2.1Existing explanations of mal

By far the most common explanation of mal’s function is that it reduces the perceived imposition of a request by indicating that what is being asked for is small and easily accomplished (e.g., de Vriendt et al. 1991de Vriendt, Sera, Willy Vandeweghe, and Piet Van de Craen 1991 “Combinatorial Aspects of Modal Particles in Dutch.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 43–59.de Vriendt, Sera, Willy Vandeweghe, and Piet Van de Craen 1991 “Combinatorial Aspects of Modal Particles in Dutch.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 43–59.; Hentschel 1991Hentschel, Elke 1991 “Aspect Versus Particle: Contrasting German and Serbo-Croatian.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 139–149.Hentschel, Elke 1991 “Aspect Versus Particle: Contrasting German and Serbo-Croatian.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 139–149.; Kotorova 2015Kotorova, Elizaveta 2015 “Expressing REQUEST in German and Russian: A Communicative-Pragmatic Field Analysis.” Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences 206: 36–45. Kotorova, Elizaveta 2015 “Expressing REQUEST in German and Russian: A Communicative-Pragmatic Field Analysis.” Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences 206: 36–45. ; Weydt 1969Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.). Many authors who understand the function of mal in this way hold that its meaning is quite closely tied to einmal, ‘once,’ from which it is widely thought to be derived.11.In some dialects (e.g., in Bavaria), the particle form is the full einmal or an abbreviated form amal rather than mal. Hentschel (1991Hentschel, Elke 1991 “Aspect Versus Particle: Contrasting German and Serbo-Croatian.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 139–149.Hentschel, Elke 1991 “Aspect Versus Particle: Contrasting German and Serbo-Croatian.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 139–149., 141), for example, explains the role of mal as follows:

The question of why mal should help to make imperatives more polite can be answered easily: the particle is, even synchronically, related to einmal (‘once’) […] Its function is to stress that the act required need only be performed ‘once’ or ‘for a short time’, that moreover what is being asked is ‘easy’ and not likely to cause the doer much difficulty. In short, the use of mal can be interpreted as a minimization strategy. By reducing our wish to a passing moment, something we want done only ‘once’, we stress its small, limited temporal extension; and it is certainly more polite to ask for a mere trifle than something that would take time.

This emphasis on the close relationship between mal and einmal is echoed by a number of other authors (e.g., Möllering 2001Möllering, Martina 2001 “Teaching German Modal Particles: A Corpus-Based Approach.” Language Learning and Technology 5 (3): 130–151. Möllering, Martina 2001 “Teaching German Modal Particles: A Corpus-Based Approach.” Language Learning and Technology 5 (3): 130–151. ; Ogiermann 2009Ogierman, Eva 2009 “Politeness and In-directness Across Cultures: A Comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian Requests.” Journal of Politeness Research 5 (20): 189–216. Ogierman, Eva 2009 “Politeness and In-directness Across Cultures: A Comparison of English, German, Polish and Russian Requests.” Journal of Politeness Research 5 (20): 189–216. ; Zinken and Deppermann 2017Zinken, Jörg, and Arnulf Deppermann 2017 “A Cline of Visible Commitment in the Situated Design of Imperative Turns: Evidence from German and Polish.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 27–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zinken, Jörg, and Arnulf Deppermann 2017 “A Cline of Visible Commitment in the Situated Design of Imperative Turns: Evidence from German and Polish.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 27–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ).

