Category: Manners

Abstract

Born Yokshire, Congreve went to Kilkenny and to Trinity College and met his lifelong friend Swift. Studying law in London, he turned to a writer. First written novel is Incognita which appeared in 1691. He achieved fame through his four comedies: The Old Bachelor, The Double Dealer, Love for Love, The Way of the World. He mastered the Restoration Comedy of manners with its wit, sexual intrigue and added a delicacy of exploring the basic feelings; the plays are frequently revived. His plays are still performed in stages and Congreve is considered to be the greatest dramatist of Restoration era.

Introduction

Of all critical man of letters born after the Restoration, the prior to distinguish him was William Congreve and it is said that, in certain sense, with him the literature of eighteenth century began. William Congreve was a Playwright and poet of Restoration age. He is known for his brilliant satirical discourse and impact on the comedy of manners of that age. He was also a member in British Whig Party. Congreve was the most brilliant of the dramatist of the Restoration comedy of manners. . He molded the English comedy of manners through his use of satire and well-written dialogues. Congreve composed five plays before he was turning 30. His first play, The Old Bachelor, was a great success at Drury Path in 1693. Congreve composed plays to entertain him during convalescence. Congreve was by all accounts a man who won the affection and regard of his numerous companions. John Dryden called his writings equal to Shakespeare and Pope devoted his translation of the Iliad to him in 1715. Congreve was among ‘The Big Five’ of restoration comedy.

Early life

Congreve was born in Bardsey near, Ledston, Yorkshire. His father was a soldier and a relative of an old English family which owned some property in Staffordshire. In 1681, Congreve was sent to Kilkenny School, where he met his lifelong companion Jonathan Swift. In 1686 Congreve joined Trinity College, Dublin. In Dublin Congreve visited many theatres and was subjected to the most famous plays and dramas such as Ben Jonson’s Volpone and Thomas Durfey’s The Boarding House. Congreve became familiar with the theatres and plays in a very young age than his contemporaries.

Congreve and his family returned to their home in Staffordshire after the Glorious Revolution in 1688 and remained there for two years. Congreve entered the Middle Temple, London in 1691 to study law as he says that, ‘the literary community in London proved to be more appealing to him.’ By publishing the novel Incognita or Love and Duty Recouncil’d under the pseudonym Cleophil in 1692 and established himself as a brilliant and gifted writer, he soon became John Dryden’s legal advisor, literary guide and later became a good friend. Congreve’s Educational standard helped him to make contributions as a translator to Dryden’s editions. Dryden recognized Congreve’s talent and predicted that Congreve would become a great gifted writer.

Congreve never married and was famous for his love with popular actresses and noblewomen in his times. One of these was Anne Bracegirdle, a prominent actress in his plays and it is for her he wrote the major parts in all his plays. He was also romantically linked with Henrietta Godolphin, 2nd Duchess of Marlborough and daughter of John Churchill. Henrietta gave birth to his sole offspring, a daughter, Mary.

Congreve was also a minor political figure in Whig party and Tory party alike was counterbalanced by the physical weakness of gout and failing sight. He suffered from both gout and cataract in eyes. In 1728, he met with a carriage accident from which he never recovered. And it is said that from this accident he received internal injuries. He died due to this injuries and internal wounds on January 19th 1729.

Literary Career

Congreve’s first play The Old Bachelor was published in 1693. It had been revised by Dryden and was produced at the Theatre Royal in Dury Lane with the leading actors and actresses ( Betteron, Mrs. Mary and Bracegridle) participating in it. This play had a great success and ran for two weeks. Congreve felt so motivated by seeing the success of his first play and he hastened to put forward a second play, The Double Dealer. This play was very complex. It had been designed and shaped better than the first play but it was not received well.

When Congreve was writing his third comedy play Love for Love, the leading actors of his age revolted against the Theatre Royal, as it was the only theatre in London and they gave permission to construct a new theatre at Lincoln’s Inn Fields. The theatre opened with the production of the play Love for Love in 1695, considered as one of his best play. This play had an excellent impact in his career and placed Congreve among the major dramatists of his time. He also became the manager of the new theatre and agreed to give a new play for the theatre. He was unable to give the play to the theatre.

But in 1697 he gave the company a tragedy ‘The Mourning Bride’. It had witty dialogues and brilliant plot. It exposed the social values, martial practices and deceits prevailed in the high society. This play is considered to be the most famous tragedy during the Restoration period.

In the same year he published an unsuccessful counterstrike on Collier’s charges against the stage. In 1700 he produced the comedy The Way of the World. It failed and Congreve left the stage. This was his last play.

After leaving the stage he wrote librettos for two Operas (The Judgment of Paris and Semele). He was the member of Whig Kit- Kat club and his career shifted to political sector. He was appointed as the commissioner for wines in 1705 and remained in this post until 1714. In 1714 he was appointed as the secretary of Jamaica. During his life in Jamaica he started writing poetry and in 1710 he published three volumes of poetry. He made translations of Homer, Ovid, Horace and Juvenal.

Congreve was a playwright who had one of the shortest literary careers. However, as the public sentiments and taste of comedy changed, his plays appeared to be immoral for the audience. So he decided to quite the stage and shifted into political sector. After that he wrote many poetry and translations but he is not remembered for his later works.

Style of Presentation

Congreve is without doubt the most prominent of the Restoration Comedy-writers. In his work the comedy of manners comes to flawlessness. His plays are a loyal reflection of the upper class life of his time but their undoubted immorality is spared from being offensive by counterfeit mind, a hard- finish and lack of realism. Congreve’s prose is brief and pointed and shows an amazing ear of beat and cadence. In all means he is a polished writer, whose unmistakable quality is brilliance.

The worth and vitality of Congreve’s comedies depends generally upon the charm of fashion, the unobtrusive adjustment of dialect to character and circumstances and the intrigue of comedian discourse. In each page of Congreve’s play is full of brilliant conceits, conundrums and antithesis that are a delight to the audience.

All Congreve’s play except The Way of the World had a prompt victory, and it is amusing that this one ought to be singled out by descendants as his magnum opus. Free from the periodic nostalgic touches with mac The Double dealer, it is the best example of comedy of manners adroit in characterization, and totally free from the coarseness and authenticity which ruin the work of his contemporaries.

Congreve is the greatest dramatist of the English comedy of manners, uniquely distinctive in numerous regards from others of this period of the dramatization. Taking as its main theme the habit and conduct of the class to which it was addressed, that is the anti-puritanical theatre gathering of people drawn to a great extent from the court, it managed with imitators of French Customs, conceited minds, and great people of all kinds; but its main theme was the sexual life driven by the courtiers, with their logic of flexibility and experimentation. Restoration Comedy was satirical and sometimes skeptical. Congreve rises over other writers of his times in both delicacy of feeling and the flawlessness of phrasing.

