Face (sociological concept)

نوشته شده در موضوع خرید اینترنتی در 21 سپتامبر 2017

This essay possibly contains strange research. Please urge it by verifying a claims done and adding inline citations. Statements consisting usually of strange investigate should be removed. (November 2016) (Learn how and when to mislay this template message)

This essay needs additional citations for verification. Please assistance urge this essay by adding citations to arguable sources. Unsourced component might be challenged and removed. (November 2016) (Learn how and when to mislay this template message)

The tenure face idiomatically refers to one’s possess clarity of grace or prestige in amicable contexts. In a English-speaking world, a countenance “to save face” describes a lengths that an sold might go to in sequence to safety their determined position in society, holding movement to safeguard that one is not suspicion badly of by his or her peers. It is a elemental judgment in a fields of sociology, sociolinguistics, semantics, caring theory, psychology, domestic science, communication, and face traffic theory, and translates during slightest rather equivalently into many universe languages, both Germanic and otherwise.


Although Lin Yutang claimed “Face can't be translated or defined”,[1] review these definitions:

  • The tenure face might be discernible as a certain amicable value a chairman effectively claims for himself or herself by a line others assume he or she has taken during a sold contact. Face is an picture of self, discernible in terms of authorized amicable attributes.[2]
  • Face is a respectability and/or esteem that a chairman can explain for himself or herself from others, by trait of a family position he or she occupies in his or her amicable network and a grade to that he or she is judged to have functioned sufficient in that position as good as acceptably in his or her ubiquitous conduct. (Ho 1975:883)
  • [Face] is something that is emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced, and contingency be constantly attended to in interaction. In general, people concur (and assume any other’s cooperation) in progressing face in interaction, such team-work being formed on a mutual disadvantage of face. (Brown and Levinson 1978:66)
  • Face is a clarity of value that comes from suggestive one’s hire and reflecting courtesy with a congruency between one’s opening or coming and one’s genuine worth. (Huang 1987:71)
  • “Face” means “sociodynamic valuation”, a literal hyponym of disproportion clarification “prestige; dignity; honor; respect; status”. (Carr 1993:90)
  • “Face” has some-more clarification formed on Chinese enlightenment context.

By country[edit]

“The judgment of face is, of course, Chinese in origin” (Ho 1975:867), nonetheless many languages have “face” terms that metaphorically meant “prestige; honor; reputation”. Marcel Mauss, who sociologically complicated a Kwakwaka’wakw (formerly famous as Kwakiutl) and Haida nations in British Columbia, interpreted a Kwak’wala word q’elsem (“rotten face”) clarification “stingy potlatch-giver; one who gives no feast”.

Kwakiutl and Haida noblemen have a same idea of “face” as a Chinese mandarin or officer. It is pronounced of one of a good fabulous chiefs who gave no feast that he had a “rotten face”. The countenance is some-more good than it is even in China; for to remove one’s face is to remove one’s spirit, that is truly a “face”, a dancing mask, a right to materialise a suggestion and wear an button or totem. It is a undoubted persona that is during stake, and it can be mislaid in a potlatch usually as it can be mislaid in a diversion of gift-giving, in war, or by some blunder in ritual. (1954:38)

Michael Carr (1992, 1993) lexicographically investigated “face; prestige” compendium forms in Chinese, Japanese, and English. Within this sample, Chinese dictionaries embody 98 forms, e.g., sipo lian 撕破臉 (“rip adult face”) “have no caring for someone’s feelings”; Japanese dictionaries list 89, e.g., kao o uru 顔を売る (“sell face”) “become popular; benefit influence”; and English dictionaries embody 5 forms, e.g., lose face (borrowed from Chinese diulian 丟臉 “lose face”). Carr found that a Chinese and Japanese lexicons have roughly equal numbers of disproportion for “losing face” and “saving face”, while English has some-more for “saving face”.

Chinese 臉.面 and 面子[edit]

Two successful Chinese authors explained “face”. Lu Xun referred to a companion Arthur Henderson Smith’s (1894:16–18) interpretation.