There appears to be some empirical evidence to support an understanding of discourse particles in general, and mal in particular, as in some way mitigating a face threat associated with the imperative form. For example, Zinken and Deppermann (2017)Zinken, Jörg, and Arnulf Deppermann 2017 “A Cline of Visible Commitment in the Situated Design of Imperative Turns: Evidence from German and Polish.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 27–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zinken, Jörg, and Arnulf Deppermann 2017 “A Cline of Visible Commitment in the Situated Design of Imperative Turns: Evidence from German and Polish.” In Imperative Turns at Talk: The Design of Directives in Action, ed. by Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Liisa Raevaara, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, 27–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. found that in both German and Polish, the more effort it requires to comply with imperatively formatted directives, the more likely they are to contain elements (including mal) that they characterize as mitigators. However, recent studies have offered a different perspective on the role of mal in imperatives. In a corpus-based study, Deppermann (2021)Deppermann, Arnulf 2021 “Imperative im Deutschen: Konstruktion, Praktiken oder Social Action Formats?” In Verfestigungen in der Interaktion, ed. by Beate Weidner, Katharina König, Wolfgang Imo, and Lars Wegner, 195–230. Berlin: DeGruyter.Deppermann, Arnulf 2021 “Imperative im Deutschen: Konstruktion, Praktiken oder Social Action Formats?” In Verfestigungen in der Interaktion, ed. by Beate Weidner, Katharina König, Wolfgang Imo, and Lars Wegner, 195–230. Berlin: DeGruyter. found that speakers used mal in imperatively formatted requests when addressees were available (often already engaged in a joint project) but not currently expecting the specific request. Similarly, in a study of hikers’ use of the expressions guck (mal) and schau (mal) (both ‘look [mal]’), Laner (2022)Laner, Barbara 2022 “‚Guck mal der Baum‘: Zur Verwendung von Wahrnehmungsimperativen mit und ohne mal.” Gesprächsforschung — Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 23: 1–35.Laner, Barbara 2022 “‚Guck mal der Baum‘: Zur Verwendung von Wahrnehmungsimperativen mit und ohne mal.” Gesprächsforschung — Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 23: 1–35. found that speakers used mal when initiating a new local project but omitted mal when referring to a subject that had already been made relevant. These results demonstrate that the pragmatic function(s) of mal are considerably more complex than has previously acknowledged and are not fully accounted for by definitions that center on reducing imposition.

Other researchers have taken a view that emphasizes the interpersonal functions of MPs. For example, Franck (1980)Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor. understands German MPs as signals of interpersonal relations, and Braber (2006)Braber, Natalie 2006 “Emotional and Emotive Language: Modal Particles and Tags in Unified Berlin.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (9): 1487–1503. Braber, Natalie 2006 “Emotional and Emotive Language: Modal Particles and Tags in Unified Berlin.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (9): 1487–1503. contends that when MPs are not used, hearers perceive the conversation as unfriendly or impersonal. Similarly, Weydt (1969Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen., 2006Weydt, Harald 2006 “What Are Particles Good for?” In Approaches to Discourse Particles, ed. by Kerstin Fischer, 205–217. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Weydt, Harald 2006 “What Are Particles Good for?” In Approaches to Discourse Particles, ed. by Kerstin Fischer, 205–217. Amsterdam: Elsevier. ) argues that MPs serve to actively build relationships between speaker and hearer and to indicate that the speaker takes the hearer’s perspective into account. In the case of mal, Weydt (1969Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen., 42, my translation) says, “[mal] brings an informality and a lack of obligation to the sentence. It reduces the weightiness of a sentence.”

What is most striking when placing the present research in context is the near-total absence of discussion of mal in contexts other than requests. In fact, Franck (1980)Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor. claims that mal can only appear in imperatives and requestive questions, but not in “real” questions (i.e., questions soliciting information), rhetorical questions, or declarative sentences. Weydt (1969)Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen. allows that mal can appear in declarative sentences, but only those that refer to something that has not yet occurred. The only further hint of a discussion of mal outside the context of requests comes from work on the Dutch modal particle eens, which is also derived from the word for ‘once,’ and which the authors suggest is equivalent to the German mal (de Vriendt et al. 1991de Vriendt, Sera, Willy Vandeweghe, and Piet Van de Craen 1991 “Combinatorial Aspects of Modal Particles in Dutch.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 43–59.de Vriendt, Sera, Willy Vandeweghe, and Piet Van de Craen 1991 “Combinatorial Aspects of Modal Particles in Dutch.” Multilingua 10 (1/2): 43–59.). In this work, non-directive questions and commissives are cited as possible environments for eens. The pattern considered in this article — speakers’ consistent use of mal when speculating or making an estimate — is quite surprising given the focus in the existing literature; I have found no previous mention of mal in similar contexts.