The last mentioned is strikingly shown within the opening speeches of The Old Bachelor, a play that appealed to the audience because it dealt with themes they were familiar with. Some of the repartee could seem shallow to the present day reader, but that was the way of the time. As Congreve advanced, his discourses got to be more balanced, more melodic, but made sure that it was in rhythm. Congreve goes more profound than any of his contemporaries, has more feeling for persons and is far subtler.

Congreve set extraordinary significance on character sketches and the themes of role play, conditional adore, blended with the love for cash and the requirement for intrigues in almost every feature of life, this can be noticed his plays. Here we too discover the quality of recently created English composition.

The Way of the World

The play is considered as his magnum opus. It is about the absurd presumptions that controlled the general public of his age, particularly those concerning affection and marriage. It is still performed today but was very offensive and questionable in its time due to the bawdy topics and sexual explicitness, which had fallen out of favour in its time. This play serves as a satire on its culture. This play is a classic example of comedy of manners. The play shows the real picture of the society of his times.

The Way of the World is probably the wittiest plays at any point composed, a play to peruse gradually and relish. Like a specialist gem dealer, Congreve cleaned the Restoration satire of habits to its definitive shimmer and gleam. The discourse is epigrammatic and splendid, the plot is perplexing riddle, and the characters sparkle with shockingly complex features. However the play isn’t all stunning surface; likewise has profundities. Most Restoration Comedies starts with the battle for influence, sex, and cash and end with a marriage. The Way of the World mirrors that standard plot; it is a fight more over a heritage than over a lady, a fight wherein sexual fascination is utilized as a weapon. However Congreve, composing late in the period, uncovers the shortcoming of the individuals who treat love as a war or a game.

Plot Summary

Mirabell, a womanizer wishes to marry a young girl he adores, Mrs. Milamant. Sadly, her aunt, Lady Wishfort holds control over the bequest and inheritance and hates Mirabell because he once claimed to love her. Mirabell and Mrs. Millamant makes a plan in which Milanmant’s servant, Waitworth, will marry Lady Wishfort’s maid, Foible, and then seek favour of Wishfort by impersonating as Mirabell’s uncle, Sir Rowland. The strategy proceeds as planned until Ms. Marwood, who desires Mirabell, finds the plan when Foible fills in Lady Wishfort’s girl, Mrs. Fainall. Mrs. Marwood tells the man to whom she is wife, Mr. Fainall, about the plan and the fact that Mirabell was also once romantically linked with his wife, Mrs. Fainall. Madden by this situation, the two plans to oppose Mirabell’s plan. Sir Wilfull, relative of Lady Wishfort’s. Lady Wishfort wishes for him, though a blundering man he wishes to marry Ms. Millamant. The situation becomes critical when Lady Wishfort, while chatting with ‘Sir Rowland,’ receives a letter from Mrs. Marwood revealing Mirabell’s plan. Fainall tries to use Lady Wishfort and her daughter’s strong social situation as grip to gain Ms. Millamant’s legacy and all the money of Lady Wishfort’s through control of his wife’s legacy and inheritance. However, he was foiled by Ms. Millamant by declaring she will marry Sir Wilfull and Mirabell declaring that he had claimed to Mrs. Fainall’s legacy since before her marriage to Fainall. When Fainall and Ms. Marwood left, Ms. Millamant revoked her declaration to Sir Wilfull and she and Mirabell got blessing from their aunt for their marriage.

Major Themes in The Way of the World

• Social Conventions
• Dowries and Marriages
• Adultery
• Love and Romance
• Money and Greed
• Jealousy and Intrigue
• Men vs. Women

“The Way of the World” as a Restoration Comedy of Manners

The Way of the World uncovered the issues of cash, adore, sex, marriage and brief the behavior of the individuals of the time within the dialect of prose. The rakes, dudes, gallants and minds are the essential sorts managed with in a language that are apparently brilliant but required the philosophical and enthusiastic or mental profundity. This makes the play a normal restoration comedy of manners. The mode utilized is satiric and sarcastic which befits the social reality of the time.

Within the restoration period there was a rich course with relaxation. Interest of sexual pleasure and cash was the main concern of the individuals. Marriage was not rather like an institution for multiplication or for giving strength to social life. It was seen as a soldier of fortune wander. The Way of the World contains characters which resort to sexual innuendos and indecent jokes. Humor and mind are the key fixings of this play.

Use of wit could be a surprising viewpoint of Restoration Comedy. The characters utilize dialect in an awfully dubious and intelligent way. Use of repartee fundamentally alludes to fast answers whereas the report is related to sharp return in discourse. Wit was a sharp weapon within the late seventeenth century, to be used for the entertainment of those cleverly sufficient to take after the trade. The entire plot of the play rotates around the issues of infidelity, marriage and fortune chasing. As we see the plot unfurl the characters uncover themselves through their interests and behavior. Congreve is satirizing the immorality of the people at that point of English society.

This gives a best example of Restoration Comedy of Manners. It has all the imperative characteristics of it. Here Congreve has presented interests and illegal love. But his discourse has wit. On the whole play could be a loyal reflection of the upper course life of the day. The characters are well drawn. Its exposition is clear and pointed. Congreve is without a doubt the most prominent of the Restoration comedy writers. In ‘ The Way of the World’ the comedy of manners has come to its flawlessness.

Conclusion

Congreve is without question one of the extraordinary scholars of the English comedy of manners which takes as its main theme the manners, indiscretions and flaws of the class to which it was tended to. Congreve appears special among the comedy writers of the world. He is likely, of them all, the one whose plays are composed with the foremost unflagging mind and scholarly charm. The fashion of Congreve lifts him tall over all his English rivals. Hazlitt has said that Congreve’s comedies “are a solitary treat to those who have developed a taste for the niceties of English fashion: there’s an unconventional enhance within the exceptionally words, which is to be found in barely any other writer.” What we call his mind, that which makes his scenes so consistently astonishing, comprises, in an incredible degree, in this mystifying bliss of phrase, this constant determination of the startling and yet clearly the finest word. In this craftsmanship of phrasing he takes after none of his claim strong counterparts. He stands on the edge of the eighteenth century, and appears to have an instinct of all its unconventional graces.