The tenure “face” keeps gathering adult in a conversation, and it seems such a elementary countenance that we doubt presumably many people give it many thought. Recently, however, we have listened this word on a lips of foreigners too, who seem to be investigate it. They find it intensely tough to understand, yet trust that “face” is a pivotal to a Chinese suggestion and that rapacious it will be like grabbing a reserve twenty-four years ago [when wearing a reserve was compulsory] – all else will follow. (1934, 1959:129)

Lin Yutang deliberate a psychology of “face”.

Interesting as a Chinese physiological face is, a psychological face creates a still some-more fascinating study. It is not a face that can be cleared or shaved, yet a face that can be “granted” and “lost” and “fought for” and “presented as a gift”. Here we arrive during a many extraordinary indicate of Chinese amicable psychology. Abstract and intangible, it is nonetheless a many ethereal customary by that Chinese amicable retort is regulated.[1]

Lin refers to liu mianzi 留面子 “grant face; give (someone) a possibility to recover mislaid honor”, shī miàn zi 失面子 “lose face”, zheng mianzi 爭面子 “fight for face; gripping adult with a Joneses”, and gei mianzi 給面子 “give face; uncover honour (for someone’s feelings)”.

The Chinese denunciation has 3 common disproportion clarification “face”:

  • mian (Chinese: ; pinyin: miàn; Wade–Giles: mien)
  • lian (Chinese: ; pinyin: liǎn; Wade–Giles: lien)
  • yan (Chinese: ; pinyin: yán; Wade–Giles: yen).

Mian 面 “face; personal esteem; countenance; surface; side” occurs in disproportion like:

  • mianzi 面子 “face; side; reputation; self-respect; prestige, honor; amicable standing”
  • mianmu 面目 (“face and eyes”) “face; appearance; respect; amicable standing; prestige; honor”
  • mianpi 面皮 (“face skin”) “facial skin; complexion; feelings; sensitivity; clarity of shame”
  • timian 體面 (“body face”) “face; good looking; honor; dignity; prestige”
  • qingmian 情面 (“feelings face”) “face; prestige; favor; kindness; partiality”

Mianmu, that occurs in a Shijing, Guanzi, and other Chinese classics, is a oldest Chinese word for incongruous “face” (Carr 1992:43). David Yau-fai Ho (1974:241) describes timian as “an countenance yet an accurate homogeneous in English”, clarification “the amicable front, a pretended arrangement of one’s amicable hire to a public. It is both a privilege and an substantial requirement for a socially renowned to be sold about.” Mianzi is a quantifiable and quantifiable judgment of “face”. Face, Hsien-chin Hu says,

can be borrowed, struggled for, combined to, padded, — all terms indicating a light boost in volume. It is built adult by initial high position, wealth, power, ability, by deftly substantiating amicable ties to a series of renowned people, as good as by deterrence of acts that would means adverse comment. (1944:61)

Lian 脸 “face; countenance; respect; reputation; prestige” is seen in several “face” words:

  • lianshang 臉上 (“face on/above”) “one’s face; honor; respect”
  • lianmian 臉面 (“face face”) “face; self-respect; prestige; influence”
  • lianpi 臉皮 (“face skin”) “face; sensitivity; compassion”

While a use of a word “mian” is some-more common outward Mainland China, in China PRC , it is a word “lian” 臉that is some-more ordinarily used.

Hu (1944:51-52) contrasts meiyou lian 沒有臉 (“without face”) “audacious; wanton; shameless” as “the many critical defamation that can be done of a person” and buyao lian 不要臉 (“don’t wish face”) “shameless; selfishly inconsiderate” as “a critical indictment clarification that ego does not caring what multitude thinks of his character, that he is prepared to obtain advantages for himself in rebuttal of dignified standards”.

Note that Cantonese uses 面 instead of 臉. However, Chinese people generally use a tenure 臉子 some-more ordinarily when vocalization in Mandarin Chinese (Putonghua).