2.2Politeness, (professional) face, and hedging

Both in requests and in the additional contexts explored in this article, it appears likely that the function of mal is in some way related to politeness and/or face. I will therefore briefly discuss my approach to these two concepts before turning to a close analysis of examples of mal in context.

My understanding of face follows Goffman (2017 [1967]Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge.Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge., 5), who defines face as “the positive social values a person effectively claims for himself by the line others assume he has taken during a particular contact.” For Goffman, face is a public, social resource (see Bargiela-Chiappini 2003Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca 2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1453–1469. Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca 2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1453–1469. for a detailed discussion of this point). He also emphasizes that individuals have an emotional investment in protecting or enhancing their face (Goffman 2017 [1967]Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge.Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge., 7). Facework strategies are thus not simply abstract “rules of conversation”; rather, they allow participants to experience pleasant emotions such as self-confidence or belonging and to avoid unpleasant feelings such as embarrassment or shame.

Because the data presented here involve onscreen speakers who participate in the interactions in a professional capacity, the subcategory of professional face is particularly relevant to understanding these speakers’ use of mal. Márquez Reiter (2009)Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. introduces the concept of professional face in her work on service calls in which a call center employee acts as a representative of a larger institution. Although she does not formally define the term “professional face,” Márquez Reiter (2009)Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. notes that different aspects of the agent’s identity are relevant at different points in the interaction. In some cases, her identity as a formal representative of the company is most relevant; in others, her personal identity is foregrounded. Márquez Reiter (2009)Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. describes the face at stake in these contexts as professional face and personal face, respectively. Much of the subsequent work on professional face (e.g., Archer and Jagodziński 2015Archer, Dawn, and Piotr Jagodziński 2015 “Call Centre Interaction: A Case of Sanctioned Face Attack?” Journal of Pragmatics 23 (1): 45–66. Archer, Dawn, and Piotr Jagodziński 2015 “Call Centre Interaction: A Case of Sanctioned Face Attack?” Journal of Pragmatics 23 (1): 45–66. ; Jagodziński and Archer 2018Jagodziński, Piotr, and Dawn Archer 2018 “Co-Creating Customer Experience Through Call Centre Interaction: Interactional Achievement and Professional Face.” Journal of Politeness Research 14 (2): 257–277. Jagodziński, Piotr, and Dawn Archer 2018 “Co-Creating Customer Experience Through Call Centre Interaction: Interactional Achievement and Professional Face.” Journal of Politeness Research 14 (2): 257–277. ; Orthaber and Márquez-Reiter 2011Orthaber, Sara, and Rosina Márquez Reiter 2011 “ ‘Talk to the Hand’: Complaints to a Public Transport Company.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (15): 3860–3876. Orthaber, Sara, and Rosina Márquez Reiter 2011 “ ‘Talk to the Hand’: Complaints to a Public Transport Company.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (15): 3860–3876. ) has also focused on facework related to a participant’s status as a representative of a larger institution. Given the dynamics identified in my data, however, I will focus here on a different aspect of professional face: the desire to be seen as a competent member of one’s profession (cf. Goffman 2017 [1967]Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge.Goffman, Erving 2017 [1967] Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. London: Routledge., 59 on “capacity esteem”; Archer and Wilcox 2018Archer, Dawn, and Phil Willcox 2018 “The Faces at Play in Performance Appraisals: With a Focus Upon a UK Retail Organization.” Journal of Politeness Research 14 (2): 261–286. Archer, Dawn, and Phil Willcox 2018 “The Faces at Play in Performance Appraisals: With a Focus Upon a UK Retail Organization.” Journal of Politeness Research 14 (2): 261–286. on “competence face”). Márquez Reiter et al. (2016)Márquez Reiter, Rosina, Kristina Ganchenko, and Anna Charalambidou 2016 “Requests and Counters in Russian Traffic Police Officer-Citizen Encounters: Face and Identity Implications.” Pragmatics and Society 7 (4): 512–549. Márquez Reiter, Rosina, Kristina Ganchenko, and Anna Charalambidou 2016 “Requests and Counters in Russian Traffic Police Officer-Citizen Encounters: Face and Identity Implications.” Pragmatics and Society 7 (4): 512–549. discuss this aspect of professional face in their work on traffic stops by Russian police officers. In these examples, the officers’ facework appears to be primarily designed to protect their own right to be viewed as competent and honest officers rather than to protect the reputation of the police as an institution. In this article, I treat professional face as an umbrella term that covers both of these components: face “on loan” to an individual from a company (Orthaber and Márquez-Reiter 2011Orthaber, Sara, and Rosina Márquez Reiter 2011 “ ‘Talk to the Hand’: Complaints to a Public Transport Company.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (15): 3860–3876. Orthaber, Sara, and Rosina Márquez Reiter 2011 “ ‘Talk to the Hand’: Complaints to a Public Transport Company.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (15): 3860–3876. , 3863) and face involving the desire to be viewed as competent in one’s professional role.