However each admirer of Congreve has experienced the weariness that this very brilliance, this unflagging sparkle of fashion produces. It is inside and out past not validity as it were, but tolerance. The extravagance of mind gets to be wearisome, and at final as it were emphasizes the nonattendance of delicacy, effortlessness, and honest to goodness creative energy. What we need to appreciate in them is the clean, the elegance, the extraordinary specialized wrap up, the exhibition of judgment skills of uncommon development and control concentrating itself on the creation of a microcosm swarming with human volvox and vibrion. In the event that we are arranged to acknowledge this, and to inquire no more than this from Congreve, we should not resentment him his lasting station among the extraordinary scholars of this country.

References

1. www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Encyclopedia
2. https://www.jstor.org/
3. https://www.researchgate.net
4. The History of English Language and Literature by Edward Albert.

Introduction

The comedy of manners may be a comedy genre that flourished during the Restoration era on English stage. Plays of this sort are typically set within the upper crust world, and mock the claims of these who see themselves as socially superior, deflating them with satire. Comedies of manners reflect on the norms and mores of society with witty dialog and cleverly crafted situations, and discuss the relationships between sexes. Marriage may be a hot topic. there’s typically little depth of characterization; instead, the playwrights used stock character types-the fool, the schemer, the hypocrite, the jealous husband, the interfering old parents-and built plots with quick twists in events, often precipitated by miscommunications. The origins of manner comedy are often traced back to Molière ‘s French comedies of the seventeenth century and to Ben Jonson’s comedy of ‘humors;’ additionally , such traits are often seen as far back in time as Ancient Greek works.

Elements of the subject

• Manners and sentimentalism on the varsity for scandal.
• Importance features of the comedy of Manners are as follows.
• An emphasis on the thought of manners Sentimentalism within the play.

Manners and sentimentalism on the varsity for scandal

The etiquette play made its introduction in about 1620 within the English Theatre. Comedy of manners are often defined in several ways like most dramatic classifications, but in its origin it had been meant to be a joyous and witty reflection of the fashionable lifetime of its time. A form during which laughter is caused by exaggerations of fashionable behavior , absurdities of its own fashion, or deviations from what’s considered civilized normality of behavior . Accepting the social code of the upper classes doubtless , it’s a synthesis of Middleton ‘s practical humor and Ben Jonson’s irony humor. Mystery is that the nature of the manners comedy plot as in humors comedy, but it’s mostly mystery for its own sake, not irony. The criticism of the latter type is aimed almost exclusively at country people, who are too boring to under-stand the courtly code, or obscene pretenders, who are too stupid to know their own failure to blend into the style world. the large contrast lies during this matter of cultures. The humor comedy deals with the world-at-large eccentrics in universals; the way comedy cares with the artificiality of its own small world. Consequently, this is often sometimes described as artificial comedy. there’s a line-of continuity between joke comedy and manner comedy. Ben Jonson’s traces are within the comedy of the manners. Manner is humour’s Restoration replacement. the way comedy of Restoration differs only in intensity. Such peculiarities are human concerns, etiquette, not nature, humors. it’s the age and therefore the trend that’s satirized, instead of humanity’s inherent vices and follies. Therefore a comedy of manners can only occur during a highly structured society during which there’s a leisure community that not only has expectations of politeness and customary sense of PR but continues to assign these norms first priority of social life. Moliere’s comedies were the primary true samples of manners satire that inspired Restoration drama in England and located an enduring place within the English repertory. Stage. Stage. George Etherege (1635-1691), Wycherley (1640-1716), Vanbrugh (1664-1726), and William Congreve (1670-1729), the best of comedy restoration authors, were the primary dramatists to perform the way satire. These playwrights were committed to picturing the outside dimensions of life, the fashions of the instant , its habits, its desires and therefore the way it talked. Their works had little enjoy romantic love for the foremost part. Their handling of the theme was unemotional and strictly academic. They were handling comedy stock figures and thus lacking in any psychological depth. Their characters were primarily fashion people and therefore the bulk of their plots were love intrigues built with clever and humorous dialogue . The satirical treatment of the immoral features of the time was Restoration comedy’s main theme and a particular degree of coarseness or indecency was a glaring feature thereof. Therefore the acute indecencies and therefore the slight belittling of all virtues were criticized in Restoration comedies. The comedy of manners that was common within the Age of Restoration degenerated and a drama of sophistication during which pathos, delicacy and complicated feelings find an area within the late 70s and 18th centuries. Sentimentalism grew strongly and pity crept into the planet of intellectual laughter. there is . a contemporary sort of dramatic work was created under the name of Sentimental Comedy, which shows the virtues of private Life instead of the Vices; and therefore the Distresses, instead of the Faults of Humanity … All the characters are very sweet, and really generous … albeit they like Humour, they need an array of Meaning and Feeling. once they appear to possess flaws or foibles, the audience is told to not excuse, yet to congratulate them, remembering the goodness in their hearts; such foolishness is commended rather than scorn, and therefore the comedy strives to succeed in our emotions without the capacity to be genuinely tragic. Sentimentalism in its initial stages was almost wholly an English creation. Nevertheless, it had been inspired by the French sentimentalists who resolved to offer their convictions to humanity within the intrinsic goodness of the human spirit, within the corrupting ways of civilization and within the purity of primal emotions.

Importance features of the comedy of Manners are as follows

There’s still something happening in London. 2. there’s still a distinction between the urban and rural areas. Squire Witwoud is from Shropshire County, for instance , in Congreve’s ‘The Way of the planet ,’ and his appearance in London ends during a lot of fun and laughter. 3. a minimum of one group of very clever young lovers attending . 4. Perhaps the foremost significant aspect of Manner’s Humor is clever dialogue. 5. Generally all the opposite elements of the play are discarded so as to make a situation which will subside to ‘witty’ dialogue. 6. The Comedy of Manners refers to the audience / reader’s intellect and to not the emotions. 7. The ‘witty’ dialogue, for the theaters had just reopened after the Restoration, was usually obscene. the ladies in these plays were rather emancipated and brave and powerful , unlike the heroines of the Romantic dramas. 9 Marriage was often held to mock the body. Both husbands and wives have shared their unhappiness with their partners publicly. 10. 10. Such works were intended mainly for London city’s glamorous and trendy audiences. and therefore the characters were most from London society. 11.These plays portrayed quite vividly the life-style of the lazy, affluent London.12. The plays were slightly ironic-the playwright didn’t afford to wreck his audience within the upper crust .

The humorous epilog, written by George Colman the Elder, is to be ‘Spoken by Lady Teazle.’ It depicts her as somewhat regretful leaving country domesticity for London society, and contains an intricate parodies of a well-liked speech in Othello by Shakespeare.