Yan 顏 “face; prestige; reputation; honor” occurs in a common countenance diu yan 丟顏 and a words:

  • yanhou 顏厚 (“face thick”) or houyan 厚顏 “thick-skinned; brazen; shameless; impudent”
  • yanmian 顏面 (“face face”) “face; honor; prestige”

Chinese uses yan reduction mostly in expressing “face; prestige” than presumably mian or lian.

Carr (1992:58–60) summarizes 4 common Chinese literal patterns for “face” words. First, a compendium antithetically modifies all 3 “face” disproportion with hou 厚 “thick; deep; great” and bao or bo 薄 “thin; slight; weak” to news “(in)sensitivity to prestige”, for example, mianpi hou “thick-skinned; shameless” and mianpi bao “thin-skinned; diffident”. Second, overdue to a significance of a manifest face, kan 看 “see; look” clarification “have caring for” and buhaokan 不好看 “not good looking” news “face”. Third, several expressions reciprocally news you 有 “having” or meiyou 沒有 “not having” “face”, such as dajia we mianzi “everybody has mutual honor” and meiyou mianzi “lacking prestige”. Fourth, “losing face” can be voiced with a common “lose” noun shi 失 and a rarer diu 丟, for instance, shi mianzi and diu mianzi “lose face; remove prestige”.

Recent studies of Chinese “face” have predominantly supposed Hu Hsien-chin’s strange eminence between a person’s mianzi “social status” and lian “moral character”. Hu (1944:45) dichotomized mianzi as “a repute achieved by removing on in life, by success and ostentation” contra lian that “represents a certainty of multitude in a firmness of ego’s dignified character, a detriment of that creates it unfit for him to duty scrupulously within a community”. Ho competent this dichotomy:

although a eminence between a dual sets of criteria for judging face – formed on judgments of impression and, broadly, of a depraved aspects of amicable opening – is justified, it can't be anchored to a linguistic eminence between a dual terms, lien and mien-tzu, as due by Hu. However, we might continue to use these terms in a senses that Hu has defined. (1975:868)

On a basement of experiments display that Chinese high propagandize students discernible waste of mianzi and lian interchangeably, while university students renowned them, Huang Shuanfan resolved that:

Succinctly, among college subjects, detriment of mianzi is some-more really tied to disaster to magnitude adult to one’s clarity of egoism or to what is approaching by others, given detriment of lian is closely tied to misdemeanour of amicable codes. Hu’s (1944) forty-year-old eminence between a dual Chinese concepts of faces appears to mount really well, even today. (1987:73)

Lian is a certainty of multitude in a person’s dignified character, while mianzi represents amicable perceptions of a person’s prestige. For a chairman to contend face is critical with Chinese amicable family given face translates into energy and change and affects goodwill. A detriment of lian would outcome in a detriment of trust within a amicable network, while a detriment of mianzi would approaching outcome in a detriment of authority.

Two “face”-related concepts in Chinese amicable family are guanxi “connections; relationships” and ganqing “feelings”.


The English semantic margin for “face” disproportion clarification “prestige; honor” is smaller than a analogous Chinese field, yet chronological dictionaries some-more accurately record a history. The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed., 1989) papers how a English village in China originated lose face and save face in a late 19th century, and how morphological variants like face-saver subsequently developed.

Lose face is a linguistic calque from Chinese diulian 丢脸 “lose face”. The OED2 Face 10 clarification distinguishes meanings between local 10a. “Outward show; insincere or factitious appearance; disguise, pretence; an instance of this; a pretext” (for instance, to put a good face on) and borrowed:

10b. to save one’s face: see save v. 8f; also to save face; to remove face [tr. Chinese diu lien]: to be humiliated, remove one’s credit, good name, or reputation; similarly, loss of face. Hence face = reputation, good name.

Robert Hart creatively translated lose face in a Jan 23, 1876 Zongli Yamen etiquette memorandum, “The Inspector General’s Memorandum Concerning Commercial Relations” (Appendix II in Hart 1901:182-251).