The patterns identified in these data also support the position that politeness and face should be considered theoretically distinct. Historically, politeness and face have often been treated as more or less synonymous. In particular, Brown and Levinson’s (1987)Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson 1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson 1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. influential work defines politeness as a combination of strategies to protect face and does not discuss the possibility of facework that is distinct from politeness. Other researchers (e.g., Bargiela-Chiappini 2003Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca 2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1453–1469. Bargiela-Chiappini, Francesca 2003 “Face and Politeness: New (Insights) for Old (Concepts).” Journal of Pragmatics 35 (10–11): 1453–1469. ; Garcés-Conejos Blitvich 2013Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar 2013 “Introduction: Face, Identity and Impoliteness. Looking Backward, Moving Forward: From Goffman to Practice Theory.” Journal of Politeness Research 9 (1): 1–33. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar 2013 “Introduction: Face, Identity and Impoliteness. Looking Backward, Moving Forward: From Goffman to Practice Theory.” Journal of Politeness Research 9 (1): 1–33. ; Haugh and Bargiela-Chiappini 2010Haugh, Michael, and Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini 2010 “Face in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2073–2077. Haugh, Michael, and Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini 2010 “Face in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2073–2077. ; Márquez Reiter 2009Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. Márquez Reiter, Rosina 2009 “How to Get Rid of a Telemarketing Agent: Face-Work Strategies in a Spanish Intercultural Service Call.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by Francesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Michael Haugh, 55–57. London: Equinox. ; Shimanoff 1994Shimanoff, Susan B. 1994 “Gender Perspectives on Facework: Simplistic Stereotypes vs. Complex Realties.” In The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. by Stella Ting-Toomey, 159–208. New York: State University of New York Press.Shimanoff, Susan B. 1994 “Gender Perspectives on Facework: Simplistic Stereotypes vs. Complex Realties.” In The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. by Stella Ting-Toomey, 159–208. New York: State University of New York Press.), however, argue for separating the concepts of politeness and facework. Following Shimanoff (1994Shimanoff, Susan B. 1994 “Gender Perspectives on Facework: Simplistic Stereotypes vs. Complex Realties.” In The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. by Stella Ting-Toomey, 159–208. New York: State University of New York Press.Shimanoff, Susan B. 1994 “Gender Perspectives on Facework: Simplistic Stereotypes vs. Complex Realties.” In The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues, ed. by Stella Ting-Toomey, 159–208. New York: State University of New York Press., 159–60), I treat politeness as a subset of facework that involves protecting or enhancing fellow interactants’ face. Choices designed to protect or enhance the speaker’s own face are characterized as facework but not politeness.