A stress on the thought of manners Sentimentalism within the play

Richard Steele (1672-1729) wrote variety of sensibility plays and Richard Cumberland (1732-1811) fed the prevailing marketplace for sentimentality and pathos with ludicrous extravagance. Steele restored the play to its original intent of edification and to use the theatre to spread tional knowledge to the general public with the newly found virtues. This revealed man’s inherent strength, instead of the sooner comedic definition of man’s natural vulnerability. the gang was delighted and sometimes driven to laughter that blurred both the spectators and therefore the actors’ cheeks in no prior time of the drama. To justice and humanitarianism . A play was a public educational experience. This revealed man’s inherent strength, instead of the sooner comedic definition of man’s natural vulnerability. the gang was delighted and sometimes driven to laughter that blurred both the spectators and therefore the actors’ cheeks in no prior time of the drama.

However, no great comedies were produced and therefore the playwrights were pushed faraway from realism by romantic- ism. They resorted to the perfect so as to display more genuinely the human values of humankind. They didn’t represent the particular people that they had around them but created abstractions of their own heads.

However, no great comedies were produced and therefore the playwrights were pushed faraway from realism by romantic- ism. They resorted to the perfect to point out more truly the humane qualities of mankind. We didn’t expose the particular people around them, rather we created abstractions in their own heads.

In its negative context, the play is freed from sentimentalism which means a deliberate emotional manipulation. The play is without an intense or sentimental love-scene. the love of Lady Sweerwell for Charles is left within the background, Charles and Maria are robbed of any fervent demonstration of their desire for every other, and even Joseph’s begging with Mary for his devotion and attempting to win Lady Teazle as a mistress are spared from any more than emotion. Sheridan displays praiseworthy discipline in his treatment of the topic . His ironic use of sentimentalism to precise Joseph’s hypocritical love for moralistic platitude, his outrage at intentional scan-dal-mongering, particularly the type published in such newspapers because the Town and Country Magazine, and therefore the refore the contrast between the scandalous mongers and the characters of excellent will, create the distinctive sound of the story, the harmony between sentiments. Aristotle defines comedy as an image of the Frail- ties of the lower a part of mankind, to differentiate it from Tragedy, which is an exhibition of the Great’s Misfortunes Therefore, as Comedy ascends on the Stage to make the characters of Princes or Generals, it’s out of its move, because Low Life and-Middle Life are its focus entirely. Therefore, the key question is that an show of its Follies isn’t superior to an outline of its Calamities in representing Low or Middle Life? So, in other words, who gets the favor? The weeping sentimental comedy, which remains such a lot generally , or the Laughing and even Law Comedy that Van-burgh and Cibber seem to possess last shown?

In episodes just like the famous screen scene, Sheridan maintains a posh movement with complete clarity and shaws the strength of his command especially. The characters, too, penetrate portraits in order that one has got to return to Congreve, and sometimes to Shakespeare beyond Congreve, to seek out Charles Surface and woman Teazle an equivalent .

‘School for Scandal’ is a superb example of a Comedy of Manners. it’s a blatant attack on the superficiality of the upper crust , pointing up their lack of morals and misplaced attentions. during a Comedy of Manners, the characters are very clear and you recognize exactly who they’re the instant they seem , not just by their appearance and actions, but by their names. Lady Sneerwell, Sir Benjamin Backbite, and Snake all carry their negative qualities in their names. The Surface brothers are all about what’s on the surface — Joseph appears moral but really isn’t while Charles presents the other .

Sheridan’s satire goes one step further than the Comedy of Manners that preceded it during the Restoration. within the 18th century, such foolishness required a consequence. During the Restoration, the evil doers were often not punished if they were clever and witty enough. within the 18h century, the evil-doers are punished. So, in ‘School for Scandal,’ we see the ‘school’ members ostracized, with the exception of Lady Teazle who is actually contrite and given a second chance to measure an upright life. it’s for this reason that Sheridan’s play is usually labeled a Sentimental Comedy, to differentiate it from the Restoration Comedy of Manners. Comedies of manners reflect on the norms and mores of society with witty dialog and cleverly crafted situations, and discuss the relationships between sexes. Marriage may be a hot topic. there’s typically little depth of characterization; instead, the playwrights used stock character types-the fool, the schemer, the hypocrite, the jealous husband, the interfering old parents-and built plots with quick twists in events, often precipitated by miscommunications. The origins of manner comedy are often traced back to Molière ‘s French comedies of the seventeenth century and to Ben Jonson’s comedy of ‘humors;’ additionally , such traits are often seen as far back in time as Ancient

Summary

the varsity for Scandal has been widely admired. English critic Hazlitt was particularly effusive in his praise of Sheridan’s comedies generally (‘everything in them tells; there’s no labor in vain’) and of this play in particular: the varsity for Scandal is, if not the foremost original, perhaps the foremost finished and faultless comedy which we’ve . When it’s acted, you hear people all around you exclaiming, ‘Surely it’s impossible for love or money to be cleverer.’ The scene during which Charles sells all the old family pictures but his uncle’s, who is that the purchaser in disguise, which of the invention of Lady Teazle when the screen falls, are among the happiest and most highly wrought that comedy, in its wide and brilliant range, can boast. Besides the wit and ingenuity of this play, there’s a genial spirit of frankness and generosity about it, that relieves the guts also as clears the lungs. It professes a faith within the natural goodness also as habitual depravity of attribute .

Abstract

A problem that is all too common, I’ve noticed, is that not enough people use their manners. Being raised a benevolent Midwesterner, I take notice when people aren’t polite, especially by forgetting to simply thank someone for a small favor. I came up with the idea of testing people’s manners firsthand to see if I was crazy, or if people actually forget “please” and “thank you” more than you’d think. In order to test how polite people are firsthand, I came up with the question of “What percentage of people are willing to thank me for holding the door for them?” It’s a simple favor and an even easier “thank you.”

My hypothesis was hopeful: More than half the people I hold the door for will thank me. Alternatively: Less than half the people I hold the door for will thank me. My sample had to be big enough to get a good feel for my conclusion. I also decided to divide my sample size evenly between men and women: I would sample 20 of each. I simply decided to take results down in my phone, since it’s the one object I always carry with me. I made a note for both men and women and divided those notes up into those who thanked me and those who did not. This was a non-experiment since I did not manipulate my subjects or my environment.

I found that 12 of 20 men thanked me and 14 of 20 women thanked me for holding the door for them. While the discrepancy between men and women wasn’t large, there still was one, which I thought was interesting, though it doesn’t mean that women are more polite than men. I expected just over half of each gender, such as 11 or 12 to thank me, and it was higher in the women’s case.

