Communicating Off-Record Politeness by Use of Non-Usual Stress in Kiswahili Language

Eunice Nafula Neyole; Fridah A. Miruka; Deborah N. Amukowa

doi:10.51867/ajernet.4.2.88

Authors

Eunice Nafula Neyole Department of Language & Literature Education, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4838-3165
Fridah A. Miruka Department of Language & Literature Education, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya
Deborah N. Amukowa Department of Kiswahili and African Languages, Maseno University, Kenya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51867/ajernet.4.2.88

Keywords:

Intended Meaning, Kiswahili, Topical Discussion, Unusual stress, topical discussion, intended meaning, Kiswahili,

Abstract

The interpretation of meaning as intended is a major factor to be borne in mind by interlocutors in a communicative event. Though speakers choose strategies that enable communication messages in well-interpreted manner, thereby eliminating ambiguity, the same is not the case in the use of unusual stress, which is normally contrasted. Unusual stress communicates off record by giving out hints. This paper discusses unusual stress as an off-record politeness strategy with particular reference to Kiswahili language that is spoken in Kenya. Bi. Msafwari’s topical discussion from the Swahili community laid the basis for analysis. YouTube files of Mawaidha na Bi. Msafwari (Bi. Msafwari’s topical discussions) were the sources of data. Analysis shows that unusual stress functions as an indirect politeness strategy through its characteristic use of free stress. It changes the intonation of the word in use thereby giving a basis for more than one interpretation of meaning. The non-usual emphasis is a hint that the speaker deliberately conveys to the listener in a given context. This paper concludes that determining the meaning intended in unusual stress is complex. This is because unusual stress has opposing functions within the same statement. It is therefore recommended that detection of the presuppositions in unusual stress can reduce ambiguity and direct the listener’s interpretation toward the intended meaning.

References

Ashton, E.O. 1969. Swahili Grammar. London: Longmans.

Babalola, J (2014) Effects of Intonation Variants on the Language of Wider Communication in A Multi-Lingual Environment. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(3), 9-14.

Bolinger, D. (1972). Accent is predictable (if you're a mind-reader). Language, 48(3), 633-644. https://doi.org/10.2307/412039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/412039

Brenner, R. (2018). Using Indirectness at Work. Chaco Canyon Consulting. http://chacocanyon.com, Vol.6.

Brown, P & Levinson,S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085

Cassimjee, F. & Kisseberth, C. W, (2000). Opaque and depressed: Giryama tonology. Paper presented at the Tone Symposium, Tromsø, Norway, June 2000.

Cummins, C., & Rohde, H. (2015). Evoking context with contrastive stress: Effects on pragmatic enrichment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01779

Downing, L. J. (2004). What African Languages Tell Us About Accent Typology. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 37 (2004), 101-136

https://doi.org/10.21248/zaspil.37.2004.247 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21248/zaspil.37.2004.247

Golidina, N. (2014). A Pragmatic Analysia of Politeness Strategies and Politeness Principles in Up Town Girls (Thesis, Yogyakarta State University).

Hahn, L., & Dickerson, W. (1999). Speechcraft: Discourse pronunciation for advanced learners. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.8396 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.8396

Heine, B. & Nurse, D. (eds). (2000). African Languages: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Idemaru, K; Winter, B & Brown, L. (2015). The Role of Pitch in Perceiving Politeness in Korean Language. Internatonal Congress of Phonetic Sciences, https://www.semanticscholar.org. Semantic Scholar.

Katz, J., & Selkirk, E. (2011). Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from phonetic prominence in English. Language, 87(4), 771-816. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0076

Leth, P. (2021). Utterance Interpretation and Actual Intentions. Axiomathes, https://philpapers.org/rec/LETUIA-2, Vol.31 (3):279-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-019-09462-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-019-09462-x

Levis, J & Levis. M. (2018). Teaching High-Value Pronunciation Features: Contrastive Stress for Intermediate Learners. The CATESOL Journal, 30(1), 139-160

Matinde, S. (2012). Dafina ya Lugha Isimu na Nadharia ya Sekondari, Vyuo vya Kati na Vyuo Vikuu. Mwanza, Tanzania: serengeti.

Muller, L., & Levis, J. (2020). Teaching Contrastive Stress for Varied Speaking Levels. Proceedings of the 11th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching conferenc (kur. Pp 316-325). Northern Arizona: Iowa State University.

Nagendra, K (2018) The Role of Intonation in Spoken English. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 6 (1), 657-662.

Obuchi, S na Sangili, N. (2016). Taaluma ya Maana Semantiki na Pragmatiki. Nairobi: The Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.

Philippson, G. (1998). Tone reduction vs. metrical attraction in the evolution of Eastern tone systems. In Larry M. Hyman & Charles W. Kisseberth, eds. Theoretical Aspects of Bantu Tone. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI, 315-329.

Seiferth, W& Otten, M. (2008). The role of prosodic features in the differentiation of meaning: L.O.G.O.S Interdisziplinair, 16 (20), 114-119.

UNESCO. (2020, February 21). Lugha ya Kiswahili yazidi kupaa duniani. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from Umoja wa Mataifa: https://news.un.org/sw/story/2020/02/1082501