Finally, since I will seek to demonstrate that mal serves as a hedge in the contexts discussed in this article, it is worth briefly considering the relationship between hedging and facework/politeness. For the purposes of this article, I have adopted Crompton’s (1997Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. , 282) test for a hedge: “Can the proposition be restated in such a way that it is not changed but that the author’s commitment to it is greater than at present?” Most obviously, hedges allow speakers to be precise about their level of certainty toward their claims (see, e.g., Crompton 1997Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. ; Hyland 1998Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ; Livytska 2019Livytska, Inna 2019 “The Use of Hedging in Research Articles on Applied Linguistics.” Journal of Language and Cultural Education 7 (1): 35–53. Livytska, Inna 2019 “The Use of Hedging in Research Articles on Applied Linguistics.” Journal of Language and Cultural Education 7 (1): 35–53. ). As authors working in a variety of research traditions have argued, hedging can also serve as a form of politeness and/or facework (e.g., Brown and Levinson 1987Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson 1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson 1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ; Cabanes 2007Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158.Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158.; Clancy 2011Clancy, Brian 2011 “Do You Want to Do It Yourself Like? Hedging in Irish Traveller and Settled Family Discourse.” In Situated Politeness, ed. by Bethan L. Davies, Michael Haugh, and Andrew John Merrison, 129–146. London: Continuum.Clancy, Brian 2011 “Do You Want to Do It Yourself Like? Hedging in Irish Traveller and Settled Family Discourse.” In Situated Politeness, ed. by Bethan L. Davies, Michael Haugh, and Andrew John Merrison, 129–146. London: Continuum.; Depraetere and Kaltenböck 2023Depraetere, Ilse, and Gunther Kaltenböck 2023 “Hedged Performatives in Spoken American English: A Discourse-Oriented Analysis.” Journal of English Linguistics 51 (3): 207–235. Depraetere, Ilse, and Gunther Kaltenböck 2023 “Hedged Performatives in Spoken American English: A Discourse-Oriented Analysis.” Journal of English Linguistics 51 (3): 207–235. ; Hyland 1998Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ; Lakoff 1975Lakoff, Robin Tolmach 1975 “Language and Women’s Place (1975)”. In Language and Women’s Place: Text and Commentaries, Revised and Expanded Edition, 2004 , ed. by Mary Bucholtz, 39–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lakoff, Robin Tolmach 1975 “Language and Women’s Place (1975)”. In Language and Women’s Place: Text and Commentaries, Revised and Expanded Edition, 2004, ed. by Mary Bucholtz, 39–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.; Martín-Martín 2008Martín-Martín, Pedro 2008 “The Mitigation of Scientific Claims in Research Papers: A Comparative Study.” International Journal of English Studies 8 (2): 133–152. Martín-Martín, Pedro 2008 “The Mitigation of Scientific Claims in Research Papers: A Comparative Study.” International Journal of English Studies 8 (2): 133–152. ; Myers 1989Myers, Greg 1989 “The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles.” Applied Linguistics 10: 1–35. Myers, Greg 1989 “The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles.” Applied Linguistics 10: 1–35. ; Vass 2004Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141.Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141.). Two face-related functions of hedging stand out as potentially relevant to the present study. First, hedges may serve to protect speakers’ face should their claims prove incorrect (Cabanes 2007Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158.Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158.; Vass 2004Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141.Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141.). Second, hedges may serve as a form of politeness by allowing speakers to show deference toward their audience. For example, in the context of academic research articles, it has frequently been suggested that hedging allows authors to present their claims as provisional, acknowledging that they require the research community’s ratification before they are accepted as fact (Crompton, 1997Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. Crompton, Peter 1997 “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems.” English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 271–287. ; Hyland 1998Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hyland, Ken 1998 Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ; Martín-Martín 2008Martín-Martín, Pedro 2008 “The Mitigation of Scientific Claims in Research Papers: A Comparative Study.” International Journal of English Studies 8 (2): 133–152. Martín-Martín, Pedro 2008 “The Mitigation of Scientific Claims in Research Papers: A Comparative Study.” International Journal of English Studies 8 (2): 133–152. ; Myers 1989Myers, Greg 1989 “The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles.” Applied Linguistics 10: 1–35. Myers, Greg 1989 “The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles.” Applied Linguistics 10: 1–35. ; cf. Cabanes 2007Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158.Cabanes, Paloma Poveda 2007 “A Contrastive Analysis of Hedging in English and Spanish Architecture Project Descriptions.” Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 20: 139–158. on architecture proposals; Vass 2004Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141.Vass, Holly 2004 “Socio-Cognitive Aspects of Hedging in Two Legal Discourse Genres.” IBERICA 7: 125–141. on legal discourse). In the following analysis, I will evaluate whether similar considerations of facework and/or politeness may help to explain why speakers use hedges in the speculations and estimates discussed in this article.