Mind your Manners

My research question was simple: What percentage of people are willing to thank me for holding the door for them? The problem that this question addressed was meant to solve a personal curiosity, because I had taken notice that not a ton of people use their manners these days. The cause-effect relationship being studied is the relationship between me holding a door for someone and them being compelled to thank me, the effect. The main construct involved is the social construct of manners. Most of us are taught to simply thank someone to show appreciation for them going out of their way to help you. It’s not that it’s difficult to open a door on your own, it’s the thought that counts in this case, for the most part. Most of us feel obligated to use those manners that we were taught when someone does something kind for us. My hypothesis is this: More than half of the people I hold the door for will thank me. Alternative Hypothesis: less than half of the people I hold the door for will thank me.

Methods

Sample

I had no particular population of interest in mind when conducting this experiment. I actually wanted my population to be random to ensure a diverse sample group and a lack of bias. However, I made an effort to sample an equal amount of men and women, so I conducted my research on 20 men and 20 women. I feel that my results are externally valid in that they could be generalized to other persons, places, and times. These results could be applied to other populations because the general population is mostly similar to the population I sampled, with the exception of age.

Measures

I addressed construct validity by conducting an experiment that I found to be meaningful and having to do with what I was aiming to measure. I feel that it was contractually valid because I think that I effectively performed the research in a way that could confirm or deny my hypothesis. I made an attempt to make data collecting easy to ensure reliability. In the end, my hypothesis was confirmed and I found that, interestingly enough, women were more likely to thank me than men by 10%. I ensured reliability by using a random testing method and by conducting the experiment at different times of the day, throughout all weekdays. Moods can be different depending on the time of day and the day itself, and I believe that your mood is a large determining factor of politeness. In collecting data at different times over the course of about a week and a half, I believe that I ensured reliability among my random population.

Design

The type of design used in this research was non-experimental. I did not manipulate the environment or population. The relationship was internal because the input, me holding a door, was cause for the effect, which was that person thanking me (or not.) A major threat that I could have encountered would be bias. If I knew the person I was performing an act of kindness for, they would probably feel more obligated to thank me in an effort to improve my image of them. Another possible threat to validity would be if I treated someone rudely when in the middle of holding the door for them. This could be anything from a nasty look to a rude comment. In other words, If I were to give someone a reason to be rude to me, that would be a threat to the validity of the socialNexperiment. I feel that I kept internal validity since I treated every person involved in the experiment the same.

Procedures

My plan of the research was to collect data over the course of at least a week when going to and from classes until I reached my desired goal of 20 men and 20 women. If I was unable to complete it in a week, the plan was to spend time walking around a crowded building and entering and exiting at different doors over and over until I hit my quota. I was able to tally up enough people when simply walking into and out of classes over the course of about a week and a half. I took tallies on my phone, creating a separate page for men and women and then dividing those pages into two sections: those who said “thank you” and those that did not. I would normally collect around 4 tallies going into and out of every class I went to, so I wasn’t required to go out of my way and rely on my plan B to meet my tally goals. It was not relevant to notify or protect participant’s confidentiality since they never gave me any information or were even aware that I was paying attention to their responses (or lack thereof) to me. The independent variable in this experiment was me always holding a door for a nonbiased participant and not speaking to the participants, which might have given them a reason to thank me or not, depending on what it was I said. Keeping the procedure the same helped ensure that I could compare answers from different participants without fear of the interference of other stimuli, or dependent variables.

Results

Upon conducting the research experiment, I found that 12 of 20 men (60%) and 14 of 20 women (70%) thanked me for holding the door for them. My hypothesis that over half of my testN subjects would thank me was confirmed. I expected a higher percentage of polite women before conducting this social research. This wasn’t part of my hypothesis, but I had noticed before this experiment that women typically tended to use better manners towards me when I was holding doors for them. This unofficial hypothesis was also confirmed, as women were 10% more likely to thank me for holding their door. There were a few instances when I counted a friendly head nod as a thank you- not all these people actually said “thanks” or “thank you.” However, the message that they were trying to send was still received.

Conclusions

One conclusion reached was that my hypothesis was confirmed. Regardless of gender, over 50% of the population tested expressed their thanks to me. Another conclusion reached was that women were more likely to thank me for holding the door for them than men were. Women were exactly 10% more likely to, in fact. I realized that more people use their manners than I had initially thought. I had the idea to conduct this research as a result of taking notice in a lack of manners being used in public. Maybe I only imagined that because it’s much more noticeable and memorable when someone doesn’t thank you for performing an act of kindness than when they do. Of course, the research proposed can’t be completely representative of everyone and how likely they are to use good manners in that same situation. The test group was somewhat homogenous, as my research took place across a college campus composed mostly of young adults. The homogenous nature of the group was probably the major weakness of the research proposed. However, I think the fact that I tested a random population helped make it less homogenous and helped eliminate bias in responses given. Possible future research based on the results of this work could include other research with the aim of measuring manners, such as sneezing in a room with a group of people and seeing how many people tell the sneezer “bless you.” Another possible research idea would be to conduct another door-holding experiment but to diversify your test population more than I was able to.

Etiquette or Decorum is an arrangement of rules and guidelines characterizing great structure or ‘great way’ in social open or authority conduct. It initially applied uniquely to lead in court conventions, yet the code has been reached out to give advisers for ordinary living. Both social and table etiquette is essential for conducting an acceptable level of manner when interacting with others.

There are sure acknowledged practices in every single social circumstance that you have to learn. With scarcely any special cases, placing them into training can have a major effect on your public activity. On the off chance that you step outside your home during the day, you’re probably going to experience individuals, so attempt to be neighborly. Indeed, even on hopeless days when everything is by all accounts turning out badly, constraining a grin can lift the disposition of the individual you’re taking a gander at as well as yours too. Offer a welcome, and you may even observe an additional beam of daylight.

At the point when you communicate with others, you have to regard them. Enable others to voice their sentiments without contention. Regard their own space as you would need others to regard yours. At the point when you are in the organization of somebody of more noteworthy power, show the person in question appropriate regard. The well-known adage ‘On the off chance that you don’t have anything decent to state, at that point don’t utter a word’ is wise and ought to be followed in general social and business circumstances. Evade gossip, regardless of whether it is succulent and engaging. On the off chance that you realize that a political exchange will bring about contention and conceivably even verbally abusing, abstain from beginning one.

