Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 15:4 (2024) ► pp.557–583

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Criticizing for the public interest and aligning with others

How Jordanians constructed their online criticisms of lockdown breaches during the COVID-19 pandemic

ORCiD logo with link | Jordan University of Science and Technology
 | Jordan University of Science and Technology
Published online: 12 June 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.22089.bad
Abstract
This study examines the speech act of criticizing in online comments on the COVID-19 lockdown breaches in Jordan in 2020. Drawing on speech act theory and the face-saving perspective of politeness, the study investigates the strategies used to criticize these breaches. The analysis of 356 online comments revealed that Jordanians used ten strategies to criticize these lockdown breaches: Insulting, Appealing to the divine, Intertextuality, Rhetorical questions, Stylized threats, Framing criticism as request, Framing criticism as advice-giving, Framing criticism as warning, Invoking legal authority, and Invoking religious ‘haram’. These criticisms were driven by safeguarding the collective interests of community members rather than merely expressing personal condemnation of the breaches. The breaches were constructed in these criticisms as communally reproachable, legally answerable, and religiously proscribed. Given their public nature, these criticisms appear to be motivated not by politeness but by expressing strong emotions, showing in-group solidarity, and aligning with other community members.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Insulting
    • 4.2Appealing to the divine
    • 4.3Criticizing through intertextuality
    • 4.4Asking rhetorical questions
    • 4.5Stylized threats
    • 4.6Framing criticism as request
    • 4.7Framing criticism as advice-giving
    • 4.8Framing criticism as warning
    • 4.9Criticizing through invoking legal authority
    • 4.10Invoking religious ‘haram’
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (54)
References
Abdel-Jawad, Hassan. 2000. “A Linguistic, Sociopragmatic and Cultural Study of Swearing in Arabic”. Language, Culture and Curriculum 131: 217–240. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anchimbe, Eric, and Richard Janney. 2011. “Postcolonial Pragmatics: An Introduction.” Journal of Pragmatics 431: 1451–1459. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barnes, Renee. 2018. Uncovering Online Commenting Culture. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bigo, Didier, Elspeth Guild, and Elif Kuskonmaz. 2021. “Obedience in Times of COVID-19 Pandemics: A Renewed Governmentality of Unease?” Global Discourse 111: 471–489. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Böwering, Gerhard. 2003. “The Qur’ān as the Voice of God.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 1471: 347–353.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Rong. 2001. “Self-Politeness: A Proposal.” Journal of Pragmatics 331: 87–106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Xinren, and Doreen Dongying Wu (Eds.). (2023). East Asian Pragmatics: Commonalities and Variations. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clancy, Patricia, Noriko Akatsuka, and Susan Straus. 1997. “Deontic Modality and Conditionality in Discourse: A Cross-Linguistic Study of Adult Speech to Young Children.” In Directions in Functional Linguistics, ed. by Akio Kamio, 19–58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, Boyd, and Peyton Mason. 2004. “Trying on Voices: Using Questions to Establish Authority, Identity, and Recipient Design in Electronic Discourse.” In Discourse and Technology, ed. by Philip LeVine and Ron Scollon, 47–58. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Ruiter, Jan Jaap, and Mona Attwa. 2021. “Allah, Allah, Allah: The Role of God in the Arab Version of The Voice.” Religions 121: 412. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feghali, Ellen. 1997. “Arab Culture Communication Patterns.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 211: 345–378. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1998. “Threatening Revisited.” Forensic Linguistics 51: 159–173. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gu, Yueguo. 1990. “Politeness Phenomena in Modern Chinese.” Journal of Pragmatics 141: 237–257. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gasparov, Boris. 2010. Speech, Memory, and Meaning: Intertextuality in Everyday Language. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giles, Howard, and Tania Ogay. 2007. “Communication Accommodation Theory.” In Explaining Communication: Contemporary Theories and Exemplars, ed. by Bryan B. Whaley and Wendy Samter, 293–310. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael, and Wei-Lin Melody Chang. 2019. “Indexical and Sequential Properties of Criticisms in Initial Interactions: Implications for Examining (Im) Politeness Across Cultures.” Russian Journal of Linguistics 231: 904–929. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet, and Maria Stubbe. 2003. Power and Politeness in the Workplace. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holton, Judith A. 2007. “The Coding Process and its Challenges.” In The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, ed. by Antony Bryant and Kathy Charmaz, 265–289. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Fiona, and Ken Hyland. 