Article published In: The Pragmatics of Ritual
Edited by Dániel Z. Kádár and Juliane House
[Pragmatics 30:1] 2020
► pp. 88–115
“By the elders’ leave, I do”
Rituals, ostensivity and perceptions of the moral order in Iranian Tehrani marriage ceremonies
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 18 December 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19021.kou
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.19021.kou
Abstract
The basis of this study is the view that social ritual practices embody and reinforce the moral order of
communities. It takes a step towards providing more empirical research on the ritual practices in lesser studied languages by
examining ethnographic data collected during marriage ceremonies in Tehran. Extracts taken from marriage ceremonies and a film
extract are examined in terms of recurrence, liminality, embodiment of the moral order and
emotivity, elements identified in Kádár’s definition of ritual ( 2017. Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ). The paper makes a theoretical contribution by showing that ostensivity can also be considered
an important facet of ritual. In ritual practices connected with marriage, ostensivity is experienced by participants and
observers as a means of maintaining the moral order. The paper proposes future areas of research for the theoretical refinement of
the concept of ostensivity and further examination of the relationship that ostensivity has with ta’arof (Iranian
ritual politeness) and face.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Brief overview
- 1.2Previous research
- 1.3Iranian marriage rituals
- 2.Objectives of this study
- 3.Methodology and data collection
- 4.Data analysis
- 4.1‘Exchange of promise to marry’ (baleh-boroon) ceremonies
- 4.1.1Interpretation of the ceremonies of “exchange of promise to marry”
- 4.2Official wedding ceremonies (‘aqd)
- 4.2.1Interpretation of official wedding ceremonies
- 4.1‘Exchange of promise to marry’ (baleh-boroon) ceremonies
- 5.Discussion and conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (31)
Asdjoodi, Minoo. 2001. “A Comparison Between Ta’arof in Persian and Limao in Chinese.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1481: 71–92.
Bucar, Elizabeth M. 2012. “Saving Face: Navigating Landmines with Ritual Politeness.” History of Religions 52 (1): 31–48.
Durkheim, Émile. 1912 [1954/2001]. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Trans. by Carol Cosman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 1972. “On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction.” In Communication in Face-to-Face Interaction, ed. by J. Laver, and S. Hutcheson, 319–346. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Ide, Risako. 1998. “‘Sorry for your Kindness’: Japanese Interactional Ritual in Public Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 29 (5): 509–529.
Ide, Sachiko. 1989. “Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Linguistic Politeness.” Multilingua 81: 223–248.
Jahangiri, Nader. 1980. “A Sociolinguistic Study of Tehrani Persian.” Unpublished PhD thesis, University of London.
Kádár, Daniel Z. 2013. Relational Rituals and Communication: Ritual Interaction in Groups. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2017. Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kádár, Daniel Z., and Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koutlaki, Sofia A. 1997. “The Persian System of Politeness and the Persian Folk Concept of Face, with Some Reference to EFL Teaching to Iranian Native Speakers.” Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Wales College of Cardiff.
2002. “Offers and Expressions of Thanks as Face Enhancing Acts: Ta’arof in Persian.” Journal of Pragmatics 341: 1733–1756.
2009. “Two Sides of the Same Coin: How the Notion of ‘Face’ is Encoded in Persian Communication.” In Face, Communication and Social Interaction, ed. by F. Bargiela-Chiappini and M. Haugh, 115–133. London: Equinox.
Locher, Miriam, and Andreas Langlotz. 2008. “Relational Work at the Intersection of Cognition, Interaction and Emotion”. Bulletin vals-asla, bulletin Suisse de la linguistique appliquee. 881: 165–91.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1923. “The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages” In C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. Oxford: Harcourt Brace.
Matsumoto, Yoshiko. 1988. Reexamination of the Universality of Face: Politeness Phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics 121: 403–426.
. 1989. Politeness and Conversational Universals – Observations from Japanese. Multilingua, 8: (2/3), 207–221.
Ohashi, Jun. 2008. “Linguistic Rituals for Thanking in Japanese: Balancing Obligations.” Journal of Pragmatics 40 (12): 2150–2174.
. 2013. Thanking and Politeness in Japanese: Balancing Acts in Interaction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Taylor, Paul Beekman. 1994. “Repetition as Cure in Native American story: Silko’s Ceremony and Momaday’s The Ancient Child
.” SPELL: Swiss Papers in English Language and Literature 71: 221–42.
Cited by (9)
Cited by nine other publications
Han, Dan, Juliane House, Fengguang Liu & Dániel Z. Kádár
Kádár, Dániel Z., Juliane House, Fengguang Liu & Dan Han
Bagheri, Roghie, Yadollah Abolfathi Momtaz, Mahshid Foroughan & Farahnaz Mohammadi Shahboulaghi
Cang, He, Juliane House, Fengguang Liu & Dániel Z. Kádár
House, Juliane, Dániel Z. Kádár, Fengguang Liu & Wenrui Shi
2023. Historical language use in Europe from a contrastive pragmatic perspective. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 24:1 ► pp. 143 ff.
Shanneik, Yafa
Li, Hui
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