3.1Research question

This analysis seeks to answer the following research question:

3.2Theoretical approach

In this article, I explore examples of mal in context using a general discourse analytic approach drawing on a number of research traditions, including (im)politeness theory, Conversation Analysis (CA), and media studies. In this section, I will describe how CA has influenced my analysis and identify the ways in which my research focus and methodology differ from a strict CA approach.

My methodological approach is particularly informed by CA’s emphasis on conducting a close turn-by-turn analysis of examples in context rather than considering turns in isolation. I have adopted CA’s understanding of utterances as social actions and its view of sequence and structure as crucial to understanding what is happening in interaction. I have also been inspired by the CA concept of a “next-turn proof procedure,” the idea that a response can provide evidence of how the previous turn was interpreted (e.g., if a participant provides an answer, this is evidence that the previous turn was understood as a question) (Sacks et al. 1974Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson 1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735. Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson 1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50 (4): 696–735. ; see Hutchby and Wooffitt 1998Hutchby, Ian, and Robin Wooffitt 1998 Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practice and Applications. Cambridge: Polity.Hutchby, Ian, and Robin Wooffitt 1998 Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practice and Applications. Cambridge: Polity. for discussion). I have found the implications of this point particularly important for analyzing how participants orient to (im)politeness in interaction — for example, taking a second turn like “mm hm” or “okay” as evidence that a participant oriented to the previous turn as unremarkable, and thus likely consistent with politeness.

Though I have adopted many useful insights from CA, some aspects of this analysis are not consistent with a strict CA approach. The biggest point of divergence is my consideration of factors not explicitly observable in the interaction. In CA, the mere fact that an interaction takes place in a particular context — in this case, a televised antiques appraisal — is not sufficient grounds to invoke this context when accounting for participants’ behavior (see Schegloff 1991Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1991 “Reflections on Talk and Social Structure.” In Talk and Social Structure, ed. by Dierdre Boden, and Don H. Zimmerman, 44–70. Cambridge: Polity.Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1991 “Reflections on Talk and Social Structure.” In Talk and Social Structure, ed. by Dierdre Boden, and Don H. Zimmerman, 44–70. Cambridge: Polity., 51; Schegloff 1992Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992 “In Another Context.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. by Alessandro Duranti and Charles Goodwin, 191–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992 “In Another Context.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. by Alessandro Duranti and Charles Goodwin, 191–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press., 196–197). In this analysis, however, I have not adhered to CA’s strict position that an analyst must be able to identify a specific point in the data where participants orient to the context in order for that context to be considered relevant. I have found this approach too limiting to allow for a meaningful discussion of the relationship between mal and facework, especially one concerned with how onscreen participants’ awareness of a (potential or imagined) audience affects their turn design. None of the examples in this analysis include explicit references to the audience. Nonetheless, it is difficult to imagine that participants are not (some of the time, to some extent) orienting to the audience, or that their perceptions of face vulnerability are not affected by concern with how the audience will judge them. It is true that discussions of the impact of participants’ awareness of the audience must carry the caveat of “likely” or “possible” relevance. Nevertheless, I consider these aspects of the wider communicative context important for analyzing the facework performed by participants on a reality TV show, and thus for understanding their use of mal.

3.3Data source

Examples for analysis are taken from the German reality antiques series Bares für Rares (‘Cash for Rarities’, henceforth BfR). Each episode features multiple storylines in which a guest (or pair of guests) has an antique and/or valuable item appraised by an expert and then sells their item at auction. As there were no examples of mal in speculations or estimates in the auction scenes, the analysis focuses exclusively on the expert assessment sequences.

The data set consists of 67:17 minutes of footage, featuring assessment sequences for fourteen guests’ storylines from three different episodes. There are forty-seven cases where mal appears to serve as a particle, twelve of which are the context of estimates or speculations. The data set includes twenty-five speakers: the show’s host, Horst, who appears in every storyline; six different antiques experts who appear in between one and four storylines each; and eighteen guests. Due to the limited demographic information available, possible differences based on regional language variety are not considered in this article.

