Abstract The main aim of this paper is to investigate how Japanese and Greek female students conceptualize politeness and then compare the findings in order to tease out any cross-cultural similarities and differences. The data is drawn from a questionnaire filled in by two hundred female undergraduates (one hundred from each group). The results show that there are significant similarities as well as some differences. Although research on im/politeness has concentrated almost exclusively on linguistic performance, a significant similarity between the two groups is that politeness is conceptualized as primarily non-linguistic action. Another major similarity is that both groups conceptualize politeness mainly as “consideration to others” and “appropriate behavior,” the former expressed mostly non-linguistically and the latter involving both linguistic and non-linguistic manifestations. Most participants view politeness as conveyed through attentiveness/helping others, respect and empathy. Differences were located mostly in the numbers of participants who mentioned the various subcategories. For example, more Greek participants related a broad sense of “respect” to politeness, whereas more Japanese participants related it to “empathy” and only Japanese participants mentioned “honorifics.” Our participants’ understandings of politeness appear to be in contrast to earlier politeness theories which view politeness as strategic concern for conflict avoidance and closer to current approaches which view it as relational, expressing concern for the needs and feelings of others.

中文翻译：

---

日语和希腊语中礼貌的概念化

摘要本文的主要目的是研究日本和希腊女学生如何礼貌概念，然后比较研究结果，以找出任何跨文化的异同。数据来自由200名女大学生（每组100名）填写的问卷。结果表明，存在明显的相似性和差异性。尽管对即时/礼貌的研究几乎完全集中在语言表现上，但两组之间的一个显着相似之处是礼貌被概念化为主要是非语言行为。另一个主要的相似之处是，这两个群体主要将礼貌概念化为“对他人的考虑”和“适当的行为，“前者主要以非语言表达，而后者涉及语言和非语言表现形式。大多数参与者认为礼貌是通过专心/帮助他人，尊重和同理心传达的。差异主要在于提到各个子类别的参与者的数量。例如，更多的希腊参与者将宽容的“尊重”与礼貌联系起来，而更多的日本参与者将其与“同理心”联系起来，只有日本参与者提到“荣誉”。我们的参与者对礼貌的理解似乎与早期的礼貌理论形成鲜明对比，后者将礼貌视为避免冲突的战略关注点，而更接近于将礼貌视为关系的，表达对他人需求和情感的关注的当前方法。大多数参与者认为礼貌是通过专心/帮助他人，尊重和同理心传达的。差异主要在于提到各个子类别的参与者的数量。例如，更多的希腊参与者将宽容的“尊重”与礼貌联系起来，而更多的日本参与者将其与“同理心”联系起来，只有日本参与者提到“荣誉”。我们的参与者对礼貌的理解似乎与早期的礼貌理论形成鲜明对比，后者将礼貌视为避免冲突的战略关注点，而更接近于将礼貌视为关系的，表达对他人需求和情感的关注的当前方法。大多数参与者认为礼貌是通过专心/帮助他人，尊重和同理心传达的。差异主要在于提到各个子类别的参与者的数量。例如，更多的希腊参与者将宽泛的“尊重”与礼貌联系起来，而更多的日本参与者将其与“同理心”联系起来，只有日本参与者提到“荣誉”。我们的参与者对礼貌的理解似乎与早期的礼貌理论形成鲜明对比，后者将礼貌视为避免冲突的战略关注点，而更接近于将礼貌视为关系的，表达对他人需求和情感的关注的当前方法。差异主要在于提到各个子类别的参与者的数量。例如，更多的希腊参与者将宽容的“尊重”与礼貌联系起来，而更多的日本参与者将其与“同理心”联系起来，只有日本参与者提到“荣誉”。我们的参与者对礼貌的理解似乎与早期的礼貌理论形成鲜明对比，后者将礼貌视为避免冲突的战略关注点，而更接近于将礼貌视为关系的，表达对他人需求和情感的关注的当前方法。差异主要在于提到各个子类别的参与者的数量。例如，更多的希腊参与者将宽容的“尊重”与礼貌联系起来，而更多的日本参与者将其与“同理心”联系起来，只有日本参与者提到“荣誉”。我们的参与者对礼貌的理解似乎与早期的礼貌理论形成鲜明对比，后者将礼貌视为避免冲突的战略关注点，而更接近于将礼貌视为关系的，表达对他人需求和情感的关注的当前方法。