The nation starts to feel that Government consented to arrangements by that China has mislaid face; a officials have prolonged been unwavering that they are apropos absurd in a eyes of a people, observant that where a immigrant is endangered they can conjunction make a Chinese right, nor calibrate a Chinese grievance, even on Chinese soil. (1901:225)

Loss of face occurs in The Times (August 3, 1929): “Each wishes to concur usually what can be conceded yet detriment of ‘face’.”

Save face was coined from lose face requesting a semantic antithesis between lose and save [tr. Chinese 保面子/bao mianzi/guard/save face; when successful, it’s called “保住面子/bao zhu mianzi/saved/guarded face “].

OED defines Save 8 “To keep, strengthen or ensure (a thing) from damage, loss, or destruction”, and elaborates,

8f. to save one’s face: to equivocate being ashamed or humiliated. Similarly, to save (another’s) face. Hence save-face adj. = face-saving … Originally used by a English village in China, with anxiety to a continual inclination among a Chinese to equivocate incurring or inflicting disgrace. The accurate word appears not to start in Chinese, yet ‘to remove face’ (diu lien), and ‘for a consequence of his face’, are common.

For a beginning use examples, a OED gives a following. Save one’s face is available in a Westminster Gazette (April 5, 1898): “Unquestionably a routine of saving one’s face leads to extraordinary formula in other countries than China.” Save-face is found in Chambers Journal of Literature, Science and Arts (1917): “The municipal local staff had bolted during a initial pointer of trouble, ‘going to news to a authorities’ being their ‘save face’ for it!” Face-saving initial appears in Enoch A. Bennett’s Lilian (1922): “She had been trapped over any possibility of a face-saving lie.” Face-saver, discernible as “something that ‘saves one’s face’, ” originated in Edgar Snow’s Scorched Earth (1941): “As a face-saver, however, Doihara was given adequate support, from a Kwantung Army in Manchuria.” Carr (1993:74) notes, “It is poignant that a beginning usages for English lose face, save face, save-face and face-saver impute to China, while after ones are some-more general in application.”

By expanding “lose face” into “save face”, English grown contrasting from Chinese, that has many “lose face” collocations, yet nothing literally clarification “save face”. Yao mianzi 要面子 “eager to benefit reputation; be endangered about appearances” is (Hu 1944:58) “the closest Chinese approximation” for “save face”.

The underlying reason for this disproportion is that English “face” lacks a sociological contrariety between Chinese lian and mianzi. Since Chinese lian is ethically comprehensive while mianzi is socially quantitative, losing a former is some-more significant. According to Huang:

The fact that Chinese lexicalizes losing face (丟臉, 沒面子), yet not gaining face is a manly sign that losing face has distant some-more critical implications for one’s clarity of egoism or goodness than gaining face. (1987:71)

Ho explains how “losing” one’s “face” is some-more sociodynamically poignant than “saving” it.

Previous writers on face have treated losing face and gaining face simply as if they were conflicting outcomes in a amicable confront and have so unsuccessful to notice a simple disproportion between dual amicable processes that are involved. In a initial instance, while it is suggestive to pronounce of both losing and gaining mien-tzu it is suggestive to pronounce usually of losing lien. One does not pronounce of gaining lien because, regardless of one’s hire in life, one is approaching to act in suitability with a precepts of a culture; rightly conceptualized, indication control adds not to one’s lien, yet to one’s mien-tzu. (1975:870)

“Losing face” brings into doubt one’s dignified goodness and governmental adequacy, yet not “gaining face”.

The lose noun in lose face means “fail to maintain” (cf. lose one’s life), while a save in save face means “avoid loss/damage” (cf. save one’s honor). “The English origination of save face as a conflicting of lose face was capricious given lose has other antonyms: win, find, keep, catch, maintain, preserve, gain, and regain“, Carr (1993:77) notes, “Speakers spasmodic use a final 3 (esp. gain) per face ‘prestige’, yet reduction frequently than save“. Another use instance is give face, that is enclosed in a Wiktionary yet not a OED2.

