Qur'anic Imperatives and the Ethics of Politeness, A Multimodal Perspective in Cross Cultural Pragmatics
Article Sidebar
Crossref Citations: 0
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: Politeness theory has traditionally examined conversational strategies for protecting face and managing social relationships. However, politeness goes beyond strategic language choices and includes ethical communication across different modes. This study explores Qur'anic imperatives that guide interpersonal behavior, suggesting they provide valuable material for advancing pragmatics and the philosophy of language by integrating linguistic, paralinguistic, and embodied aspects of polite conduct within an ethical framework.
Methodology: Out of approximately 1,848 imperative forms in the Qur'an, a purposive sample of 55 verses was chosen from 20 chapters based on their relevance to interaction and polite behavior. The study uses an analytical approach informed by three major traditions in politeness research: face management, relational work, and multimodal rapport management. It extends these by emphasizing an ethical perspective on communication. The analysis investigates how these imperatives encode politeness through verbal, tonal, and embodied communicative resources.
Results: The findings identify five domains of Qur'anic politeness: relational work, discursive framing, identity construction, voice control, and gaze management. The results show that politeness in the Qur'an is not negotiated situationally but codified as prescriptive discourse rooted in fairness, humility, restraint, and respect. Politeness functions as a linguistic strategy, a relational practice, and an ethical discipline that unifies word, tone, and bodily comportment.
Conclusion: This study reframes politeness as strategic, relational, multimodal, and ethical, positioning the Qur'anic model as a comparative paradigm for cross-cultural pragmatics. The findings expand politeness theory beyond Western conversational models and offer insights into how ethical imperatives shape communicative behavior across diverse cultural and religious traditions.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
and exegesis. Routledge.
Al-Hindawi, F. H., & Alkhazaali, M. A. (2016). Politeness in English and Arabic: A comparative study. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(2), 189–203.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press.
Azima, M. A. (1984). Dirāsāt li-uslūb al-Qurʾān al-karīm. Dar al-Hadith.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4–5), 585–614.
Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge University Press.
Eelen, G. (2001). A critique of politeness theories. St. Jerome Publishing.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Books.
Haugh, M. (2010). When is an email really offensive? Argumentativity and variability in evaluations of impoliteness. Journal of Politeness Research, 6(1), 7–31.
Heru, A. M. (2003). Gender and the gaze: A cultural and psychological review. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 8(2), 109–116.
Hoffmann, A., Schiestl, S., Sinske, P., Gondan, M., Sachse, P., & Maran, T. (2024). Sharing and receiving eye-contact predicts mate choice after a 5-minute conversation: Evidence from a speed-dating study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 53(3), 959–968. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02806-0
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Kádár, D. Z. (2017). Politeness, impoliteness and ritual: Maintaining the moral order in interpersonal interaction. Cambridge University Press.
Kádár, D. Z., & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. Cambridge University Press.
Kendon, A. (1990). Conducting interaction: Patterns of behavior in focused encounters. Cambridge University Press.
Leech, G. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press.
Locher, M. A., & Watts, R. J. (2005). Politeness theory and relational work. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 9–33.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mills, S. (2003). Gender and politeness. Cambridge University Press.
Pandey, R. (2025). Qualitative research in applied linguistics. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 42(1), 15–32.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory (2nd ed.). Continuum.
Tracy, S. J. (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119390838
Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184
Watts, R. J. (2005). Linguistic politeness research: Quo vadis? In R. J. Watts, S. Ide, & K. Ehlich (Eds.), Politeness in language: Studies in its history, theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. xi–xlvii). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199819
Heru, A. M. (2003). Gender and the gaze: A cultural and psychological review. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 8(2), 109–116.
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.