The analysis considers examples of mal from both experts and guests. Before proceeding to a detailed analysis of these speakers’ use of mal in context, I will briefly discuss these two participant roles and identify some of the face concerns that are relevant for each. I will also highlight the importance of considering the influence of participants’ awareness of the audience in a discussion of onscreen facework.

Central to the experts’ role is their claim to epistemic authority — that is, authority based on knowledge and experience (Heritage 2012Heritage, John 2012 “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 1–29. Heritage, John 2012 “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45: 1–29. , 2013Heritage, John 2013 “Action Formation and Its Epistemic (and Other) Backgrounds.” Discourse Studies 15 (5): 551–578. Heritage, John 2013 “Action Formation and Its Epistemic (and Other) Backgrounds.” Discourse Studies 15 (5): 551–578. ; Heritage and Raymond 2005Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond 2005 “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68: 15–38. Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond 2005 “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68: 15–38. ; Hudak and Maynard 2011Hudak, Pamela L., and Douglas W. Maynard 2011 “An Interactional Approach to Conceptualising Small Talk in Medical Interactions.” Sociology of Health and Illness 33 (4): 634–653. Hudak, Pamela L., and Douglas W. Maynard 2011 “An Interactional Approach to Conceptualising Small Talk in Medical Interactions.” Sociology of Health and Illness 33 (4): 634–653. ; Landmark et al. 2015Landmark, Anne Marie Dalby, Pål Gulbrandsen, and Jan Svennevig 2015 “Whose Decision? Negotiating Epistemic and Deontic Rights in Medical Treatment Decisions.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 54–69. Landmark, Anne Marie Dalby, Pål Gulbrandsen, and Jan Svennevig 2015 “Whose Decision? Negotiating Epistemic and Deontic Rights in Medical Treatment Decisions.” Journal of Pragmatics 78: 54–69. ). The experts’ turns tend to be much longer than those of the other onscreen participants, with only minimal acknowledgements like “mm hm” or “okay” from guests. As a result of this highly asymmetrical turn structure, the expert seems to take on the role of instructor, conveying relevant information about the object to the other participants (and, of course, to the audience). Indeed, the role of comparable experts on the British Antiques Roadshow has frequently been compared to that of a university professor (e.g., Bishop 1999Bishop, Ronald 1999 “What Price History? Functions of Narrative in Television Collectibles Shows.” Journal of Popular Culture 33 (3): 1–27. Bishop, Ronald 1999 “What Price History? Functions of Narrative in Television Collectibles Shows.” Journal of Popular Culture 33 (3): 1–27. ; Bonner 2003Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. ; Clouse 2008Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. ). Guests may contribute their knowledge about the object’s history and provenance, and Horst occasionally contributes knowledge of his own, but it is the expert who has the ultimate authority to provide an “official” description and ultimately assign value to the object (cf. Clouse 2008Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. ). It is also important to note that the experts are likely to view their appearance on the show as a form of advertising, which has significant implications for the impact of their awareness of the audience on their perceptions of professional face vulnerability.

The guests, too, have distinct conversational rights and responsibilities. Guests are likely to be familiar with the structure of the show and thus to have a general understanding of the role they are expected to play (Bonner 2003Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. ; Garcés-Conejos Blitvich and Lorenzo-Dus 2013Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Nuria Lorenzo-Dus 2013 “Reality Television: A Discourse-Analytical Perspective.” In Real Talk: Reality Television and Discourse Analysis in Action, ed. by Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, 9–23. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, and Nuria Lorenzo-Dus 2013 “Reality Television: A Discourse-Analytical Perspective.” In Real Talk: Reality Television and Discourse Analysis in Action, ed. by Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, 9–23. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ). The typical format of the antiques show involves apparently naïve guests who appear on the show to learn from the expert. Indeed, guests who do have knowledge about their items, especially those who have previously sought an expert appraisal, are expected to keep this knowledge to themselves (Bonner 2003Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. ). Thus, an important part of conforming to the role expected of a guest is at least the performance of naïveté.

