129
  21. Penner N.A. Principles of politeness in English, Russian, and Kazakh as part of the theory of politeness in linguistics. Ufa, Bashkir State Pedagogical University named after M. Akmulla Publ. ,2020, pp. 308-312. URL:
  22. Rapanta Ch. Can teachers implement a student-centered dialogical argumentation method across the curriculum? Teaching and Teacher Education, 2021, vol. 105. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2021.103404
  23. Rødnes K. A., Rasmussen I., Omland M. Who has power? An investigation of how one teacher led her class towards understanding an academic concept through talking and microblogging. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2021, vol. 98. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2020.103229
  24. Sinclair A.J., Fernández R. Alignment of code switching varies with proficiency in second language learning dialogue. System, 2023, vol. 113. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2022.102952
  25. Walsh M., Matsumura L.C., Zook-Howell D. Video-based literacy coaching to develop teachers’ professional vision for dialogic classroom text discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2020, vol. 89. DOI: 10.1016/j.tate.2019.103001

For citation: Antonova T.V. Strategic and tactical planning of students’ pair work in accordance with the rules of the politeness category. CITISE, 2023, no. 1, pp. 250-266. DOI: