 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
In sociology,face refers to a class of behaviors and customs, associated with themorality,honor, andauthority of an individual (or group of individuals), and their image withinsocial groups. Face is linked to thedignity andprestige that a person enjoys in terms of theirsocial relationships. This idea, with varying nuances, is observed in many societies and cultures, includingChinese,Arabic,Indonesian,Korean,Malaysian,Laotian,Indian,Japanese,Vietnamese,Filipino,Thai,Russian and otherEast Slavic cultures.
Face has particularly complex dynamics and meanings within the context ofChinese culture, and its usage in theEnglish language is borrowed fromChinese.[1]
Although Chinese writerLin Yutang claimed "face cannot be translated or defined",[2] these definitions have been created:
In China, in particular, the concepts ofmianzi,lian andyan play an extremely important role in the fabric of society.
InChinese culture, "face" refers to two distinct concepts, although linked in Chinese social relations. One ismianzi (面子), and the other islian (臉), which are used regularly in everyday language although not so much in formal writing.
Two influential Chinese authors explained face. The Chinese writerLu Xun[4] referred to the American missionaryArthur Henderson Smith's interpretation.[5]
The term "face" keeps cropping up in our conversation, and it seems such a simple expression that I doubt whether many people give it much thought. Recently, however, we have heard this word on the lips of foreigners too, who seem to be studying it. They find it extremely hard to understand, but believe that "face" is the key to the Chinese spirit and that grasping it will be like grabbing a queue twenty-four years ago [when wearing aqueue was compulsory] – everything else will follow.[6][7]
Lin Yutang considered the psychology of "face":
Interesting as the Chinese physiological face is, the psychological face makes a still more fascinating study. It is not a face that can be washed or shaved, but a face that can be "granted" and "lost" and "fought for" and "presented as a gift". Here we arrive at the most curious point of Chinese social psychology. Abstract and intangible, it is yet the most delicate standard by which Chinese social intercourse is regulated.[2]
The concept of face has a significant role inChinese diplomacy.[8]: 123
Miàn (面) "face;personal esteem; countenance; surface; side" occurs in words like:
Hsien-chin Hu says “face”
can be borrowed, struggled for, added to, padded, — all terms indicating a gradual increase in volume. It is built up through initial high position, wealth, power, ability, through cleverly establishing social ties to a number of prominent people, as well as through avoidance of acts that would cause unfavorable comment.[10]: 61
Liǎn (臉) "face; countenance; respect; reputation; prestige" is seen in several face words:
Hu contrastsméiyǒu liǎn (沒有臉; 'without face') "audacious; wanton; shameless" as "the most severe condemnation that can be made of a person" andbùyào liǎn (不要臉; 'don't want face') "shameless; selfishly inconsiderate" as "a serious accusation meaning that ego does not care what society thinks of his character, that he is ready to obtain benefits for himself in defiance ofmoral standards".[10]: 51–52
Yán (顏) "face; prestige; reputation; honor" occurs in the common expressiondiū yán丟顏 and the words:
The Englishsemantic field for "face" words meaning "prestige; honor" is smaller than the corresponding Chinese field. English face meaning "prestige; honor, respect, dignity, status, reputation, social acceptance, or good name. The "lose" verb in "lose face" means "fail to maintain", while the "save" in "save face" means "avoid loss/damage".The country begins to feel that Government consented to arrangements by which China has lost face; the officials have long been conscious that they are becoming ridiculous in the eyes of the people, seeing that where a foreigner is concerned they can neither enforce a Chinese right, nor redress a Chinese grievance, even on Chinese soil.[11]
Several American newspapers from 1874 listed the concept in a column of "Chinese Proverbs" or "Facts & Fancies" stating "The Chinese, be it observed, are great sticklers for propriety and respectability, and are very much afraid of what they term "losing face"."[12][13]Loss of face occurs inThe Times (August 3, 1929): "Each wishes to concede only what can be conceded without loss of 'face'".[14]
Save face was coined fromlose face applying the semanticopposition betweenlose andsave (Chinese:保面子;pinyin:bǎo miànzi;lit. 'guard/save face'; when successful, it's called保住面子;bǎozhu miànzi; 'saved/guarded face').
TheOxford English Dictionary (OED) defines "save face" as: "To keep, protect or guard (a thing) from damage, loss, or destruction", and elaborates,
8f. to save one's face: to avoid being disgraced or humiliated. Similarly, to save (another's) face. Hence save-face adj. =face-saving ... Originally used by the English community in China, with reference to the continual devices among the Chinese to avoid incurring or inflicting disgrace. The exact phrase appears not to occur in Chinese, but ‘to lose face’ (diu lien), and ‘for the sake of his face’, are common.[15]
Among theEnglish words of Chinese origin,lose face is an uncommonverb phrase and a uniquesemantic loan translation. Most Anglo-Chinese borrowings arenouns,[16]: 250 with a few exceptions such asto kowtow,to Shanghai,to brainwash, andlose face. Englishface, meaning "prestige" or "honor", is the only case of a Chinesesemantic loan. Semantic loans extend an indigenous word's meaning in conformity with a foreign model (e.g., the Frenchrealiser,lit. 'achieve' or'create' or'construct', used in the sense of Englishrealize). The vast majority of English words from Chinese are ordinaryloanwords with regular phonemic adaptation (e.g.,chop suey < Cantonesetsap-sui雜碎lit. 'miscellaneous pieces'). A few arecalques where a borrowing is blended with native elements (e.g.,chopsticks < Pidginchop "quick, fast" < Cantonesekap急lit. 'quick' +stick).Face meaning "prestige" is technically a loan synonym, owing to semantic overlap between the native English meaning "outward semblance;effrontery" and the borrowed Chinese meaning "prestige; dignity".
Whenface acquired its Chinese sense of "prestige; honor", it filled alexical gap in the Englishlexicon. Chan and Kwok write,
The Chinese has supplied a specific "name" for a "thing" embodying qualities not expressed or possibly not fully expressed, by a number of terms in English. The aptness of the figurative extension has probably also played a part[17]
Carr concludes,
The nearest English synonyms of the apt figurativeface areprestige,honor,respect,dignity,status,reputation,social acceptance, orgood name.[18][19]: 847–880 [20] explains how "face" is a more basic meaning than "status", "dignity", or "honor". "Prestige" appears to be semantically closest to "face", however a person can be said to haveface but notprestige, or vice versa. Prestige is not necessary; one can easily live without it, but hardly without "face".[18]
In Japan, the concept of face is known asmentsu (面子), which is defined as “the public image people want to present within a given social framework”.[21] More specifically, mentsu can only be established when in social situations where others are present. It is associated with the fulfillment of one’s social role(s) as expected by others.[22] There are two main types of face in Japanese culture:
The need for positive self-regard is culturally variant and Japanese motivations for positive self-regard differ from those of other cultures in that it is primarily self-critically focused.[24] From a young age, children are encouraged by parents to become socially shared images of the ideal person through the phrase “rashii” (らしい；similar to).[24] In this way, social roles influence how Japanese identify themselves but also establish the desirable image Japanese people wish to present in front of others.[25] “Japanese competition characterized byyokonarabi (横並び), emphasizing not on surpassing others, but on not falling behind others”.[24] The continual effort to improve oneself as summarized by the sayinggambarimasu (頑張ります) can be viewed as an expression to secure the esteem of others, illustrating high motivations to maintain public face in Japanese culture.[26]
In contrast to the Chinese notion ofmianzi which emphasizes one’s power, the Japanese notion ofmentsu places emphasis on social roles.[21] A comparative study of Japanese and Chinese student’s perceptions of face revealed that Japanese students tend to be more concerned about face in situations relating to social status and appropriate treatment of others based on social status, while Chinese students tend to be more concerned in situations concerning evaluations of competence or performance.[21]
The integration of face in Japanese culture is evident in the language and cultural norms. According to Matsumoto 1988, “To attend to each other’s face in Japanese culture is to recognize each other’s social position and to convey such a recognition through the proper linguistic means, including formulaic expressions, honorifics, verbs of giving and receiving, and other “relation-acknowledging devices”. The Japanese cultural norms ofhonne (本音; inner feelings) andtatemae (建前; presented stance) ,[27] a commonly understood model of communication whereby individuals put up a polite “front” that hides their real beliefs,[24] emphasize the importance placed on carrying out social responsibility in Japanese society.[27]
In the politeness-orientated Japanese society, simple sentences in English would have many variations in Japanese where the speaker must make linguistic choices based on their interpersonal relationship with the listener.[28] Common greetings in Japanese such asyoroshikuonegaishimasu (よろしくお願いします; I make a request and I hope things go well) highlight the debt-sensitive culture in Japan.[29] By emphasizing the speaker’s debt to giving credit to the listener, one implies the debt will be repaid, this is rooted in the Japanese concept of face.[29] In addition, phrases such assumimasen (すみません), originally an expression for apology but encompasses feelings of both gratitude and apology, are used across a variety of contexts, highlighting the use of language to maintain and reinforce smooth face-to-face interactions within Japanese society.[30]
A study investigating the conditions that led to feelings of face-loss in Japanese participants revealed that the presence of others and engagement in activities related to social roles led to a stronger face-loss experience.[25] When examiningmentsu in Japan, it was revealed that people generally regard experiences of losing one’s own face as unpleasant. Experiences of face-saving and face-loss can influence one’s mood and self-esteem.[31] Moreover, people’s moods can be influenced by whether the face of those close to them are saved.[31] Findings also reveal that caring for others through saving face can have a positive impact on one’s interpersonal relationships with others.[31]
RussianOrthodox concept of face (лик, лицо, личина) is different from the Chinese concept of face in regards to different emphasis onsacricety andindividualism, and in regards to different understanding of the opposites.[citation needed] However, both Russian and Chinese concepts of "face" are close to each other in their focus on person being, first and foremost, part of largercommunity. In contrast to co-existence of personal individualism with their simultaneous participation in community affairs withinWestern culture, individuality is much more toned-down in both Russian and Chinese cultures in favour of communality; both Russian and Chinese cultures are lacking in stark Westerndichotomy of "internal" vs. "external", and also lacking in Western focus onlegal frameworks being foundation for individualism; and instead of it, in both Russian and Chinese cultures ritualism inpublic relations is much more highly regarded than in Western culture, where in the West ritualism is thought of to be mostly dull and empty of content.[32]
The importance of the concept of face in Russia may be seen imprinted into amassment of proverbs and sayings, where the wordлицо is used as a reference to one's character orreputation, for instanceупасть в грязь лицом (lit. 'to fall face down into mud') meaning "to lose reputation",двуличие (lit. 'two-facedness' or'the absence of a well-defined face') denoting a negative trait,потерять лицо, similarly toупасть в грязь лицом, but stronger, meaning to "lose reputation or social standing", andличина meaning both "face" and at the same time "the essence", when being used to describe a person, showing that there is high expectation of "inner self" and "outer self" of a person being in high accord with each other, looking from the framework of Russian culture.[citation needed]
AmongSouth Slavs, especially inSerbo-Croatian andBulgarian, the wordobraz (образ) is used as a traditional expression forhonor and the sociological concept of face. Medieval Slavic documents have shown that the word has been used with various meanings, such as form, image, character, person, symbol, face, figure, statue, idol, guise and mask. The languages also have a derived adjectivebezobrazan (безобразанlit. 'without face'), used to associateshame to a person.[33]
InArabic, the expressionhafiẓa māʼ al-wajh (حفظ ماء الوجه,lit. 'save the face's water', is used to meansave face. The entireArab culture of social and family behavior is based aroundIslamic concepts of dignity. For Shia Islam, face is based on the social and family ranking system found in the Treatise of Rights,Al-Risalah al-Huquq, Shia Islam's primary source for social behaviors.[34]
InPersian, expressions like "Aab ro rizi" (آبروريزی,lit. 'losing the face's water'), is used to meansave face and "Dou roi" (دورويی,lit. 'two-facedness'), "Ro seyahi" (nq,lit. 'Black-facedness') meaning "ashamed and embarrassed" and "Ro sepidi" (روسپيدی,lit. 'white-facedness') meaning "proud" (opposite ofRo seyahi) are used. In Iranian culture the meaning of linguistic face is much closer to the meaning ofcharacter. So Persian speakers use some strategies in saving the face or character of each other while they communicate.
The Khmer word for face ismuk (មុខ,lit. 'face').Bat muk (បាត់មុខ) translates literally as 'lose face'.Tuk muk (ទុកមុខ) translates literally as 'save face' or 'preserve face'. This concept is understood and treated much the same in Cambodia as elsewhere in Asia.