As researchers discussing the British Antiques Roadshow have pointed out, reality antiques shows create drama by exploiting the inherent tension between the emphasis on the historical, artistic, and sentimental value of the objects and the goal of ascertaining the monetary value of these objects (Bishop 1999Bishop, Ronald 1999 “What Price History? Functions of Narrative in Television Collectibles Shows.” Journal of Popular Culture 33 (3): 1–27. Bishop, Ronald 1999 “What Price History? Functions of Narrative in Television Collectibles Shows.” Journal of Popular Culture 33 (3): 1–27. ; Bonner 2003Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. Bonner, Frances 2003 Ordinary Television: Analyzing Popular TV. London: Sage. ; Clouse 2008Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. Clouse, Abby 2008 “Narratives of Value in the Antiques Roadshow: ‘A Game of Recognitions.’” Journal of Popular Culture 41 (1): 3–20. ). This tension creates a significant risk to guests’ personal face. On the one hand, guests desire to project a positive image of themselves — for example, as people who appreciate their heritage and who value the cultural significance of their objects. On the other hand, there is no escaping the fact that they have appeared on the show in order to sell the objects for cash. Studies of the way viewers interact with and discuss this type of show suggest that guests are right to be concerned about how their hopes for the objects’ value and their reactions to the assessed price will influence the audience’s perception of them (see, for example, Hine 2011Hine, Christine 2011 “Towards Ethnography of Television on the Internet: A Mobile Strategy for Exploring Mundane Interpretive Activities.” Media, Culture, and Society 33 (4): 567–582. Hine, Christine 2011 “Towards Ethnography of Television on the Internet: A Mobile Strategy for Exploring Mundane Interpretive Activities.” Media, Culture, and Society 33 (4): 567–582. on the entertainment viewers find in “celebrated instances of disappointment” on YouTube). Guests’ awareness of these kinds of audience reactions to previous episodes is likely to enhance their perceptions of face vulnerability during discussions about their items’ value. Again, then, participants’ awareness of being judged by a future audience is likely to affect their linguistic choices, especially the facework they can be seen to perform.

5.1Summary of findings

It is clear from these data that existing discussions of mal do not account for the full range of contexts in which speakers use this particle. As outlined in Section 2, previous discussions of mal have focused almost exclusively on its function(s) in requests. In the data presented here, however, speakers consistently use mal in a different context: when speculating or making an estimate. Indeed, the examples in these data contradict some prior claims about the contexts where mal can appear. Recall, for example, that Franck (1980)Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor.Franck, Dorothea 1980 Grammatik und Conversation. Königstein im Taunus: Scriptor. claims that mal cannot appear in declarative sentences at all, while Weydt (1969)Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen.Weydt, Harald 1969 Abtönungspartikel: Die deutschen Modalwörter und ihre französischen Entsprechungen. Bad Homburg: Gehlen. claims that mal can only be used in declarative sentences that refer to something that has not yet occurred. In these data, however, speakers use mal in declarative sentences in which they speculate about the present state of affairs.

The clearest pattern in these data is the experts’ use of mal when making estimates, often alongside verbs indexing uncertainty. In these examples, mal appears to be a form of hedging, serving to protect the experts’ professional face in case their estimates prove incorrect. This reading is supported by the fact that turns of this kind often contain additional elements of hesitation and/or hedging, suggesting that mal serves a comparable function. Although this is a very different use of mal than has so far been discussed in the literature, there is some overlap with the facework function that has been proposed in the context of requests. Namely, speakers’ use of mal does appear to be associated with a perception that face is vulnerable. In the case of the experts’ estimates, their use of mal appears to be a form of professional facework.

Guests, too, use mal to hedge statements in contexts where face is potentially vulnerable. Specifically, in Examples (1) and (2), guests use mal when indicating that statements about their items are conjecture. This qualifying function may be a means of protecting themselves from the face threat associated with publicly making an incorrect statement. This hedging may also serve a politeness function, conveying deference to the experts’ superior epistemic authority. In Example (3), a slightly different facework function appears likely — namely, mal is used as a hedge to protect a guest’s personal face in case his desired price is unrealistically high. Like the experts, guests frequently use mal after verbs that indicate a lack of certainty or commitment, often in turns containing other forms of hedging and uncertainty. Again, this pattern supports the theory that mal serves a similar function.

5.2Implications