User-to-User Impoliteness in Facebook Comments Related to Football Matches: A Critical Analysis of Impoliteness Frameworks

Abstract

Previous research on impoliteness has typically relied on a single framework to analyze the phenomenon, which may lead to an incomplete understanding of the strategies used.This study sought to investigate impoliteness strategies that are used by Jordanian Facebookers when commenting on football matches. Additionally, it aimed to determine whether Lachenicht's (1980) aggravating language or Culpeper's (1996) impoliteness framework was better suited for analyzing impoliteness in Facebook comments related to football matches. The researchers analyzed 100 comments using both frameworks to identify different impoliteness strategies. The findings showed that Jordanians’ comments on football matches contained different types of impoliteness such as bald on record, positive impoliteness/aggravation, negative impoliteness/aggravation, and off-record. Additionally, negative impoliteness was the most frequently used strategy. It was found that Culpeper's framework was more effective in identifying and managing taboo language and direct insults than Lachenicht's. This study enhances our understanding of impoliteness strategies used by Jordanian Facebook users when commenting on football matches and highlights the importance of using appropriate frameworks for data analysis. Future studies may examine impoliteness strategies in different contexts and combining multiple frameworks to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon.

Keywords: Impoliteness strategies, Jordanian Facebook users, Lachenicht's (1980) aggravating language, Culpeper's (1996) impoliteness frameworks, Taboo language

Highlights:

• Dual-Framework Approach: The study uniquely applies both Lachenicht’s (1980) and Culpeper’s (1996) frameworks to analyze impoliteness strategies, providing a comparative assessment rarely seen in previous research.
• Contextual Focus on Jordanian Facebook Users: It specifically investigates how Jordanian Facebook users employ impoliteness strategies in the context of commenting on football matches, offering cultural and situational insights.
• Prevalence of Negative Impoliteness: Among the identified strategies, negative impoliteness emerged as the most frequently used, indicating a strong tendency toward this form of verbal aggression in sports-related discussions.
• Superiority of Culpeper's Framework: Culpeper’s model proved more effective than Lachenicht’s in detecting and interpreting direct insults and taboo language, highlighting its practical value in analyzing online discourse.
• Implications for Future Research: The study underscores the benefits of combining multiple analytical frameworks and suggests broader exploration of impoliteness strategies across different online and cultural contexts.