Among a English disproportion of Chinese origin, lose face is an odd noun word and a unaccompanied semantic loan translation. Most Anglo-Chinese borrowings are nouns (Yuan 1981:250), with a few exceptions such as to kowtow, to Shanghai, to brainwash, and lose face. English face clarification “prestige; honor” is a usually box of a Chinese semantic loan. Semantic loans extend an inland word’s clarification in consent with a unfamiliar indication (e.g., French realiser “achieve; create; construct” used in a clarity of English realize). The immeasurable infancy of English disproportion from Chinese are typical loanwords with unchanging phonemic instrumentation (e.g., chop suey Cantonese tsap-sui 雜碎 “miscellaneous pieces”). A few are calques where a borrowing is blended with local elements (e.g., chopsticks Pidgin chop “quick, fast” Cantonese kap “quick” + stick). Face clarification “prestige” is technically a “loan synonym” overdue to semantic overlie between a local English clarification “outward semblance; effrontery” and a borrowed Chinese clarification “prestige; dignity”.

John Orr (1953) coined a tenure “invisible exports” to news how French forme, ouverte, and courir borrowed a sports meanings of English form, open, and run. Chinese lose face is an inaudible English import given it appears to be a predicted semantic prolongation of face, and not a conspicuous unfamiliar borrowing. This invisible face “prestige; status” loan is, Chan and Kwok (1985:60) explain, “so resolutely determined in a English wording that a normal local orator is unknowingly of a Chinese origin.”

When face acquired a Chinese clarity of “prestige; honor”, it filled a literal opening in a English lexicon. Chan and Kwok write,

The Chinese has granted a specific “name” for a “thing” embodying qualities not voiced or presumably not entirely expressed, by a series of terms in English. The command of a incongruous prolongation has almost also played a partial (1985:61-62).

Carr concludes,

The nearest English synonyms of a good incongruous face are prestige, honor, respect, dignity, status, reputation, social acceptance, or good name. Ho (1975:874-880) explains how “face” is a some-more simple clarification than “status”, “dignity”, or “honor”. “Prestige” appears to be semantically closest to “face”, however a chairman can be pronounced to have face yet not prestige, or clamp versa. Prestige is not necessary; one can simply live yet it, yet frequency yet “face”. (1993:87-88)


In Arabic, a countenance hafiẓa māʼ al-wajh (حفظ ماء الوجه), that literally interpret as save a face’s water, is used to meant save face. The whole Arab enlightenment of amicable and family duty is formed around Islamic concepts of dignity, or “Face”, that has a basement in a amicable and family ranking complement found in a Treatise of Rights, Al-Risalah al-Huquq, Islam’s primary source for amicable behaviors.[3]


In Persian , expressions like “Aab ro rizi” (آبروريزی) literally – losing a face’s water, is used to meant save face and “Dou roi” (دورويی) (lit. two-facedness) , “Ro seyahi “(روسياهی) (lit. Black-facedness) clarification “ashamed and embarrassed” and “Ro sepidi” (روسپيدی) (lit. White-facedness) clarification “proud” (opposite of Ro seyahi) are used.

In Iranian enlightenment a clarification of linguistic face is many closer to a clarification of “Personality”. So Persian speakers use some strategies in saving a face or celebrity of any other while they communicate. The many visit proceed to demonstrate face saving act is a focus of initial chairman plural pronoun “شما” instead of initial chairman unaccompanied “تو”. The other common proceed of expressing caring about a face, is a indirectenss. Instead of observant “نمک را بده به من” (pass me a salt) we can contend “می شه ازتون خواهش کنم نمک را به من بدید؟” (Can we ask we to pass me a salt?)

The whole Iranian enlightenment of amicable and family duty is formed around Islamic concepts of dignity, or “Face”, that has a basement in a amicable and family ranking complement found in The Treatise of Rights, Al-Risalah al-Huquq, Islam’s primary source for amicable behaviors.[3] “To Ask, Listen, Know” is how Irani children learn this concept. CLARIFICATION NEEDED: WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?


