(Im)politeness Strategies Used in Vice -Presidential Candidates Debate Between Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris

Nur Najibah Sukmawati(1*), Lystiana Nurhayat Hakim(2), Tommy Hastomo(3), Purwanti Taman(4), Hana Lia(5)
(1) Universitas Pamulang
(2) Universitas Pamulang
(3) STKIP PGRI Bandar Lampung
(4) Universitas Pamulang
(5) Universitas Pamulang
(*) Corresponding Author
DOI : 10.24256/ideas.v10i2.2990


Politeness is necessary for the way people socialize. However, some people choose to communicate impolitely despite knowing that it’s inappropriate. This study aims to find out how people use impoliteness strategies in communication, and identify the impoliteness strategies used in the Vice-Presidential United States of Amerika candidates debate between Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris on October 8th, 2020, while also figuring out the purpose of using these strategies in the debate. For this reason, to identify the use of impoliteness strategies, the researcher used Jonathan Culpeper's (2005) theory of impoliteness strategies and a qualitative approach to analyze the data. The data was taken from a YouTube video entitled “Full Debate: Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris | WSJ” posted by the Wall Street Journal on October 8, 2020. The results of this study revealed that four out of five impolite strategies were used, with negative impoliteness as the most commonly used strategy. The other four strategies are bald on record impoliteness, positive impoliteness, negative impoliteness, and sarcasm and mock politeness. Meanwhile, withholding politeness was never used in the debate.


communication, debate, impoliteness strategies


Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness; Some universals in language usage. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: SAGE Publications.

Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349-367.

Culpeper, J. (2003). Impoliteness revisited: with several references to dynamic and prosodic aspects. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1545-1579.

Culpeper, J. (2005). Impoliteness and Entertainment in The Television Quiz Show: The WWeakestLink. Politeness Research, 41-42.

Culpeper, J. (2005). Impoliteness and Entertainment in The Television Quiz Show: The Weakest Link. Politeness Research, 41-42.

Fraser, B. (1990). Perspective on Politeness. Journal of Practamtics, 225.

Hammod, N. M., & Rassul , A. A. (2017). Impoliteness Strategies in English and Arabic Facebook. International Journal of Linguistics, IX(5), 98.

Holmes, J. (2013). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.

Holmes, J., Marra, M., & Schnurr, S. (2008). Impoliteness and ethnicity: Ma¯ori and Pa¯keha¯ discourse in New Zealand workplaces. Journal of Politeness Research 4, 193-219.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd ed.). United States of America: Sage Publications.

Leech, G. (2014). The Pragmatics of Politeness. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lucky, J. (2015). A Pragmatic Analysis of Impoliteness Strategies in British TTV SeriesSherlock.

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2021). Liberalism and Nationalism in contemporary America. American Political Science Association, VIV(1), 1-8.

Morin, D. A. (2020). Social Skills. Dipetik March 22, 2021, dari SocialPronow: https://socialpronow.com/blog/how-to-banter/

Pishghadam, R., & Navari, S. (2012). A Study into Politeness Strategies and Politeness Markers in Advertisements as Persuasive Tools. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, III(2), 161-171.

Sari, I. P., Emmiyati, N., & Maharani, S. (2019). Impoliteness Strategies in Peter Rabbit Movie. Elite, VI(2), 222-238.

Seetharaman, B. (2016). Sampling and Methods of Data Collection in Qualitative Research. Indian Journal of Continuing Nursing Education, XVII(2), 41-47.

Shinta, V. M., Hamzah, & Wahyuni, D. (2018). Impoliteness Strategies Used by Supporters and Detractorsof Ahok in Their Online Comments by Gender. English Language and Literature, XII(1), 225-236.

Thomas, J. (2013). Meaning in Interaction. New York: Routledge.

Tracy, K., & Tracy, S. J. (1998). Rudeness at 911 Reconceptualizing Face and face Attack. Human Communication Research, 25(2), 225-251.

Yule, G. (2010). The Study of Language (4th ed.). UK: Cambridge University Press.

Article Statistic

Abstract view : 48 times
PDF views : 52 times

How To Cite This :


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2023 Nur Najibah Sukmawati, Lystiana Nurhayat Hakim, Tommy Hastomo, Purwanti Taman, Hana Lia

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.