2001. “Sugaring the Pill: Praise and Criticism in Written Feedback.” Journal of Second Language Writing 101: 185–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ide, Sachiko. 1989. “Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Universals of Linguistic Politeness.” Multilingua 81: 223–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jauhari, Edy, Djatmika Djatmika, and Riyadi Santosa. 2020. “Criticism in the Javanese Arek Cultural Community: Its Expression Context and Strategy Use.” Pragmatics and Society 111: 524–544. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jauhari, Edy, and D. Purnanto. 2019. “Indirect criticism in the ethnic Madurese community: Its various semantic formulas, lingual markers, and context of use.” In Urban Studies: Border and Mobility, ed. by Kerr, Thor et al., 137–144. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jia, Mian, and Guoping Yang. 2021. “Emancipating Chinese (Im)politeness Research: Looking Back and Looking Forward.” Lingua 2511: 103028. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kádár, Dániel. 2019. “Introduction: Advancing Linguistic Politeness Theory by Using Chinese Data.” Acta Linguistica Academica 661: 149–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koshik, Irene. 2002. “Conversation Analytic Study of Yes/No Questions Which Convey Reversed Polarity Assertions.” Journal of Pragmatics 341: 1851–1877. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
LeVine, Mark. 2009. “Doing the Devil’s Work: Heavy Metal and the Threat to Public Order in the Muslim World.” Social Compass 561: 564–576. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Limberg, Holger. 2009. “Impoliteness and Threat Responses.” Journal of Pragmatics 411: 1376–1394. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam, and Holger Limberg. 2012. “Introduction to Advice in Discourse.” In Advice in Discourse, ed. by Holger Limberg and Miriam Locher, 1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mao, LuMing Robert. 1994. “Beyond Politeness Theory: ‘Face’ Revisited and Renewed.” Journal of Pragmatics 211: 451–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Màrquez Reiter, Rosina. 2021. “Confessions of Lockdown Breaches. Problematising Morality During the Covid-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Pragmatics 1791: 61–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nguyen, Thi Thuy Minh. 2008. “Criticizing in an L2: Pragmatic Strategies Used by Vietnamese EFL Learners.” Intercultural Pragmatics 51: 41–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ohlander, Erik. 2005. “Fear of God (Taqwā) in the Qur’ān: Some Notes on Semantic Shift and Thematic Context.” Journal of Semitic Studies 501: 137–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overstreet, Maryann, and George Yule. 2001. “Formulaic Disclaimers.” Journal of Pragmatics 331: 45–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piamenta, Moshe. 1979. Islam in Everyday Arabic Speech. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pilch, John. 2014. “Insults and Facework in the Bible.” HTS Theological Studies 701: 1–8.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pino, Marco. 2016. “Delivering Criticism Through Anecdotes in Interaction.” Discourse Studies 181: 695–715. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ren, Wei. 2019. “Emancipating (Im)politeness Research and Increasing its Impact.” Acta Linguistica Academica 661: 289–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rudanko, Juhani. 2001. Case Studies in Linguistic Pragmatics. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 51: 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1979. Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tang, Chihsia. 2016. “Managing Criticisms in US-Based and Taiwan-Based Reality Talent Contests: A Cross-Linguistic Comparison.” Pragmatics 261: 111–136.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tao, Yingnian. 2021. “Who Should Apologise: Expressing Criticism of Public Figures on Chinese Social Media in Times of COVID-19.” Discourse & Society 321: 622–638. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tracy, Karen, Donna Van Dusen, and Susan Robinson. 1987. ““Good” and “Bad” Criticism: A Descriptive Analysis.” Journal of Communication 371: 46–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Eric Eisenberg. 1990. “Giving Criticism: A Multiple Goals Case Study.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 241: 37–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tracy, Karen, and Jessica Robles. 2013. Everyday Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandergriff, Ilona. 2013. “Emotive Communication Online: A Contextual Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication Cues.” Journal of Pragmatics 511: 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Xiaoping, and Richard Fitzgerald. 2021. “‘Hidden in Plain Sight’: Expressing Political Criticism on Chinese Social Media.” Discourse Studies 231: 365–385. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Ran, Yongping & Jiabei Hu
2025. How public discourse functions to restore moral orders. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) DOI logo
Weng, Xin & Qiaoyun Liao
2025. The intimacy-power relationships in the usage of direct criticism in Chinese: a reflection of rapport management. Language and Cognition 17 DOI logo

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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue