296 China Review International: Vol. ?, No. ?, Spring 1994 Studies in China; they are problems that still exist today. Inclusion ofa briefdiscussion of such issues, with views from both the American and Chinese sides, would have been a valuable addition to the directory. Frank Tang University ofHawai'i Kaidi Zhan. The Strategies ofPoliteness in the ChineseLanguage Berkeley: Institute ofEast Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Center for Chinese Studies, 1992. xv, 106 pp. This is a compact book about a very complicated subject: the linguistic means and strategies for achieving politeness in Mandarin Chinese. Authored by a native Chinese speaker, the bulk ofit consists of conversational snippets and utterances and capsule explanations cataloged under the typology of universal politeness strategies developed earlier by anthropologically trained linguists Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson. In constructing their typology, Brown and Levinson had treated face—and the avoidance of face threats to self and others— as the underlying imperative for much of routine polite communication; in addition , they regarded politeness as the underlying imperative for many deviations from maximally efficient communication. The author's Chinese examples are largely culled from contemporary Chinese literature, the Chinese classic Dream ofthe Red Chamber, and recorded conversations; they are presented in both simplified characters and pinyin, followed by their English translation. Throughout, the author tries to compare and contrast differences in politeness choices and conventions between Chinese and English speakers, and to explain their potential for cross-cultural confusion. Linguist Robin Lakoffprovides a lengthy preface to help acquaint the reader with the book's pragmatic focus, its intended audience (linguists, sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, language learners, and teachers), and to underscore the pertinence ofpoliteness to comparative understandings of sociability and culture. In her introductory chapter, the author presents some distinctive grammatical possibilities available to Chinese politeness strategies. Chinese, for example, has special suffixes, particles, and reduplicated verbs that can be used either to soften or to vivify or to convey cooperation or commiseration. The author also attributes Chinese politeness strategies to unique cultural and psychological incopyright \994fluences. Theyinclude a traditional sense ofsocial hierarchy, strong kin sentiby University ofments, the Confucian Doctrine ofthe Mean and the Confucian stress on modHawai 'i Presseration, and other values such as modesty, prudence, kindness, compassion, Reviews 297 solicitousness, optimism, showing respect to one's elders and betters, and putting others first. She enlists these language-specific and culture-specific features in her next three chapters to illustrate Chinese versions of the three superpoliteness strategies charted by Brown and Levinson: (1) positive, that is, "familiar," politeness— redressive speech that seeks to develop greater warmth and closeness between interlocutors by showing special regard for the addressee's virtues, abilities, possessions , achievements, or condition; (2) negative, that is, "respectful," politeness— redressive speech that is distancing and seeks to preserve an addressee's need for privacy, autonomy, or freedom from imposition; and (3) off-record politeness— redressive speech delivered roundaboutly or ambiguously in a way that, in effect, lets a speaker offthe hook or, at least, doesn't put anyone on the spot. The first two superpoliteness strategies are complementary on-record strategies that, writes the author, are more elaborate and more frequently used than are offrecord politeness strategies among Chinese. In their positive politeness strategies, for example, Chinese might address others (i.e., neighbors, friends, and even strangers and serious lovers) as kinfolk; they might also signal their commonality in dialect or locality, or give explicit recognition to their shared status as old schoolmates or former work mates, or they might lexically acknowledge a master-apprentice, teacher-student relationship . At other times, Chinese might shift to the addressee's reference point by substituting the verb complement -qu"go" for -Zai"come" or by switching from speaker focus to speaker-addressee focus through specialized pronominal use, that is, zanmen "inclusive we" or ni (jiu) shuo "you (just) say." They avoid disagreements by offering vague responses, token agreements, or white lies. Unlike English, which uses conventional, generalized forms, Chinese greetings are concretely directed to an addressee's health ("Have you recovered yet?") or to whether the addressee has taken a meal yet ("Have you had your breakfast/lunch/ dinner?"), and their partings are full ofgentle admonishments about safety ("Be careful...