At the point when you are in a circumstance where you’re the main individual who knows different gatherings, set aside the effort to present them. Take a gander at the individual whose name you are stating, talk unmistakably, and in case you’re in a social setting, discover something the individuals share practically speaking. For instance, you may state, ‘Jim, I’d like you to meet my friend Sally. She just returned from Italy, and since you used to live there, I figured you may appreciate discussing your encounters.’

Although eating out has gotten increasingly easygoing, regardless it isn’t adequate to converse with your mouth loaded with nourishment, rock the table with your elbows, or meddle with other coffee shops’ encounters by showing ill-advised behavior. It’s imperative to pursue certain habits rules in both conventional settings and drive-through eateries. You may feel that you must be accessible to everybody who has your phone number consistently, however when you eat in an eatery, put your phone on silent. In addition to the fact that it is inconsiderate to the others in your gathering, yet different clients additionally don’t have to hear all your own or expert business. On the off chance that you get an instant message, either do not react or send a concise message telling the other individual you are inaccessible until you leave the eatery. Try not to race through your food. Take as much time as is needed to cut your nourishment into reduced down pieces and bite completely to avoid gagging. Try not to place another nibble into your mouth until you have gulped what is now there. In addition to the fact that it is unattractive to see swelling cheeks, however, it is likewise undesirable to eat too rapidly. Take on a steady speed to complete each course simultaneously as the remainder of your gathering.

Keep your mouth shut when you bite. Even though it is so essential to come to a meaningful conclusion, don’t talk until you have gulped your nourishment. Be mindful so as not to swallow a huge mouthful to rapidly contribute a remark.

Avoid grooming at the dining table when you are eating in an eatery. Notwithstanding being unsanitary, it is viewed as awful habits to brush or brush your hair. On the off chance that you should reapply your lipstick, do so tactfully and ensure you smudge your lips on a tissue to forestall spreading it on the stemware, napkin or your face. Never floss or pick your teeth out in the open, regardless of whether toothpicks are accessible. On the off chance that you have nourishment stuck in your teeth, pardon yourself and deal with the issue in the bathroom. Finally, you should be neighborly to your server consistently. To be otherwise shows awful habits. Disappointment with any part of the nourishment or administration ought to be carefully conveyed to the server. On the off chance that you are not content with the reaction, address the dining room manager. Recollect that the server has no influence over the nature of the nourishment or the measure of time it takes for the kitchen staff to set it up. If you find a remote item in your nourishment, for example, a hair or bug, call the server to your table and quietly show the person in question. There is no reason for causing a ruckus, so handle this circumstance as tactfully as could reasonably be expected.

These basic decorum skills help us behave responsibly and promote our characters when engaging in formal and informal gatherings with people. Much appreciation is shown to individuals who adhere to these good manners whilst also enhancing the comfort of everyone involved.

REFERENCES

1. Debby Mayne. (2019a) Manners and Civility. Avoid Common Etiquette Blunders in Restaurants. Retrieved from https://www.thespruce.com/avoid-common-etiquette-blunders-in-restaurants-1216959
2. Debby Mayne. (2019b) Table manners, Etiquette & advice. Table Manners and Dining Etiquette For Meals in a Social or Professional Setting. Retrieved from https://www.thespruce.com/table-manners-and-dining-etiquette-1216971
3. Debby Mayne. (2019c) Manners & Civility, Etiquette & advice. 10 Quick and Easy Manners Tips. Retrieved from https://www.thespruce.com/quick-and-easy-manners-tips-1216616
4. Debby Mayne. (2019d) Manners & Civility. Social Etiquette Tips. Retrieved from https://www.thespruce.com/social-etiquette-tips-1216646
5. Cecil, B. Hartley. (1860). The Gentlemen’s Book of Etiquette and Manual of Politeness (1st ed.). Boston, USA: Union Books.
6. John Bridges. (1998). How to Be a Gentleman Revised and Expanded: A Timely Guide to Timeless Manners (The GentleManners Series) (3rd ed.). Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson books.

It is a wise thing to be polite; consequently, it is a stupid thing to be rude. To make enemies by unnecessary and willful incivility, is just as insane a proceeding as to set your house on fire. For politeness is like a counter—an avowedly false coin, with which it is foolish to be stingy. —Arthur Schopenhauer.

Life is short, but there is always time enough for courtesy. —Ralph Waldo Emerson.

‘Yes, please’. ‘No, thanks’. These are simple expressions that have led to a pleasant second helping across the dinning and prevented a third World War. As amusing as it might seem, lack of manners and simple courtesy from world leaders have led to the culmination of full scale wars of which tens of thousands become innocent victims. Between nations and between individuals, manners are an important part of any relationship and communication. It is weird, however, how easy it is to exhibit good manners and how most people still choose to say ‘damn you, courtesy’. This then leads us to ask “Do manners still exist?”

Good social etiquette demands that you display good manners wherever you find yourself and irrespective of who you are with. Good manners show the courteous, more pleasant side of your person. Your relationship with others will take a better and healthier turn if you show that you have good manners. Today, many friendships have gone sour simply because of a lack of manners, good manners. It would seem like the world does not care about courtesy and etiquette until your bad manners create a terrible impression about you at work or with friends.

Practicing good manners begins with your words. How you talk to other people can give you away as an ill mannered person, so you need to watch your words. It is taught to children that whenever asking for anything they need to say ‘please’ so as not to seem rude, but adults flout this without shame. Adding ‘please’ when requesting for something is courtesy enough to make the other person understand that you are not giving a command or making a demand. This way, the person who might be reluctant to help will be mandated to help you out on account of the politeness you have displayed. Thanking the person who fulfills your request is also a way to go as far as good manners are concerned. A ‘Thank you’ once a while will do you a lot of good. Even when people offer to render small help or friendly gestures, it is best to show your appreciation. This will not only show that you have manners, it can also leave open doors for future help.

There are many cultures that place premium on introductions and salutations. It is great to recognise when you are expected to greet others and introduce yourself. In the event when you are meeting with someone for the first time, it is proper etiquette to greet the person, say your name and ask for the person’s name. You should make an effort to repeat the person’s name correctly, this is an endearing behaviour and it helps to keep the name fresh in your memory. If the context permits it, you should reach out for a firm and warm handshake. Those who forget to introduce themselves are really ill mannered, while most people have created a bad habit of not introducing those around them to their acquaintance.

Listening is an art to be mastered, one many people are poor at. You should learn how to listen to what others have to say without interrupting them. Unnecessary interruptions and poorly timed comments are rude. Not paying attention to what someone has to say is also unacceptable, you should maintain eye contact with the speaker and provide appropriate responses when the time is right. You must not struggle with someone else in speech, even when you start talking at the same time. Give others the liberty to express themselves before you express yourself. When expressing yourself, you must also respond to what others have said before you to show that you were listening and you value their thoughts.

The use of foul language is becoming a way of life for many. Do not use foul language when discussing with others, some people are genuinely offended by such expressions. Keep your words clean and respectable.

Good manners is not all talk either. We wonder if manners still exist because many people don’t see any value in the roles of the brother’s keeper or good Samaritan anymore, except they are beneficiaries. Most people want to ‘mind their business’ these days. Your actions must show that you are the respectful and courteous type. Be that Girl or Boy Scout everyday. Try to offer some little help here and there. Sometimes, you may not need to ask to help someone. Offering a seat to an elderly person on a bus, or holding the door open for the next person coming in are examples of good manners too.

Some persons lack manners when it comes to respecting the personal space of others. Some emotional intelligence is needed in this regard. Many people don’t pay attention to how others feel around them. Excessive touching and rubbing the body of whoever is with you is not appropriate, it can be very offensive. People are guilty of this and don’t seem to really care. Please learn to study the body language of others and understand when or how they feel uncomfortable around you. Apologise by saying “Excuse me, I’m sorry.”, whenever you violate the personal space of others or bump into them.

Empathise with others and be reasonable in your approach. A few people find it hard to express felicitations with others. This is a lack of manners too. Try to congratulate and encourage others when they do noteworthy things. Do not make things revolve around you, give credit to others while paying no attention to yourself.

Good manners still exist and are practiced by numerous people. Your manners are a part of your personality, respect others and be courteous. Do not be a part of those who lack manners and stand unashamedly in ethical ignorance.

What do you readily see when you meet someone for the first time? Does the person seem intimidating, brilliant, and proper, or do they come across as calm, introverted, and reserved? Whatever be the case, we all have the tendencies to perceive the characteristics of a person, even before we get to know that person. What we find out about someone after we get to know them is a different matter entirely, like we would be discussing in this post today.

Our main focus would be on the difference between personality and character – their definitions and other properties that are peculiar to each of them. While we are at it, we would throw in a comparison table towards the end of the post to show how these two compare to each other.

DEFINITION OF PERSONALITY

Personality is defined as the traits that define the surface value of a person as recognized mostly during interactions with the person. A person may be observed to be confident and outgoing, or reserved and gloomy, depending on the way the person interacts with people around him or her.

The term “personality” was derived from the Latin word “persona” which stands for mask – a meaning that would cause you to pause and think. What this means is that whatever we put out there as our personality is not really who we are, it is just a way of presenting ourselves or reacting to certain situations. Sometimes, a person’s personality can be straightforward, transparent, and honest; in other cases, it may be the exact opposite of what a person really is.

It would go a long way if you can understand the difference between character and personality as this would help you make better decisions about people you come in contact with.

DEFINITION OF CHARACTER

Character is defined as the deep-seated qualities that make up a person’s belief, moral compass, and sense of judgement. It is possible to find both good and bad qualities in a person. As a matter of fact, it is not likely to find a person whose character is totally good or bad; there is always a dominating side though.

The character of a person is developed from birth and influenced by social association, education, and society in general. It is what forms the core of one’s reputation after a while of notable presence and interaction with a person. One thing that is worthy of note in the personality vs character comparison is that the former is readily seen by just interacting with a person, even for the first time. The latter takes a while of being subjected to different situations, some of which may be pleasant or unpleasant to actually surface.

MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PERSONALITY VS CHARACTER

There is more to just the definition of these terms. They are similar in the sense that they make up the being of a person, but they have quite a number of differences you should be aware of. We have explained those differences in the table below.

MODE OF COMPARISON PERSONALITY CHARACTER

Definition The traits that define the surface value of a person as recognized mostly during interactions with the person The deep-seated qualities that make up a person’s belief, moral compass, and sense of judgement

Meaning Face-level abilities, attitude, and carriage. Represents who we seem to be Moral attributes and qualities that form the reputation of a person. Represents who we really are.

• Time Does not take a lot of time to point out Takes quite some time to point out
• Traits Personal and physical traits Moral and mental traits
• Nature Subjective in nature Objective in nature
• Validation of society Not required Required

CONCLUSION

Do you think the personality or character of a person can change? The truth is, yes, they can. But the former is more susceptible to change than the latter. Let us summarize the character vs personality comparison with “mood”.

When you are in a good mood, for instance, it is possible to be in your best behavior. You are in better control of your emotions and tend to be assertive. But when you are not in a good mood, you may ditch all that and act in a manner that is in line with your inner person and belief.

During the Regency Period, almost everyone had the same views on marriage: it was a tool used to make your life better. Most would marry for either social or monetary gain, an idea that is found in Pride in Prejudice, but is challenged by Elizabeth, whose view of marriage is one of love. Mrs. Bennet’s idea of marriage is one of monetary gain. Each of these characters are based around their marriage views, and these marriage views influence the other parts of their character, which can be their personalities or their actions. In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth’s marriage views influence her independence. Mrs. Bennet’s views on marriage make her shallow.

Elizabeth’s idea of marriage for love makes her strong willed and opinionated. In Elizabeth’s rejection of Darcy, she talks about her first impression of Darcy, and how his bad actions and manner made it impossible for her to marry him (Austen 241). Elizabeth’s rejection of Darcy shows how she is strong willed because she would not change her opinion on Darcy, even when he offers her marriage. She is opinionated because she holds on to her first impressions of Darcy, refuses to change her opinion of Darcy even after he apologizes. In her rejection of Mr. Collins, she also demonstrates how she is strong willed. When Collins threatens to get Mr. and Mrs. Bennet to force Elizabeth to marry him, Elizabeth still did not agree to marry him (Austen 137). She is strong willed because of how she refuses to bend to pressure from Mr. Collins and later her mother to marry him. She also shows how she is independent from others because of this. While she could have secured her future by marrying Mr. Collins, she decided not to because of her beliefs. In both of these examples, Elizabeth rejects men who could provide her financial security, showing how she able to be independent without them, and how she is able to stick to her beliefs. Elizabeth’s ideas of marriage for love make her strong willed and opinionated, and also make her more independent.