Hindu standards of ethics (Nitisastra) are formed on a Upanishads of a Vedas and are from that a 10 Yamas a 10 Niyamas (Codes of Behavior) are derived.[4]

South Slavic[edit]

Among South Slavs, generally in Serbo-Croatian and Bulgarian, a word obraz (Cyrillic: образ) is used as a normal countenance for honour and a sociological judgment of face. Medieval Slavic papers have shown that a word has been used with several meanings, such as form, image, character, person, symbol, face, figure, statue, idol, guise and mask. The languages also have a subsequent verb bezobrazan (Cyrillic: безобразен) “without face”, used to associate contrition to a person.[5]


The Thai word for face is หน้า,meaning literally face. There are fundamentally dual categorical ways of expressing detriment of face. One, เสียหน้า, [sia naa] translates literally as ‘lose face.’ Another term, ขายหน้า, or [khai naa], means sale of face – discernible inference is that a chairman who mislaid face did so by error of self or by a careless movement of another. As in China and other regions where detriment of face is important, a Thai chronicle involves sociodynamic status.


The judgment of “face” or “chemyon” (Hangul: 체면 hanja: 體面 , Korean: [/t͡ɕʰe̞mjʌ̹n/]) is intensely critical in Korean culture.

Academic interpretations[edit]

Figurative “face” clarification “prestige; honor; dignity” is practical opposite many educational disciplines.


“Face” is executive to sociology and sociolinguistics. Martin C. Yang analyzed 8 sociological factors in losing or gaining face: a kinds of equivalence between a people involved, their ages, personal sensibilities, inequality in amicable status, amicable relationship, alertness of personal prestige, participation of a witness, and a sold amicable value/sanction involved.[6]

The sociologist Erving Goffman introduced a judgment of “face” into amicable speculation with his (1955) essay “On Face-work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements of Social Interaction” and (1967) book Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. According to Goffman’s dramaturgical perspective, face is a facade that changes depending on a assembly and a accumulation of amicable interaction. People essay to contend a face they have combined in amicable situations. They are emotionally trustworthy to their faces, so they feel good when their faces are maintained; detriment of face formula in romantic pain, so in amicable interactions people concur by regulating caring strategies to contend any other’s faces.

“Face” is sociologically universal. People “are human”, Joseph Agassi and I. C. Jarvie (1969:140) believe, “because they have face to caring for – yet it they remove tellurian dignity.” Ho elaborates:

The indicate is that face is admirably human. Anyone who does not wish to announce his amicable failure contingency uncover a courtesy for face: he contingency explain for himself, and contingency extend to others, some grade of compliance, respect, and esteem in sequence to contend a smallest turn of effective amicable functioning. While it is loyal that a conceptualization of what constitutes face and a manners ruling face duty change extremely opposite cultures, a courtesy for face is invariant. Defined during a high turn of generality, a judgment of face is a universal. (1976:881-2)

The sociological judgment of face has recently been reanalysed by caring of a Chinese concepts of face (mianzi and lian) that permits deeper bargain of a several measure of knowledge of face, including dignified and amicable evaluation, and a romantic mechanisms (Qi 2011).

Politeness theory[edit]

Penelope Brown and Stephen C. Levinson (1987) stretched Goffman’s speculation of face in their caring theory, that differentiated between certain and disastrous face (Miller 2005).

  • Positive face is “the certain unchanging self-image or ‘personality’ (crucially including a enterprise that this self-image be appreciated and authorized of) claimed by interactants”
  • Negative face is “the simple explain to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction—i.e., to leisure of movement and leisure from imposition”

In tellurian interactions, people are mostly forced to bluster presumably an addressee’s certain and/or disastrous face, and so there are several caring strategies to lessen those face-threatening acts.