The concept of "face" orchemyeon (Korean: 체면;Hanja: 體面;Korean:[/t͡ɕʰe̞mjʌ̹n/]) is extremely important inKorean culture.[citation needed]
"Face" is central tosociology andsociolinguistics. Martin C. Yang[35] analyzed eight sociological factors inlosing or gaining face: the kinds of equality between the people involved, their ages, personal sensibilities, inequality in social status, social relationship, consciousness of personal prestige, presence of a witness, and the particular social value/sanction involved.[36]
The sociologistErving Goffman introduced the concept of "face" intosocial theory with his 1955 article "On Face-work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements of Social Interaction" and 1967 bookInteraction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior.[37][38] According to Goffman'sdramaturgical perspective, face is amask that changes depending on theaudience and the variety of social interaction. People strive to maintain the face they have created in social situations. They are emotionally attached to their faces, so they feel good when their faces are maintained; loss of face results in emotional pain, so insocial interactions peoplecooperate by usingpoliteness strategies to maintain each other's faces.[citation needed]
Face is sociologically universal. People "are human",Joseph Agassi and I. C. Jarvie believe, "because they have face to care for – without it they lose human dignity."[39]: 140 Hu elaborates:
The point is that face is distinctively human. Anyone who does not wish to declare his social bankruptcy must show a regard for face: he must claim for himself, and must extend to others, some degree of compliance, respect, and deference in order to maintain a minimum level of effective social functioning. While it is true that the conceptualization of what constitutes face and the rules governing face behavior vary considerably across cultures, the concern for face is invariant. Defined at a high level of generality, the concept of face is a universal.[19]: 881–882
The sociological concept of face has recently been reanalyzed through consideration of the Chinese concepts of face (mianzi andlian) which permits deeper understanding of the various dimensions of experience of face, including moral and social evaluation, and its emotional mechanisms.[40]
According to Hu, mianzi stands for "the kind of prestige that is emphasized...a reputation achieved through getting on in life, through success and ostentation", while face is "the respect of a group for a man with a good moral reputation: the man who will fulfill his obligations regardless of the hardships involved, who under all circumstances shows himself a decent human being".[10] The concept seems to relate to two different meanings, from one side Chinese consumers try to increase or maintain their reputation (mianzi) in front of socially and culturally significant others (e.g. friends); on the other hand, they try to defend or save face.[citation needed]
Mianzi is not only important to improve the consumer's reputation in front of significant others, but rather it is also associated with feelings of dignity, honor, and pride.[41] Inconsumer behaviour literature,mianzi has been used to explain Chinese consumer purchasing behaviour and brand choice[42] and considered it as a quality owned by some brands. Some consumers tend to favour some brands (and their products and services) because of their capacity to enable them to gainmianzi, which does not mean simply increase their reputation but also to show achievements and communicate these achievements to others in order to be more accepted in social circles, especially upper class circles.[43] Chinese consumers tend to believe that if they buy some brands it is easier to be accepted in the social circles of powerful and wealthy people. Connections are particularly important in Chinese culture as people use social connections to achieve their goals.[citation needed]
However,mianzi has also an emotional facet.[43] Consumers feel proud, special, honoured, even more valuable as individuals if they can afford to buy brands that can enhance theirmianzi. Therefore, some branded products and services, especially those that require conspicuous consumption (e.g. smartphones, bags, shoes), are chosen because they foster feelings of pride and vanity in the owner.[42][43]
A brand that enables an individual to achieve such goals in life, in branding literature, it is labelled as 'brandmianzi', which is the capacity of a brand to provide emotions and self-enhancement to its owner.[42][43]
Scholars have proved that brandmianzi affects consumer purchase intentions[42][43] and brand equity.[41]
In summary,mianzi is a cultural concept that relates to the social, emotional and psychological dimension of consumption and has an impact on consumers’ perception of their self and purchase decisions. Purchase and consumption of brands (but also other activities, like choosing a specific university), in Chinese culture, are profoundly affected bymianzi and different brands can be more or less apt to enhance or maintainmianzi, while others can cause a loss of face.[citation needed]
Penelope Brown andStephen C. Levinson (1987) expanded Goffman'stheory of face in theirpoliteness theory, which differentiated betweenpositive and negative face (p. 61).[44][45][46][47]
In human interactions, people are often forced to threaten either an addressee's positive and/or negative face, and so there are various politeness strategies to mitigate those face-threatening acts.[citation needed]
However, researchers disagree on the universality of Politeness Theory, arguing it fails to consider the cultural origins of the face and behaviors in non-western cultures where interactions focus on group identity rather than individuality.[48]