Mrs. Bennet is single-minded because of her views of marriage for wealth. When Elizabeth tells Mrs. Bennet that she is getting married to Darcy, she “can think of nothing else” (Austen 467). Her marriage views make her single-minded because she cannot think about all of the other benefits for Elizabeth getting married, and only thinks about the wealth she will have when she gets married. Another time when Mrs. Bennet shows how single-minded she is is when Mr. Bingley first moves in, and she is trying to get Mr. Bennet to talk to him (Austen 3). Mrs. Bennet’s insistence on Mr. Bennet meeting Mr Bingley in order to try to get one of her daughters married shows how that is the only thing she thinks about, since she does not even know why Mr. Bingley is moving into the neighborhood in the first place. Her single-mindedness shows how she is shallow because her mind is always concerned with one thing, which is getting her daughters married. Mrs. Bennet’s ideas of marriage for wealth make her single-minded, which ends up making her shallow.

In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth’s independence is strengthened by her marriage views. Mrs. Bennet’s marriage views make her single-minded and shallow. Elizabeth’s strong will contributes to her independence, because her strong will makes it so she cannot be forced to do things she doesn’t agree with (like marrying Mr. Collins). Mrs. Bennet’s single-mindedness contributes to her shallowness because her mind cannot focus on more important things going on in her life than getting her daughters married. The characters’ personalities in Pride and Prejudice are influenced by their marriage views.

Politeness is sometimes a reflection of our own personality. The word ‘politeness’ originated from the simple word polite, which is showing good manners toward others through our behaviour and speech. Politeness could also be defined as the application of good manners or etiquette towards other people no matter familiar or unfamiliar. Politeness is also a culturally defined phenomenon. Thus, sometimes what is considered as polite in one culture can be interpreted as quite rude or simply eccentric in another cultural context. Politeness is without doubt an important aspect of human interaction. However, it is a topic that is rarely mentioned in debates on metapragmatics in contemporary societies. More precisely, according to Mills and Kádár (2011), “if politeness is discussed at all outside academia, it is most often referred to as a phenomenon in decline across modern societies’’.

On the other side, Islam strongly emphasized on politeness among its believers towards all creatures and not only towards human being as required by our creator, Allah SWT. It is known to all Muslim that a person can’t be a true Muslim if he does all the required ‘ibadat’ ,as in prayer five time a day, fasting, zakat and pilgrimage, but neglects an important side of his worship, which is ‘adab’ or good manners. For example, a person who offers his daily prayers in mosque timely and in proper way, but when dealing with other people in his daily life is the worst person, even his farthest neighbour cannot be considered as a true Muslim.

It is said in Hadith 6018 of The Book of Al-Adab (Good Manners) by Sahih Al Bukhari that whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should not harm his neighbour and anybody. “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, Anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should not harm his neighbor, and anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should entertain his guest generously and anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should talk what is good or keep quiet. (i.e. abstain from all kinds of evil and dirty talk).” (Sahih Al Bukhari 1: Chapter 79, Hadith 6018)

In this research, we aim to study the level of awareness on politeness among the students at Kulliyyah of Language and Management (KLM) and how far they apply the concept of politeness in their daily life. We could see its results based on the results of questionnaires through Google Form that we had already distributed to all students in KLM.

Politeness can be said as behaviour that is socially correct and shows understanding of and care for the other people’s feeling. Politeness also is the practical application of good manners or etiquette so as not to offend others. Next, theory of politeness formulated in 1978 and revised in 1978 by Brown and Levinson. Politeness theory can be defined as using communicative strategies to create and maintain social harmony. (Oxford Learners Dictionary).” Face is the public self-image that every member wants to claim for themselves.” (Brown and Levinson. 1987) – Face- Threatening Act (FTA) Positive and Negative.

First and foremost, one influential model of politeness is based on the notion of face (Brown and Levinson 1987). “Face” refers to a speaker’s sense of linguistic and social identity. There are two kinds of “face”. First, a negative face is your desire to be unimpeded in your action. Second, a positive face is your desire for identification with the community. Brown and Levinson’s Politeness Theory said that the use of politeness is seen as deliberate and free decision of the individual based on consideration of context and the face wants of involved participants.

In addition, Robin Lakoff (1973) Language and woman’s Place pointed out three maxims that are conventionally followed. Together they make up the politeness principle such as don’t impose, give options and make your receiver feel good. These maxims can explain why many utterances carry no information but have the function of facilitating social interaction. Lakoff also ranks among the earliest scholars who dealt with the concept of politeness in relation to pragmatics. Based on Grice’s maxims distinguishes three types of politeness from a behavioural point of view. First, polite behavior which is clear when interlocutors follow the politeness rules, whether or not expected. Second, non-polited behaviour which does not conform with politeness rules, where conformity is not expected. Thirdly, rudeness, where politeness is not transformed, although expected.

Next, Leech’s Politeness Principles. It is also based on Grice’s maxims. Leech’s Politeness Principles concerned with absolutes politeness, indicating that speech acts are either inherently polite or impolite, based on their illocutionary force, where order is inherently less polite than request. Leech (1996:82) states that his general politeness principle is basically used to maintain social equilibrium which may be harmed by some speech acts. Leech’s Politeness Principles propose four main ‘illocutionary functions’, namely, competitive, convivial, collaborative, and conflictive in correlation with social goal stressing that the first two types.

Politeness exists in human behaviour as a means to bypass or decrease the likelihood of conflict with another. It creates a set of rules or conduct codes that guide and at times dictate human behaviour. Based on (Frindlund,1991), interaction partners’ smiles may lead receivers to anticipate positive social outcomes whereas frowns suggest otherwise. For example, begin with smiles as it makes it easier to leave a good impression in social or professional settings. Someone who speaks to others in a courteous manner is more likely to leave a good impression than someone who has bad manners. Being polite is especially important when communicating with customers and colleagues.

Second, Palmer (1981: 62-63), during the conversation, the ability to speak which is to identify the person to whom he is speaking. It can be said that a polite person always shows the best ways to speak with be careful in choosing words. If we are positive, we will get positive outcomes such as everyone loves to hear good and respectful words. These are some of the good habits that make our life meaningful. There are some magic words which really reflect politeness in our behaviour. Some of them are: ‘sorry,’ ‘excuse me,’ ‘thank you’ and ‘please’. If we break something or hurt someone, we should apologise by saying sorry.

Lastly, Gleason & Ratner (1998:286) perceive that politeness means acting so as to take care of the feelings of others. Being polite means being aware of and respecting the feelings of other people. Politeness can and will improve your relationship with others which means always praise or congratulate others on their achievements. It must also need to be seen as genuine from your heart. This action makes a polite person will always please others by his polite behaviour and good manners. In conclusion, politeness means consideration for the feelings of others. A polite man always puts the feelings of others first. He will not say things that will hurt them; he will never speak in a rude way that will offend them.