Communication theory[edit]

Tae-Seop Lim and John Waite Bowers (1991) explain that face is a open picture that a chairman claims for himself. Within this explain there are 3 dimensions. “Autonomy face” describes a enterprise to seem independent, in control, and responsible. “Fellowship face” describes a enterprise to seem cooperative, accepted, and loved. “Competence face” describes a enterprise to seem intelligent, accomplished, and able (Miller 2005).

Masumoto, Oetzel, Takai, Ting-Toomey, Yokochi (2000) discernible “facework” as “the communicative strategies one uses to sequence self-face and to uphold, support, or plea another person’s face”. In terms of interpersonal communication, Facework refers to an individual’s temperament in a amicable universe and how that temperament is created, reinforced, diminished, and confirmed in communicative interactions.

Intercultural communication[edit]

Face is executive to intercultural communication or cross-cultural communication. Bert Brown explains a significance of both personal and inhabitant face in general negotiations:

Among a many heavy kinds of problems that arise in traffic are a unsubstantial issues associated to detriment of face. In some instances, safeguarding opposite detriment of face becomes so executive an emanate that it swamps a significance of a discernible issues during interest and generates heated conflicts that can block swell toward agreement and boost almost a costs of dispute resolution. (1977:275)

In terms of Edward T. Hall’s dichotomy between high context cultures focused on in-groups and low context cultures focused on individuals, face-saving is generally noticed as some-more critical in high context cultures such as China or Japan than in low-context ones such as a United States or Germany (Cohen 1977).

Face-negotiation theory[edit]

Stella Ting-Toomey grown Face Negotiation Theory to explain informative differences in communication and dispute resolution. Ting-Toomey defines face as

the communication between a grade of threats or considerations one celebration offers to another party, and a grade of explain for a clarity of egoism (or direct for honour toward one’s inhabitant picture or informative group) put onward by a other celebration in a given situation. (1990)


The psychology of “face” is another margin of research. Wolfram Eberhard, who analyzed Chinese “guilt” and “sin” in terms of literary psychology, debunked a determined parable that “face” is rare to a Chinese rather than a force in each tellurian society. Eberhard noted

It is especially in a papers of foreigners that we find a highlight on contrition in Chinese society; it is they who settled that a Chinese were typically fearful of “losing their face”. It is they who reported many cases of self-murder given of detriment of face, or of self-murder in sequence to retaliate another chairman after one’s genocide as a ghost, or to means by self-murder unconstrained problems or even punishment to a other person. But in a Chinese novel used here, including also a brief stories, we did not once find a word “losing face”; and there was no transparent box of self-murder given of contrition alone. (1967:119-120)

The Chinese University of Hong Kong amicable clergyman Michael Harris Bond celebrated that in Hong Kong,

Given a significance of carrying face and of being associated to those who do, there is a engorgement of attribute politics in Chinese culture. Name dropping, zeal to associate with a abounding and famous, a use of outmost hire symbols, attraction to insult, intemperate gift-giving, a use of titles, a diligent deterrence of criticism, all abound, and need substantial readjustment for someone used to organizing amicable life by unbiased rules, frankness, and larger equality. (1991:59)

Political science[edit]

“Face” has serve applications in domestic science. For instance, Susan Pharr (1989) stressed a significance of “losing face” in Japanese analogous politics.


Linguists have analyzed a semantics of “face”. Huang (1985, cited above) used antecedent semantics to compute lian and mianzi. George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s Metaphors We Live By (1980:37) emphasizes “the face for a person” metonymy. Keith Allan (1986) extended “face” into fanciful semantics. He presumed it to be an essential component of all denunciation interchanges, and claimed (1986:10): “A acceptable speculation of linguistic clarification can't omit questions of face presentation, nor other caring phenomena that contend a associated inlet of denunciation interchange.”

See also[edit]

  • Dignitas (Roman concept)
  • Shame multitude vs Guilt society
  • Izzat (honor)
  • Honor killing



External links[edit]

Look adult face in Wiktionary, a giveaway dictionary.

Article source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_(sociological_concept)

tiger pelak 2 Face (sociological concept)

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید

نشانی ایمیل شما منتشر نخواهد شد.