For instance, the Chinese origins of “face” was not considered by Brown and Levinson.[48] Concerning the concept of negative face, obtainingmianzi in Chinese culture results in the recognition of one’s claim to respect from the community, not freedom of action .[48] Japanese researcher claims the concept of negative face is alien to Japanese culture, and mistakenly assume the basic unit of society is the individual which is incongruent with the importance placed on interpersonal relationships in Japanese culture.[28] In the case of Japan, individuals obtain face to maintain one’s position in relation to other members of the same community.[28]
These differences suggest the concept of face according to the Politeness Theory is centered around the ideal individual autonomy. However, the concept of face in Eastern cultures such as the Chinese and Japanese orientate towards social identity.[48]
Tae-Seop Lim and John Waite Bowers (1991) claim that face is the public image that a person claims for himself. Within this claim there are three dimensions. "Autonomy face" describes a desire to appear independent, in control, and responsible. "Fellowship face" describes a desire to seem cooperative, accepted, and loved. "Competence face" describes a desire to appear intelligent, accomplished, and capable.[49][45][page needed] Oetzel et al. (2000) defined "facework" as "the communicative strategies one uses to enact self-face and to uphold, support, or challenge another person's face". In terms ofinterpersonal communication, Facework refers to an individual'sidentity in asocial world and how that identity is created, reinforced, diminished, and maintained incommunicative interactions.[50]
Facework[51] represents the transition from thereal self of theindividual to the image he or she represents to society forcommunicative orleadership purposes. This concept is all about presentation of the dignifiedimage which soon will become as anauthority for other individuals. Facework is a skill of constantly maintaining the face in order to deserve the respect and honor from it. For instance,Individualistic cultures likeUnited States,Canada, andGermany are standing for the position of protecting the self-face of the individual whilecollectivist cultures such asChina,South Korea, andJapan support the idea of maintaining the other-face for self-dignity and self-respect
There are also exist other facework strategies not always basing on the culture strategies likeface-negotiating,[52] face-constituting, face-compensating, face-honoring, face-saving, face-threatening, face-building, face-protecting, face-depreciating, face-giving, face-restoring, and face-neutral.[51]
Face is central tointercultural communication orcross-cultural communication.Bert Brown explains the importance of both personal and national face in international negotiations:
Among the most troublesome kinds of problems that arise in negotiation are the intangible issues related to loss of face. In some instances, protecting against loss of face becomes so central an issue that it swamps the importance of the tangible issues at stake and generates intense conflicts that can impede progress toward agreement and increase substantially the costs of conflict resolution.[53]
In terms ofEdward T. Hall's dichotomy betweenhigh context cultures focused upon in-groups andlow context cultures focused upon individuals, face-saving is generally viewed as more important in high context cultures such as China or Japan than in low-context ones such as the United States or Germany.[54]
Stella Ting-Toomey developedFace Negotiation Theory to explain cultural differences in communication and conflict resolution. Ting-Toomey defines face as:
[...] the interaction between the degree of threats or considerations one party offers to another party, and the degree of claim for a sense of self-respect (or demand for respect toward one's national image or cultural group) put forth by the other party in a given situation.[55]
Thepsychology of "face" is another field of research.Wolfram Eberhard, who analyzed Chinese "guilt" and "sin" in terms of literary psychology, debunked the persistent myth that "face" is peculiar to the Chinese rather than a force in every human society. Eberhard noted
It is mainly in the writings of foreigners that we find the stress upon shame in Chinese society; it is they who stated that the Chinese were typically afraid of "losing their face". It is they who reported many cases of suicide because of loss of face, or of suicide in order to punish another person after one's death as a ghost, or to cause through suicide endless difficulties or even punishment to the other person. But in the Chinese literature used here, including also the short stories, I did not once find the phrase "losing face"; and there was no clear case of suicide because of shame alone.[56]
The Chinese University of Hong Kong social psychologist Michael Harris Bond observed that in Hong Kong,
Given the importance of having face and of being related to those who do, there is a plethora of relationship politics in Chinese culture. Name dropping, eagerness to associate with the rich and famous, the use of external status symbols, sensitivity to insult, lavish gift-giving, the use of titles, the sedulous avoidance of criticism, all abound, and require considerable readjustment for someone used to organizing social life by impersonal rules, frankness, and greater equality.[57]
"Face" has further applications inpolitical science. For instance,Susan Pharr stressed the importance of "losing face" in Japanesecomparative politics.[58]
Linguists have analyzed thesemantics of "face". Huang usedprototype semantics to differentiatelian andmianzi.[59]George Lakoff andMark Johnson'sMetaphors We Live By emphasizes "the face for the person" metonymy.[60]: 37 Keith Allan (1986) extended "face" into theoretical semantics. He postulated it to be an essential element of all language interchanges, and claimed: "A satisfactory theory of linguistic meaning cannot ignore questions of face presentation, nor other politeness phenomena that maintain the co-operative nature of language interchange."[61]
{{cite book}}:|journal= ignored (help){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of November 2024 (link)